In today’s global freight environment, tariffs are more than a line item - they are one of the largest drivers of total landed cost and a key variable in supply chain design. For shippers moving freight across North America, tariff exposure directly impacts margins, network design, and modal strategy, yet many organizations fail to optimize sourcing, routing, and intermodal decisions for duty efficiency.
This article explains how shippers can reduce tariff costs using bonded warehouses, Foreign Trade Zones (FTZs), duty recovery programs, and trade compliance strategies - without slowing freight flow. By aligning transportation and trade strategy, companies can unlock measurable savings while maintaining speed, flexibility, and regulatory compliance.
Over the past decade (and even more so in the past year), tariff planning has evolved into a core logistics discipline rather than a back‑office compliance task. With the U.S. engaged in multiple trade disputes and supply chains reorienting toward nearshoring and “China+1” strategies, companies face:
The good news: strategic use of intermodal freight, bonded warehouses, FTZs, sourcing shifts, and duty recovery can significantly reduce tariff exposure, improve cash flow, and make landed cost outcomes more predictable.
Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 lets the U.S. Trade Representative investigate foreign acts, policies, or practices that are “unjustifiable” or “unreasonable” and that burden U.S. commerce, and respond with measures such as additional tariffs.
Section 301 tariffs are typically imposed on specific Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) lines from a country accused of unfair trade practices (for example, forced technology transfer or intellectual property violations), and they have been a major driver of recent duty increases on China and other partners.
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 allows the U.S. President to restrict imports—most often with tariffs or quotas when the Commerce Department finds that those imports threaten national security. In practice, Section 232 actions have focused on products like steel, aluminum, and certain derivatives, with higher duty rates used to support domestic capacity in industries considered critical to defense and key infrastructure.
USMCA rules of origin determine whether a product “originates” in the United States, Mexico, or Canada and therefore qualifies for preferential (often duty‑free) treatment. Depending on the product, origin can be proven through criteria such as tariff shifts, regional value content (RVC) thresholds, or more stringent requirements for autos.
Those could include higher RVC, labor value content, and specific steel and aluminum sourcing rules. These rules are detailed and product‑specific, and they differ from general marketing concepts like “Made in USA.”
Historically, Section 321 of the Tariff Act of 1930 allowed individual shipments below a de minimis value (raised to $800 in 2015) to enter the U.S. duty‑ and tax‑free, a provision widely used by e‑commerce shippers. As of August 29, 2025, however, a presidential order and subsequent legislation suspended duty‑free Section 321 treatment for most commercial imports, effectively eliminating the broad de minimis channel and forcing low‑value shipments back into standard customs processes.
Now with the definitions behind us, the next step is to look at practical ways shippers can redesign their networks and documentation to reduce landed costs (the total costs of getting items from their origin to the end consumer) brought on by these additional tariffs.
Bonded warehouses allow importers to store goods without paying duties, taxes, or certain fees until the products are withdrawn for domestic consumption. This defers cash outlay and can be especially powerful when demand timing is uncertain or a portion of inventory may be re‑exported.
By pairing bonded storage near major intermodal ramps (for example, Chicago, Laredo, Dallas–Fort Worth), shippers can:
Example: A shipper importing auto parts from Asia via Los Angeles/Long Beach can move containers via intermodal to a bonded facility near Joliet, Illinois, store inventory without paying duty, then clear and distribute only what is needed for U.S. customers while re‑exporting excess volume into Canada or Mexico.
FTZs act as secure, U.S.-based “duty‑free” zones where imported goods can be stored, manipulated, or even manufactured before formal entry into U.S. commerce. Within an FTZ, companies can often optimize how and when they incur duty by changing product form, consolidating entries, or applying inverted duty relief.
Key FTZ advantages include:
When paired with door‑to‑door intermodal solutions, FTZs near inland hubs such as Chicago, Louisville, Kansas City, and Memphis can reduce both transit and duty costs by shifting work closer to customers while controlling duty timing.
