10 US Policies Under Trump: Which Matter To Project Cargo?

By Leslie Meredith

From tariffs to LNG, Trump-era policies are shaking up global trade. But which ones matter for breakbulk and project cargo? We explore ten key federal moves and ask industry leaders to weigh in on how Washington’s decisions are shaping project planning and transport demand.

From Issue 4, 2025 of Breakbulk Magazine

(7-minute read)

With nearly six months of experience under Trump’s second administration, do we have a clearer view of what the impact of a flurry of policy initiatives will have on the project industry here in the United States?

Fluctuating tariffs, trading partners falling into and out of favor, and a new conflict in the Middle East with direct U.S. involvement, complicate the outlook for industrial projects. Meanwhile, campaign promises related to where Americans will get their energy from and initiatives to strengthen domestic industry are underway, developing as we discussed in 5 Things Breakbulk Must Prepare for Under Trump last fall. But, how those policy changes coupled with economic and geopolitical realities will play out is in question.

Current sentiment can be boiled down to one word: uncertainty. “301 and other tariffs have a huge impact, but nobody really knows what the answer is yet,” Tarek Amine, principal vice president and chief supply chain officer at Bechtel Global Corporation, said during a panel at Breakbulk Europe in May.

It’s that uncertainty that can block decision-making, leading to a wait-and-see approach. The Breakbulk community needs some measure of certainty, and that’s why we reached out to 10 senior leaders from across the industry, and asked them to rank 10 federal initiatives based on their impact to project development. Let’s take a look at the ranking and at evidence that shows the direction the industry is moving.

1. Steel & Aluminum Tariffs Raised to 50%

This action led the pack by a wide margin, receiving 7 out of 10 first place votes by the panelists. Everyone agreed it would have a substantial negative impact on the project market. Marco Poisler, COO of UTC Overseas, rates the measure a “critical risk,” saying it raises costs “across virtually every manufacturing supply chain.”

For instance, the price for steel rebar, a component found in almost every construction project, is 8 to 9% higher than it was in March, with most of the increase coming after the tariff doubled from 25% in June. Analysts point to a coordinated mill price increase made by steel producers without fear of being undercut by foreign suppliers due to the high tariff rate.

The administration hopes to encourage new domestic steelmaking capacity. And it has done that with its approval of Nippon Steel’s acquisition of U.S. Steel for US$14.9 billion, which closed in June. The deal commits Nippon to investing US$11 billion into the steel sector. Nippon’s plan joins expansion programs from Nucor and others, positioning the sector as a steady source of heavy-lift activity in leading steel states such as Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and Michigan.

Bottom line: Because steel costs more, projects will cost more. Plan on some new steel mills over the next few years with ongoing transportation demand for finished goods.

2. LNG Export Moratorium Lifted

Our industry panel ranked this political move as having the second highest impact on project development. When the moratorium was lifted in January, natural gas producers’ response was decisive. After a year of operating under the Biden administration’s pause on new LNG export approvals to non-free trade agreement countries*, the floodgates opened on a dozen projects, including Venture Global CP2 LNG, which received all government approvals. When the second phase of this US$28 billion project is completed in 2030, it will become the largest LNG plant in the country.

“Whether used as a clean energy source or as a feedstock for ammonia, hydrogen, methanol or fertilizers, LNG continues to prove its worth in the global economy,” Edward Talbot, managing director of Roll Group, wrote in his analysis accompanying his ranking. “The logistics sector will heavily benefit from projects (pipelines, processing facilities, export terminals, etc.) that are greenlit for construction.”

LNG processing facilities are one type of project to benefit from this policy. Further, there are dozens of LNG terminals and pipelines approved or under construction, and with all of these projects, modules, tanks, compressors and other oversized cargoes will need logistics support and transport.

Bottom line: LNG projects are a sure bet – watch for more FIDs, approvals in the coming months and open the conversation with project owners now.

3. Section 301 Tariffs on Industrial Equipment

Section 301 tariffs on Chinese port equipment prompted mid-level concern from the panel’s aggregate results, and serious concern from our port panelist. Greg Borossay, principal maritime business development at the Port of San Diego, said “The impact will be negative and immediate.”

Covering over US$18 billion in imports—including ship-to-shore cranes and their components, heavy machinery, turbines and electrical gear—these tariffs have sharply increased costs for essential port equipment. Regardless of where the machinery is assembled, if it is associated with a Chinese company or contains Chinese parts, it will be subject to the new tariffs. Because the U.S. lacks the industrial base to manufacture large-scale port machinery, port authorities are left with few alternatives but to absorb higher prices or pass them on to shipping lines.

