Gene Seroka Opines on Tariffs, Trade Disruption, & POLA’s Zero-Emissions Future
With the Port of Los Angeles experiencing an immediate 20% drop in cargo volume following the Trump Administration’s announced tariffs and resulting trade uncertainties, VX News checked in with Gene Seroka, Executive Director of the Port of Los Angeles, to illuminate how tariff uncertainty is reshaping global trade flows—and the cascading effects these disruptions are having on American workers, consumers, and supply chains. Seroka confirms the Port’s ongoing commitment to infrastructure investment, supply chain resiliency, and zero-emissions operations emphasizing the need for long-term planning amid short-term uncertainty.
“What I’m seeing right now, on the question of winners and losers, is this: these tariffs have fundamentally changed how the world looks at trade.”
Gene, all of us have viewed you on the news, CNN, Fox Business, and others, raising the alarm on the effects of tariffs on trade and supply chains. How have the Trump Administration’s announced tariffs and resulting trade uncertainties impacted goods movement through the Port of Los Angeles?
Overall cargo is down at the Port of Los Angeles for May, with 20% of our 80 scheduled vessels having been canceled. The first and fourth weeks of the month saw precipitous drops, exceeding 30% in year-over-year comparisons.
Even though there’s been a reprieve on tariffs from China, dropping from 145% to 30%—30% is still a significant cost added to goods. Please remember, that’s just an average. Auto parts for some of our importers carry a tariff of 57.5%, and infant footwear is over 90%. There are many stories like that.
Looking ahead, we continue to see very light cargo volume coming through the Port of Los Angeles—and not just from China. A 10% tariff remains in place, along with others, on cargo from throughout the Pacific Rim, which is our main theater of operation. In fact, I saw statistics this morning showing that cargo from all of our traditional import locations is down since the announcement of tariffs at the beginning of April.
Is the 20% decline in Cargo thru POLA similar to what other US ports are experiencing?
We’ve felt the impacts a bit earlier, because cargo gets here faster than it reaches the East and Gulf Coasts, which typically lag by about four to six weeks based on transit time alone. It’s safe to say that imports to the U.S. are down precipitously.
That trend was reflected in China’s April export recap, where exports to the U.S. were down, I believe, somewhere in the neighborhood of 9 to 10%. Meanwhile, exports to the rest of the world were up over 20%. So yes—it’s hitting ports across the nation.
And the impact on exports?
From the Port of Los Angeles' perspective, we’ve seen exports decline for five consecutive months. We're now really starting to feel the impact of reciprocal tariffs kick in—those imposed by other countries on American goods from the export side of the ledger. Most affected by this are American farmers, and those here in the Central Valley of California.
Brazil sold more soybeans to China in recent months than ever in its history. Australia has stepped in with almonds being sold to India, whose middle-class population is greater than our entire population here in the United States. These are not transactional parts of business, either. If you get a contract on an agricultural product, you're probably running three, six, or twelve months in duration. Even if something changes here concerning the trade policy, we’re still out of the game for some time.
Address what the above supply chain disruptions likely mean for consumers and workers nationwide this year?
On the import side of the ledger, we’re likely to see lower inventory levels from American retailers, fewer products on shelves, and likely higher prices. There’s a general uncertainty around trade policy, whether changes will come in two hours, two days, or two months. Since January, there have been 57 different announcements related to trade policy. Even the most seasoned professionals are struggling to keep up with the constant stream of information and to understand how it might impact their business, or that of their customers. It’s been extremely difficult across the board.
On the export side, the American farmer has been getting walloped. These sales are perishable, not just the commodities themselves, but the opportunity to sell. If a sale doesn’t happen, it may not come around again for months—or even a year. Locally, the workforce at the port has already felt the impact, with an immediate decline in jobs tied directly to the drop in cargo volume.
Job postings for longshore labor are down, in some cases, on a daily basis, by 40%. And as you know, for every four containers that move through the port, we create a job. That’s why it’s so important to keep cargo volumes at high levels: to sustain the workforce that depends on this activity. While I don’t foresee mass layoffs, if you’re a dock worker who was regularly getting overtime or working double shifts, you're likely now working less than a standard full week.
If you’re a casual dock worker—someone trying to build skills and hours to become a permanent cardholder—you’re probably getting very little work at all right now. Truckers who were moving four or five loads a day just a couple of weeks ago are now down to two or three. This slowdown is hitting everyone connected to port operations: Customs House brokers, freight forwarders, and manufacturers. In L.A. County alone, there are more than 400,000 manufacturing jobs, many of which are now likely selling fewer products.
