Category Archives: Global Trade

UPS Has An Awfully Simple View of Supply Chains

A recent article over on Forbes.com presented 3 Ways to Manage A Global Supply Chain from UPS. The article focussed on how to ease the transition when a business is going global for the first time. It gave three pieces of advice:

  • Look to Local Experts
    When expanding internationally, find a partner that is a local market master who can guide you in developing the brand in that market. Whether it’s taking the time to seek out the right suppliers, or contracting with a skilled business consultant in the area who can do the same, there’s no replacement for local expertise.
  • Invest in IT
    Managing a global supply chain means a constant interaction with data. Furthermore, while a variety of supply chain best practices are available, but some can be ineffective if companies don’t select the IT solution that best meets their specific supply chain requirements.
  • Diversify and Appreciate Suppliers
    Developing good relations with all partners in your global supply chain will benefit everyone and lead to better negotiations, production, and delivery.

This is all valid advice, but it’s not how you manage a global supply chain. It’s how you improve a global supply chain. To manage a global supply chain, you have to first:

  1. Design a global supply chain.
  2. Create the technological infrastructure to manage and run it.
  3. Create a management framework.
  4. Staff up the management team.

then you find the local experts, work with suppliers, and make use of your IT and management assets. You can’t apply best practices if you do not have any best practices to apply them against.

A Customs Audit is Coming Your Way – Are You Ready?

As per this recent post over on the C.H. Robinson blog, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is stepping up enforcement of customs compliance. It’s not just looking for fraud, but for poor record-keeping, mistakes, and uncorrected discrepancies that will allow up to impose fines of up to $10,000, penalties of up to 8 times the value of the loss of duty on dutiable items, and penalties of up to 80% of the value of non-dutiable items which allow the CBP, and the U.S. Government, to fill its coffers at your expense. Just like ignorance of the law is no excuse, neither is an innocent mistake.

And while you can’t prevent an audit, you can prevent a fine and a penalty by making sure you don’t make any of the nine-common trade-related errors the CBP will get you on and, in a few cases, taking extra steps to limit what can be held against you. To minimize fines and penalties,

  • Report Manufacturing Assists which are dutiable (at cost).
  • Have a system and process in place to verify the mainfest immediately after the ship is loaded.
    If there are additional, missing, or damaged items, and the price is modified, the price you are actually going to pay needs to be reported.
  • Be sure not to include dutiable costs! While you will be refunded duty overpayments, you can also be fined $10,000 for a record-keeping error!
  • Don’t screw up the country of origin. It’s not necessarily the exporting country. It may ship from China, but it could be manufactured in Myanmar and Vietnam.
  • Get the HTS code right. Hire a consultant or acquire an import trade tool if you have to, because if you get this wrong, here’s where the 8X penalty comes into play!
  • If claiming Free Trade, make sure you have the arguments, documentation, and, if they exist, previous determinations or rulings to back it up.
  • If you are re-importing goods into the US (HTS 9801 & 9802), be sure to have tangible proof of US manufacturing and a full chain of custody that demonstrates no advance while abroad.
  • Don’t screw up the amounts claimed in a related-party transaction.
    Just because you trade goods for $1 does not mean this is the value you can claim when calculating duty.
  • Keep exactly 5 years of records. You have to keep five years, or get fined, but if you have more than 5 years, you are just giving the CBP more records to go through to find problems.

Will this completely eliminate your risk? No, but it will greatly reduce it!

It Took 40 Years, but BPOs (Bank Payment Obligations) are now Truly SWIFT!

SWIFT, formerly known as the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications, and a global provider of secure financial messaging services, turned 40 on May 3 of this year, and that’s noteworthy on it’s own as this tells us that we’ve only been thinking about electronic financial transactions on a global scale for 40 years, but that’s not the most important piece of news to come out of SWIFT, which processes 90% of traditional global trade transactions, this year.