A surprising amount of duty spend stems from misaligned classifications or underused trade preferences. While legal counsel and licensed customs brokers must ultimately validate any change, logistics and sourcing teams can partner with them to identify opportunities.
Areas to explore include:
Intermodal lanes connecting U.S.–Mexico and U.S.–Canada are natural candidates to combine USMCA benefits with inland rail efficiencies, as long as documentation, certificates of origin, and routing are aligned with the applicable rules.
Intermodal shipping can be more than a cost‑saving tool, it can be a lever for tariff and compliance optimization when the network is designed with customs in mind. Instead of treating customs clearance as a fixed step at coastal ports, shippers can use inland ports, ramp‑adjacent warehouses, and FTZs to change where, when, and how goods become “entered” into U.S. commerce.
By routing freight through inland ports or customs‑cleared FTZs, shippers can:
When tariffs are high and demand is uncertain, this kind of intermodal‑plus‑tariff architecture can be the difference between a marginal lane and a profitable one.
Tariff mitigation is not only about where you clear freight; it is also about what you buy and from whom. Strategic sourcing and product design can materially lower landed cost when aligned with trade rules.
Consider:
These decisions are long‑cycle moves, but over time they can have more impact on landed cost than any single rate negotiation.
Landed cost is not only about what you pay going forward; it also includes what you can legally recover from past imports. Many companies leave money on the table by underusing duty recovery tools.
Shippers should look at:
Duty drawback: For importers that export finished goods or components, the U.S. duty drawback program can refund up to 99 percent of eligible duties, taxes, and fees paid on imports that are later exported or destroyed under Customs supervision. Because drawback claims require detailed data, tight documentation, and specialized filings, many shippers either partner with experts or, where practical, redesign flows to use in‑bond moves and bonded warehouses to reduce the volume of shipments that need full drawback processing.
In‑bond moves and re‑exports: Combining in‑bond transit, bonded warehouses, and/or FTZs with cross‑border intermodal allows importers to defer duties and, in some cases, avoid them entirely when goods are ultimately exported to Canada, Mexico, or other markets. This approach can complement or, for some flows, substitute for complex drawback claims.
Auditing historical entries: Periodic reviews of HTS classifications, origin claims, and special‑program eligibility often uncover misclassifications or missed preferences that led to overpayment. For many importers, these audits have produced six‑ or seven‑figure refunds and ongoing savings by correcting codes and tightening processes. I can attest to the savings found in these audits, as I put myself on the fast track within GM at the start of my career by challenging the classifications of many products and sub-assemblies because of the millions of dollars saved through the process.
A structured duty‑recovery program turns prior overpayments into a new source of cash while also improving the accuracy of future classifications and filings.
Even the best tariff strategy fails without accurate data and repeatable processes. Building a “tariff‑ready” operating model ensures decisions are based on true landed cost, not rough estimates.
Key elements include:
This governance layer connects your tariff strategy to day‑to‑day execution and helps avoid surprises when policies or markets shift.
Bonded warehouses and FTZs both defer duties, but they are optimized for slightly different use cases.
Many shippers start with bonded warehouses near key ramps to quickly add duty deferral, then layer on FTZ capabilities as volumes grow and product transformation becomes more central to their strategy.
Managing tariffs does not end at customs, but instead starts with network and product design. Shippers that integrate intermodal transport, bonded warehousing, FTZ strategy, sourcing decisions, duty recovery, and trade agreement planning into their supply chain can dramatically improve duty efficiency while maintaining or even enhancing service reliability.
For most organizations, the most effective path is to:
Done well, tariff strategy becomes a competitive advantage, not just a compliance requirement.
For more about InTek Logistics - and the industry in general, go to our Resources or visit the highlighted pages below. If you're interested in working with us, hit the Talk to Us button and we'll be happy to get in touch to discuss your freight needs.