Latest news with #LarryGross
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Predicting the unpredictable for intermodal
Intermodal analyst Larry Gross says that normally he'd be able to draw on his 45 years of transportation experience to make predictions about freight volume in the months ahead. 'Theoretically, it would mean that I would be bringing some long-term insight to the situation that we find ourselves in today: You know, a sense that, well, the last time that this happened, here's how it went,' Gross said Tuesday during an Intermodal Association of North America webcast. But the past does not offer a road map for how intermodal traffic might perform while a trade war is raging. 'There is no 'last time' for some of what we're seeing right now,' Gross said. 'It's really a unique situation.' Shippers pulled forward their imports, particularly from China, in an attempt to beat tariff deadlines, which sent international container volume higher beginning late last year. Then when the Trump administration imposed 145% tariffs on Chinese goods in April, trade all but dried up, creating an air pocket of container volume bound for the says he was surprised it took as long as five to six weeks for the air pocket decline to hit U.S. railroads. 'We've only really seen it now for the past two or three weeks,' he said of BNSF and Union Pacific (NYSE: UNP) intermodal volumes. Now, with tariffs on Chinese goods reduced to 30% from May 12 through the middle of August, Gross is expecting a mini-surge in volume to begin in the middle of this month. 'It's not going to be … a huge volume, because even though 30% is a lot lower than 145%, it's still pretty significant,' Gross said of tariffs on Chinese goods. The hold on reciprocal tariffs, which vary by country and will remain in effect until at least July 9, means importers of goods made elsewhere also may try to rush containers to the U.S., he says. What happens to volume after these summer tariff-related deadlines depends on the next steps in trade talks. But it's trade with China, Gross says, that will have the biggest impact on U.S. intermodal makes up roughly half of all U.S. rail traffic. And North American volumes this year are running well ahead of 2024 levels as well as the 10-year average. U.S. intermodal volume is up 7% this year through May 24, while North American volume is up 5.8%, according to Association of American Railroads data. Overall, 41.3% of U.S. containerized imports come from China, Gross says, citing S&P Global PIERS data for 2024. Chinese imports make up 57.5% of containers handled by U.S. West Coast ports but just 25.6% of boxes that land at U.S. East Coast ports and 34.7% at Gulf Coast ports. 'To the extent that we have a trade war with China, the West Coast is going to feel it much more acutely than the East Coast,' Gross said. Making matters worse for the West Coast: Asian trade is flowing back to normal routings involving East Coast ports for two reasons. First, shipments were diverted to the West Coast last year amid labor uncertainty and a brief strike at East and Gulf Coast ports. Second, some shipments shifted to the West Coast to avoid danger on their normal route via the Red Sea, which was under threat by Houthi rebels in Yemen. This means that both international and domestic intermodal volume from Southern California will face headwinds after the mini-surge, Gross says. Some 15% of domestic container shipments out of Southern California carry goods that were transloaded from international containers, he estimates. This is bad news for BNSF and UP, which originate intermodal loads from West Coast ports. But it's not necessarily good news for Eastern carriers CSX (NASDAQ: CSX) or Norfolk Southern (NYSE: NSC) because the intermodal share of imports is much lower at the East Coast ports they serve. It's unclear when trade disputes will be ironed out, Gross says, but he doesn't expect agreements to fall into place quickly. And that, he says, will mean lingering uncertainty for businesses and consumers alike. 'Uncertainty is the enemy of growth,' Gross said. Slowing growth, plus the potential for tariff-fueled inflation, could ultimately produce stagflation that will reduce consumer demand, he says. 'It certainly wouldn't surprise me to see a downturn in the second quarter and third quarter of this year,' Gross he expects domestic intermodal to eke out slight year-over-year gains for 2025 – if intermodal can continue to slowly regain market share from trucking. International volume, Gross says, likely will be flat to down this year. 'I certainly view more downside risk in that forecast than upside potential,' he said. The post Predicting the unpredictable for intermodal appeared first on FreightWaves. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
11-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
L.A. City Council backs huge trash fee hikes for residents