The most significant piece of news to come out of SWIFT this year, and this decade, is the fact two weeks later on May 17, two months ago, the electronic Bank Payment Obligation (BPO) for an open account transaction became an official financial instrument under the International Chamber of Commerce’s (ICC) Uniform Rules for Bank payment Obligation (URBPO). The URBPO, which is an element in the electronic matching of open account trade data, and which utilizes the ISO 20022 messaging standards, provides an irrevocable payment guarantee in an automated environment and enables banks to offer flexible risk mitigation and financing services across the supply chain to their corporate customers.

As defined by the U.S. Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration in their Trade Finance Guide, an open account transaction, which is the preferred transaction type by most North American and European multi-nationals, is a sale where the goods are shipped and delivered before payment is due. This option, which is often the most advantageous to the importing buyer, is often the most disadvantageous to the exporting supplier, as they will have difficulty getting financing from their bank to finance the production and shipment of the goods until they are paid by the buyer without proof that they will be paid. That’s why many suppliers will insist on a Letter of Creditworthiness from the buyer’s bank, which will often need to be provided direct to the supplier’s bank. This paperwork takes time, especially since it has to flow through banks, slows down trade, and aggravates buyers who need to move fast to keep up with constantly changing customer demand. That’s why they insist on open accounts, even though the supplier’s bank may not accept them because the buyer, or the buyer’s bank, isn’t known (well enough) to the supplier’s bank, which is fair.

This is a situation that, theoretically, could be easily corrected with an electronic replacement for a letter of credit, that could move at the speed of light down a fiber cable, as the buyer’s bank, which can see the buyer’s ability to pay, can immediately send the supplier’s bank an electronic Bank Payment Obligation that the bank will pay when the goods are shipped and adequate proof has been provided. The supplier’s bank could then advance the supplier as it has a trustworthy bank obligation, and not just a copy of a purchase order (PO), from the buyer’s bank that it can rely on. And now that we have the ICC URBPO, this is finally a reality. And if you’re a multi-national, it’s a reality that’s at your fingertips!

All that is required to create a BPO is a purchase order and an acceptance by the supplier. All that is required to complete the BPO is a commercial invoice and acceptance by the buyer. No other documents are required.

The process is as follows, provided the buyer has an open account with a bank on the SWIFT network that is, or soon will be, URBPO enabled:

  • the buyer sends their PO to their bank and requests a BPO be sent to the supplier’s bank
  • the buyer’s bank delivers the BPO through the TSU (Trade Services Utility) operated by SWIFT to the supplier’s bank
  • the supplier’s bank delivers the PO to the supplier
  • the supplier accepts the PO and sends confirmation to their bank
  • the supplier’s bank delivers the confirmation to the buyer’s bank

and, voila, a valid BPO, which is irrevocable once all conditions are met, has been created. Once the terms of the PO have been completed in full,

  • the supplier informs their bank and provides the commercial invoice
  • the supplier’s bank informs the buyer’s bank that the terms have been completed
  • the buyer’s bank asks for confirmation from the buyer
  • the buyer confirms completion

and the supplier is paid! It’s that easy.

Since only banks have access to the TSU, it’s likely that you’ll probably still have to use e-paper to communicate with your bank if you’re a small or mid-size operation, but if you’re a large multi-national, you can work with an approved vendor (of which there are at least 6 and more in the process of being certified) to integrate your finance system into the bank’s SWIFT system and if you have an open account with the right permissions, automatically create BPOs within your transaction limit (and seamlessly submit requests for approval and conveyance with the click of a mouse), just as easy as you can do ACH payments and wires today with advanced business banking solutions from the major banks.

Of course, it goes without saying that you have to be a client of either the 6 banks that are currently live, the 10 banks that have implemented the capability and that are in the process of implementing their big clients, or the 50 banks that are adding the capability, but if you’re not, and you’re a major player in international trade, maybe you should be! e-Invoicing was e-Procurement 1.0. e-Payment was e-Procurement 2.0. But e-BPO/TSU is e-Procurement 3.0, and if you want to get to the next level, you have to get there.