Gene, market chaos and confusion often produce winners and losers. Who are the current winners?
Well, I think it’s a little too early to tell—but right now, it’s hard to see how anyone comes out a winner. We’re a consuming nation—70% of our economy is driven by you and me buying at the retail level. So, if prices go up, family budgets get pinched and belts get tightened.
If you’re a dock worker, your hours are going down, and then when you head to the store, you’re paying more. That’s a double whammy. Meanwhile, other countries are starting to negotiate around us. We’ve seen the UK and India reach a deal. French President Macron is in Southeast Asia this week, cobbling together new partnerships. Everyone’s scrambling to figure out what next.
What I’m seeing right now, on the question of winners and losers, is this: these tariffs have fundamentally changed how the world looks at trade. The whipsaw effect of announcements, without clarity on where things will land, has caused many organizations to hit the pause button. That means no major hiring, no filling of open positions, and no capital investment—because it’s just too risky.
We simply don’t know where this is going. This will in fact—and it’s proven to—slow global trade, which in turn, is slowing economies, including ours. The GDP decline in the U.S. during the first quarter of this year made that abundantly clear. There’s a lot to digest, and no clear endgame in sight.
Given all the talk about bringing manufacturing back to the United States, we’ve yet to see a sector-specific plan, with timelines for permitting, construction, opening doors, or hiring strategies tied to the necessary skill sets. I’ll tell you this—if you and I decided to open a factory today, it would probably take five years to get it operational, and it would probably be automated with robotics.
Gene, most economists predict inflation will be rising, and the dollar value is under stress. What do these two financial indices mean for the port and global trade going forward?
Well, if inflation rises again, the cost of holding inventory becomes even more expensive. That tells me businesses will likely scale back their inventory carrying requirements. While we often focus on finished goods moving through this port, for American retailers there’s an equally significant volume of parts and components heading to American factories. Those companies are telling me they plan to maintain a steady, but very low, stream of parts to keep operations going.
If an automotive plant has to shut down a line, it could cost between $2 million and $4 million an hour in lost productivity, time, and sales. That’s an extraordinary number to contend with.
If inflation continues to rise, the American consumer generally buys less. With 70% of our economy tied to consumer spending, that signals a difficult road ahead. Investment decisions in infrastructure, manufacturing, shipbuilding, and other sectors are not transactional, they take decades.
When we talk about the U.S. economy and the value of the dollar, a strong dollar benefits us in many ways as the world’s reserve currency. However, it can make U.S. exports more expensive abroad—that’s something we have to manage. The reality is: there’s no single lever to pull that’s “best” for the American economy. It’s a series of levers and puts and takes that allow us to grow this $30 trillion economic engine. When you’re talking about $3 trillion in American imports, even with tariffs applied, that’s still a relatively small piece considering the broader picture.
Since the COVID pandemic, POLA and you, specifically, have been a recognized leader in affirming the Port’s commitment to resiliency. Will the prescient preparations made to date be enhanced?
What we’re seeing right now is a convergence of cycles: budget cycles, like the one we’re currently facing, economic cycles that we’re actively evaluating, and election cycles that we’ll navigate through. And we will get through this.
A key part of our resiliency strategy is that we planned for a moment like this more than a decade ago. We’ve maintained a prudent financial policy at the Port of Los Angeles, one that ensures even in times of lower cargo volume or broader economic downturns, we continue to invest through the cycle, in infrastructure, and the bricks and mortar of the port. Right now, there are more than 3,500 construction workers on port property each day, building and advancing critical projects. My goal is to make sure those women and men have steady work to come to, regardless of short-term economic fluctuations affecting the port.
At a Cargo News Briefing recently, you said that the Port was going to focus on the $230 million in capital projects planned this fiscal year so that POLA is ready to go when volume comes back. Do you stand by that commitment?
Absolutely. One thousand percent. You rarely get a chance to accelerate projects because of an economic dip or a volume downturn in the industry. You have to take advantage of that, and you’ll be even more prepared. Similarly, when it comes to our dock workers, I’ve been in discussions with the Pacific Maritime Association—the Employers Association group—about keeping these workers on the job.
This period presents a rare opportunity: we can focus on preventative maintenance, equipment upkeep, and preparing our marine terminals for when cargo volumes pick back up. Under normal conditions, with cargo constantly flowing through the system, we don’t often get the chance to pause and invest in re-skilling and up-skilling our workforce, or even to allow them to refresh their existing training. We have to take advantage of this moment, and because we’ve maintained strong financial policies over the years, we have the financial wherewithal to make it happen.