The clock is ticking: Unless targeted tariff exclusions are granted, ports will face higher project costs, more frequent delays and growing challenges in keeping up with cargo volumes. For shippers, this means more uncertainty in scheduling, budgeting and long-term planning.

Bottom line: With no current domestic alternatives, expect congestion, budget overruns and scheduling problems if exclusions or other solutions are not put in place.

4. Strict “Buy American” Rules for Federal Projects

The current administration has embarked on a sweeping overhaul of the “Buy American” rules for federal projects, but its focus is on streamlining rather than changing the criteria for either domestic content thresholds or price preference for domestic goods.

Under Biden, the FAR amendments raised domestic content thresholds from 65% in 2024 to 75% starting in 2029. The premium on foreign goods increased from 6% to 20% on large businesses, making it more difficult for a non-U.S. company to win a federally funded contract. While the new reforms don’t change these regulations, the process for government contracting should be simplified. For example, the executive order stipulates that for every new requirement added, ten existing ones must be repealed.

Have we seen an uptick in domestically produced components for federal projects? While there is no public data to support such a trend, we do see movement, which could be the start of growth in the sector. In 2024, Siemens announced it would expand its transformer plant in North Carolina with production set to begin in 2026. The move supports growing U.S. demand for grid capacity and aligns with Buy American preferences. As energy infrastructure spending rises, more foreign manufacturers may consider local production to compete.

Bottom line: No change to content thresholds. Growing grid demand may spur domestic transformer manufacturing and thereby increase transport by road, rail and barge in the sector.

5. Offshore Wind Leasing & Funding Rollbacks

For a brief time, offshore wind looked like it was going to finally take off in the U.S., but prospects have dwindled. New administration directives temporarily withdraw all areas of the Outer Continental Shelf from new or renewed wind energy leasing and suspend the issuance of new permits, approvals and loans for wind projects (offshore and onshore) pending a comprehensive federal review. Project developers were swift to respond.

RWE has paused its plans for leases off the coast of New York, Louisiana and California. Atlantic Shores developers Shell and EDF Renewables have formally requested the cancellation of their regulatory agreements. In a recent Wood Mackenzie report, the analyst downgraded its wind capacity projections through 2029 by 40%. New capacity will come from projects that were already approved or under construction.

It’s no surprise that our industry panel ranked offshore wind rollbacks in the middle of the pack. Offshore wind has struggled to gain momentum here in the U.S., and faced challenges from Jones Act regulations, environmentalists and insufficient infrastructure. While offshore wind projects provide significant work for project cargo professionals as we’ve seen throughout Europe and other parts of the world, it was still a little early to count on big volume business from these projects in the U.S.

Bottom line: Offshore wind is off the table for now. Leasing is frozen, funding suspended and developers are pulling out. This sector could return in 2028.

6. Nuclear Revival

AI’s voracious need for computing power has put nuclear back in play largely because of new small modular reactor technology. But it’s not the only reason.

To capitalize on existing infrastructure, Constellation Energy will restart Three Mile Island Unit 1 by 2028, a year ahead of schedule, to supply Microsoft data centers. It will be the first U.S. reactor ever returned to service after a shutdown.

Fermi America will build a huge multi-power source data center complex from scratch. The company recently announced its partnership with Texas Tech University, saying the project will integrate “the largest nuclear power complex in America, the nation’s biggest combined-cycle natural gas project, utility grid power, solar power, and battery energy storage.”

Around US$35-45 billion in SMR and fuel supply chain projects have been announced. Executive orders have shifted parts of the licensing pathway from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to the Department of Energy to reduce approval times.

Nuclear fuel security is advancing quickly as well: new uranium mines are planned for Utah, while Wyoming and Texas are fast-tracking restarts and expansions of existing sites.

For project-cargo specialists, that means a steady stream of oversize cargoes throughout the country. Panelist Dennis Devlin, managing director USA of DT Project America, said of his ranking of nuclear, “It’s the only good thing on the list.”

Bottom line: AI and data centers are fueling a nuclear comeback. From SMRs to uranium mines, this sector promises steady oversize cargo demand and long-term project opportunities.

7. Fast-Track Permitting for Energy & Infrastructure

The Trump administration has aggressively pursued permitting reform to fast-track infrastructure projects, primarily through Executive Order 14154 (“Unleashing American Energy”) and a 2025 memorandum launching a government-wide Permitting Technology Action Plan. These directives have prompted multiple federal agencies to overhaul their National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) procedures, including the Department of Transportation’s changes that cut its procedures by half.