A Proven Blueprint for Country-Based Global Domination of a Chosen Industry

  1. Become a leading outsourcing destination through low-cost labour.
  2. Patiently build up your cash reserve over a couple of decades.
  3. Through raw material subsidies and free loans, flood the global market with cheap, excess capacity so you become the primary source.

This is exactly how China became:

  • a global leader in solar, steel, glass, paper and auto parts,
  • the world’s largest exporter in 2009 (when it surpassed Germany),
  • the world’s second largest manufacturer in 2010 (when it overtook Japan), and
  • built up the largest foreign-exchange reserves in the world in that same year.

As per this recent post over on the HBR blogs on How Chinese Subsidies Changed the World, since 2001, when China joined the WTO, subsidies have financed over 20% of the expansion of the country’s manufacturing capacity. The state has willingly paid the price of economic inefficiency to accomplish political, social, economic, and diplomatic goals. As a result, huge Chinese subsidies have led to massive excess global capacity, increased exports, and depressed worldwide prices, and have hollowed out other countries’ industrial bases. For example, in 2000, China was a net importer of steel with 13% of world imports and 16% of global output. By 2007, after 27B of energy subsidies, it had become the world’s largest producer, consumer, and exporter of steel. It now produces 50% of the world’s steel, and with no scale economy or technological edge, still sells steel for 25% less than the U.S. or the EU.

This government support of private industry has helped China skyrocket to the second largest producer of GDP faster than anyone expected and will quickly propel it into the top spot. But there is hope for America. All it has to do to regain it’s glory as the largest economic superpower in the world is to:

  1. Take advantage of China’s rising wages and increasing unemployment and start promoting its “low cost labour”.
  2. Patiently wait as China, India, and other fast-growing economies follow its example and outsource everything over the next two decades, grabbing as much renminbi, rupee, and other foreign currency as it can over the next two decades.
  3. Subsidize raw material, manufacturing, and energy production like mad in key industries and begin the climb back up the GDP ladder.

At the rate things are going, China is going to overtake the US before Obama’s term is up, not in the 2020’s like everyone was originally predicting. There’s no stopping them. America’s only hope is to realize economies are often cyclical and take advantage of its next opportunity to get back on top.

I Am The Freight Container

I am the freight container
And I now just where I stand
Another freight enabler
And another caravan
Today I am your champion
As I have won your hearts
And I know the game
You won’t forget my name
And I’ll still be here
In a hundred years
As I’m still state of the artI am the freight enabler
As I have reduced your price
The things you did not know at first
You learned by doin’ twice
And you cannot replace me
No mater what they say
No one else can dent
by ninety seven percent
shipping costs compared
to loading freight impaired
by old bulky wooden crates.

Little did Malcom McLean know when he first invented, patented, and then sent the first metal shipping container on its way on April 26 in 1956 that it would do more to enable global trade than any treaty or global trade organization ever would. As pointed out in this recent economist blog that asked why have containers boosted trade so much, a recent paper by Daniel M. Bernhofen, Zouheir El-Sahli, and Richard Kneller on “Estimating the Effects of the Container Revolution on World Trade”, has disentangled the impact of trade deals from that of shipping containers and derived a rather shocking result. Analyzing the data from 22 industrialized countries, the study found that that containerization is associated with a 320% increase in bilateral trade over the first five years and a 790% increase in bilateral trade over 20 years. On the other hand, a bilateral free-trade agreement only boosts trade by 45% over 20 years and membership in GATT (the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) raises trade by 285%. In other words, a trade agreement will boost trade 50%, membership in GATT will increase trade by a factor of two and a half, but containers will increase trade by a factor of 8!

So, not only did they greatly reduce shipping costs (by 97% according to the shipping records maintained by Mr. McLean who saw his costs per tonne fall from $5.83 per tonne for loose cargo to $0.16/tonne), but they have already done more for global trade than any long winded bureaucrats and diplomats ever will.