Address the status of POLA’s funding as a test site for ARCHES—California’s hydrogen hub. Given the executive orders of late, it would seem that such funding is in play. What’s your take on it?
Everything’s in play right now, and so far, we haven’t heard anything negative. But that doesn’t mean we can bury our heads in the sand. We need to move forward with our commitment to zero-emission cargo handling equipment by 2030 and zero-emission heavy-duty trucks by 2035.
We’ve learned a lot since those initial mayoral resolutions were adopted back in 2017. One major realization: ship emissions are now understood to be the largest polluters, not just here at the port, but globally.
Last summer, we welcomed the Maersk Alette, the first effective zero-emissions vessel to call at the Port of Los Angeles. It ran on e-methanol—not as a test, but as a full commercial voyage. This 16,000-container unit ship sailed from Xiamen in China’s Fujian Province to Los Angeles in just about 16 days, proving under real-world industrial conditions that zero-emissions cargo movement is possible—but that’s just one ship out of 2,000 calls we receive annually.
We now face the challenge of manufacturing, transporting, storing, and distributing clean fuels at scale. That’s why I’m advocating—at the state, county, and city levels—for a streamlined permitting and strategic planning process to build renewable and clean energy fueling infrastructure right here at the Port of Los Angeles. We have a real opportunity to lead.
Next on the list: trucks. While our footprint is relatively small, about 7,500 acres, these trucks travel far across the western region. There’s a role we can play in that transition, too. Then, locomotive engines. In my view, investing in ships, trucks, and trains offers the greatest return in emissions reductions. That’s where our efforts and resources will have the most impact.
Let’s pivot to green shipping corridors. What’s their status?
The green shipping corridor was an idea that originated between former Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and us here at the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, during his time as chair of the C40 Cities. You may recall that in those early days, the U.S. had withdrawn from the Paris Agreement, similar to more recent developments, and we recognized an opportunity that needed exploration. That’s when we began to look more closely at what we could do on the water side of our operations.
Today, we’ve established eight unique agreements with ports across Asia, from Japan and China to Vietnam and Singapore. The goal is to align with long-standing trading partners and build shared momentum. These relationships have now extended to the private sector as well, and we've seen real interest from companies in the shipping industry who are pursuing similar goals.
It’s still early. There’s no consensus yet on fuel protocols, sourcing locations, or commercial pricing and quantities. But we’re leaps and bounds ahead of where we were just five years ago during the COVID era—and I like our chances. At this point, we know enough to begin building the infrastructure and systems needed for next-generation fueling. The ships being purchased today are equipped with dual-fuel tanks, which means they won’t be stranded in the middle of the Pacific. They can switch from conventional bunker fuel to renewable or synthetic fuels midstream, allowing us to test these technologies in real-time under demanding industrial conditions, to see what works and what needs refining.
Terry Tamminen would not be happy if we didn't ask a closing question about AltaSea and its relationship to POLA’s goals and objectives.
I saw Terry just last week at the Chamber of Commerce event around Fleet Week. What he’s doing to create accelerators, incubators, and companies with real experience coming closer to the harbor must and cannot be understated. His days as CalEPA chief under the Governor and bringing it down here on the ground in real time to explore what we can do with renewables, how we can use the power of the ocean to help drive this port complex, will pay dividends in the years to come.
We’re also seeing how the AltaSea facility has been refurbished as a real attraction for those businesses to come to the harbor as a site driven by Terry himself, along with his board, and Tim McOsker, who predated Terry and is now our Councilman here in District 15. There's a lot of groundwork laid, but I like the trajectory Terry’s got the organization on now.
Let me close by asking—what's the common agenda of your peers all over the country and in North America?
The common theme is clear: we need all ports across the nation operating at full speed to help power the American economy. There’s a tremendous volume of cargo moving across the country, and there’s enough for everyone. We’ve got some sharp, forward-thinking leaders at ports nationwide, working in alignment with their legislatures to ensure strong public and private investment. These ports contribute more than 20% of the nation’s GDP through job creation, economic activity, tax revenue, utilities, and more.
They are true economic engines, and often early indicators of broader economic mobility, as cargo flows in and export orders are fulfilled. I really admire the people leading these ports around the country, and I always say—working together with them not only strengthens our national system, it makes us a better port, too.
