Global trade enters 2026 carrying the aftershocks of another unstable year. From unresolved geopolitical risk to policy-driven shifts in customs treatment and a tentative reopening of critical sea lanes, the operating environment remains fluid. In its latest winter Global Market Update, Maersk outlines where disruption is most likely to surface next, and how logistics networks may be tested as multiple adjustments converge.
2025 delivered little respite for international trade. The Russia–Ukraine war continued to distort energy and freight markets, tariff policy uncertainty resurfaced in the United States, and a series of cyber incidents exposed how quickly digital disruption can translate into physical supply chain stoppages. Against that backdrop, Maersk’s winter outlook focuses less on long-term forecasts and more on near-term execution risks as networks rebalance.
Rather than predicting a clean reset, the update frames 2026 as a year defined by overlapping transitions: route normalization, constrained port capacity, and regulatory changes that directly affect inventory placement and e-commerce flows.
Red Sea Traffic Returns, but with Operational Side Effects
A potential return to Red Sea transits through the Suez Canal sits at the center of Maersk’s near-term outlook. In December 2025, the carrier’s MECL service marked a cautious step toward restoring Asia–Europe routings, contingent on security conditions holding. While a full resumption would shorten sailing times compared with Cape of Good Hope diversions, Maersk stresses that the transition itself introduces instability.
Johan Sigsgaard, Chief Product Officer for Ocean at Maersk, notes that network shifts of this scale rarely unfold smoothly. As vessels re-enter East–West lanes, arrival patterns are likely to compress, creating temporary surges at European ports. Similar effects were observed when traffic was rerouted around southern Africa, and Maersk expects a comparable period of adjustment in reverse.
The company also points to an inventory dimension. If Suez and Cape of Good Hope sailings overlap during the transition, Europe could see a short-term spike in inbound volumes. Past episodes of inventory whiplash, most notably after pandemic-era constraints were lifted, show how quickly synchronized arrivals can strain terminals, inland transport, and warehouse capacity. For shippers, this raises the risk of overstocking at precisely the moment flexibility is hardest to find.
Ports and Policy Add to the Congestion Equation
Port utilization is the second pressure point. Maersk cites data from Drewry indicating that major European terminals including Port of Rotterdam, Port of Hamburg, and Port of Algeciras operated near 80% utilization through the summer of 2025. That level leaves little margin for error if vessel bunching accelerates during a Red Sea reopening.
Karsten Kildahl, Maersk’s Chief Commercial Officer, emphasizes that high utilization combined with already elevated inventory levels tightens the cost–risk trade-off. Capital tied up in excess stock becomes harder to unwind when terminal congestion limits throughput and inland lead times extend. As a result, scenario planning now has to account not only for longer transit times, but for uneven arrival profiles and reduced recovery options once delays occur.
Layered onto these physical constraints is a regulatory shift with direct implications for network design. From July 1, 2026, the European Union will remove its de minimis customs duty exemption for low-value imports. Parcels previously entering duty-free up to €150 will face a flat €3 charge per item, a move expected to reshape cross-border e-commerce economics.
Lars Karlsson, Maersk’s Global Head of Trade and Customs Consulting, points to the U.S. experience as a reference case. After changes to de minimis treatment there, many e-commerce players repositioned inventory closer to consumers to reduce exposure. Maersk anticipates a similar shift in Europe, with more stock held inside the region ahead of the July deadline, adding another variable to inventory levels, warehouse demand, and intra-EU transport flows. The challenge, Karlsson notes, lies in consistent implementation across all member states to avoid entry-point distortions.
Transition Risk Is Becoming a Planning Variable
One insight that deserves more attention is how often disruption now comes not from shocks, but from normalization itself. Trade data from recent route shifts and customs changes show that congestion, cost pressure, and inventory distortion tend to peak during transition periods rather than crisis moments. For planning teams, that shifts the emphasis away from worst-case contingency scenarios and toward managing overlap, overlapping sailings, overlapping inventory positions, overlapping policy regimes. The companies that navigate 2026 more smoothly are likely to be those that treat transition windows as discrete operating phases, with explicit guardrails on inventory release, port exposure, and inland capacity, rather than assuming networks will naturally rebalance once headline conditions stabilize.