USDoT added strict deadlines and page limits on environmental reviews, and made it easier for agencies to use exclusions and adopt other agencies’ analyses to avoid duplicate work. A project that previously required years of environmental assessment and hundreds of pages of documentation may now be reviewed in months.

Edward Talbot, managing director for Roll Group said, ”Streamlined permitting may spur growth and accelerate capital and domestic infrastructure,” but continued with this warning, “This could have unexpected short-term negative effects as the upstream supply chains struggle to keep pace.”

While these reforms are already accelerating some project approvals, their long-term impact is uncertain. The changes could be reversed by future administrations, as seen in the past, and are likely to face legal challenges from environmental groups. Based on our panel’s ranking, they are aware of the possibly fleeting nature of these reforms.

Bottom line: Use this window while it lasts; future environment-related lawsuits or political shifts could shut down controversial projects. Don’t be left unable to do the work.

8. Domestic Shipbuilding Incentives & Port Fees

While few dispute the appeal of revitalizing American shipyards, industry leaders placed this policy initiative in the lower third of priorities. That likely reflects the current reality: Section 301 port fees on Chinesebuilt vessels apply only to container and ro-ro ships. Most heavy-lift vessels—essential to project cargo— fall below the 55,000 dwt threshold and are exempt at this time.

As for the SHIPS for America Act, its goal of rebuilding a U.S. commercial fleet is ambitious but faces serious obstacles. U.S.-built ships can cost 2–3 times more than those from Chinese, Korean or Japanese yards, and delivery times are significantly longer. The shortage of skilled labor and yard capacity adds to the challenge.

New preferential cargo laws now require 100% of U.S. government cargoes—including U.S.-manufactured goods for overseas projects financed by EXIM Bank—to sail on U.S.-flagged ships, up from the previous 50%. But with so few ships available, this mandate may be difficult to meet.

But several domestic shipyards are making moves, including Philly Shipyard whose new owner Hanwha Ocean said it was expanding the yard and looking to increase the facility’s revenues from $368 million per year to $4 billion per year by 2035, largely through military contracts. The company may also build the country’s first U.S.-flagged LNG tankers.

Bottom line: Port fees could be applied later to heavy-lift vessels. Domestic shipbuilding at scale is a long way off. Higher costs are inevitable.

9. Opening Federal Lands & Waters for Drilling

True to his campaign promise, the Trump administration moved early to open millions of acres of U.S. coastal waters and public land for oil, gas and mining development, including 23 million acres across the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska. A Gulf oil lease sale covering about 80 million acres is scheduled later this year in December.

This is part of the “Unleashing American Energy” package and includes streamlining the permitting process as well as lifting some environmental requirements. Our panelists were not impressed, ranking this policy change near the bottom of the list.

Energy companies haven’t announced big plans for new exploration and production projects, due to volatile oil and gas prices, instability in oil-producing regions, legal action from environmentalists, and potential regulatory changes in the future.

But there’s one big exception: Glenfarne Group is advancing its US$44 billion Alaska LNG project with Worley as lead EPC. The project includes an 807-mile pipeline carrying North Slope natural gas to the Anchorage region and an LNG export terminal at Nikiski. A final investment decision is expected by the end of the year.

Bottom line: As long as a project has its approvals, go for the work. Energy security policy will likely continue to be prioritized.

10. Coal Comeback

Our executives put coal at the bottom of the list, despite President Trump’s backing of coal as part of Executive Order 14154, “Unleashing American Energy.” The order supports mine reopenings, life extensions for coal-fired power plants and revokes the moratorium on coal mining leases on federal land.

But coal has been on a steady decline since its peak in 2008, according to the government’s Energy Information Administration, due to the abundant supply of natural gas and the falling costs of renewables, affecting both domestic use and exports. Even in steelmaking, coal use has declined as steelmakers turned to Electric Arc Furnaces that use scrap metal rather than coal to produce most types of steel, a process that reduces emissions and is cheaper.

Yet it serves as a political rallying point, supporting jobs in states that rely on coal mining such as West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Wyoming. There are only around 40,000 coal mining jobs today compared with 180,000 in the 1980s.

“Coal revival efforts represent the policy with the largest gap between political commitment and economic viability,” Marco Poisler, COO of UTC Overseas, said.

Bottom line: Coal has political backing but little economic case. Cheaper, cleaner alternatives dominate energy and steelmaking. There’s no hope for reversing its trajectory.

Breakbulk Americas 2025 is happening on Sep 30 - Oct 2 in Houston.