The Los Angeles City Council moved Friday to dramatically increase trash fees in a bid to raise money and close a billion-dollar budget deficit. On a 10-1 vote, the council ordered city attorneys to draft an ordinance raising the fees on roughly 740,000 customers, with council members arguing that the city has subsidized the cost of trash pickup for too many years. Owners of single-family homes and duplexes will see their trash fees more than double in the coming budget year, reaching $55.95, up from $36.32. Fees for smaller apartment buildings — those with three or four units — will be increased to $55.95, up from $24.33, with each unit paying the full fee. The trash fees will rise each year through 2029, hitting $65.93 for all categories. For single-family homes and duplexes, that would represent an 81% increase over this year. For buildings with three or four units, the fee for each unit would nearly triple. On residents' bimonthly bills from the Department of Water and Power, the increases will show up under the line item 'Solid Resource Fee.' Read more: Huge trash fee hike looms for L.A. residents Larger apartment buildings would not be covered by the planned trash fee hikes. Residents can seek to overturn the fees. Proposition 218, passed by California voters in 1996, requires that property owners be mailed information about the proposed fees and that a hearing be held at least 45 days after the mailing. The fee fails if a majority of owners send in written protests. Larry Gross, executive director of the Coalition for Economic Survival, said landlords will likely pass the fee increase on to tenants who renew a lease or sign a new lease. He expressed concern about the regressive nature of the fee, which will disproportionately hurt low-income residents, since they will pay the same amount as wealthier residents. Councilmember Adrin Nazarian, who represents the eastern San Fernando Valley, expressed a similar concern at Friday's City Council meeting as he cast the lone "no" vote. He pointed out the dramatic increase that residents of a four-unit building will see in the first year. "That unit is going to pay as much as a home in the wealthiest parts of the city," he said. Councilmembers John Lee, Traci Park, Monica Rodriguez and Imelda Padilla were absent from Friday's vote. City leaders said that a program to help low-income residents afford the fees will be expanded, also pointing out that the last trash fee increase was 17 years ago. Without the fee hike, the general fund would lose about $200 million in the next budget year, since the city has been partly subsidizing trash pickup, according to city officials. The fee increase is planned as the city faces a nearly $1-billion budget shortfall and the potential elimination of thousands of city jobs. Mayor Karen Bass is scheduled to release her proposed budget, and her plan for closing the financial gap, later this month. Part of the shortfall is due to labor costs and recent pay increases for some workers, including for police officers and firefighters, that were approved by Bass and the council. Read more: L.A. city budget shortfall grows to nearly $1 billion, with layoffs 'nearly inevitable' The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. on Friday blasted the trash fee hike and accused Bass and the City Council of mismanagement through overspending, "unaffordable" labor contracts and "policies that have driven businesses out of the city, resulting in lower business tax and sales tax revenue." 'The mayor and City Council may want taxpayers to bail out Los Angeles, but it's more likely that taxpayers will bail out of Los Angeles,' the association said. Several Bureau of Sanitation employees spoke in support of the fee at Friday's City Council meeting. Charles Leone, a coordinator with Service Employees International Union 721, which represents sanitation workers, told the council that the fee should have gone up "decades ago" and described the hard work that goes into picking up the trash. "They took on the homeless crisis — head on, they take out the trash every single day, they lift up the mattresses every single day, they address the couches every single day, the list goes on and on," he said. The council last year raised sewer fees for all property owners. Landlords who own units that are rent-stabilized — the vast majority of units in the city — typically can't pass on water costs, which are linked to sewer costs, to their tenants, according to city officials. Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
11-04-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
L.A. City Council backs huge trash fee hikes for residents
The Los Angeles City Council moved Friday to dramatically hike trash fees in a bid to raise money and close a billion dollar budget deficit. On a 10 to 1 vote, the council ordered city attorneys to draft an ordinance raising the fees on roughly 740,000 customers, with councilmembers arguing that the city has subsidized the cost of trash pickup for too many years. Owners of single-family homes and duplexes will see their trash fees more than double in the coming budget year, reaching $55.95, up from $36.32. Fees for smaller apartment buildings — those with three or four units — will be increased to $55.95, up from $24.33, with each unit paying the full fee. The trash fees will rise each year through 2029, hitting $65.93 for all categories. For single-family homes and duplexes, that would represent an 81% increase over this year. For buildings with three or four units, the fee for each unit would nearly triple. On residents' bimonthly bills from the Department of Water and Power, the increases will show up under the line item 'Solid Resource Fee.' Larger apartment buildings would not be covered by the planned trash fee hikes. Residents can seek to overturn the fees. Proposition 218, passed by California voters in 1996, requires that property owners be mailed information about the proposed fees and that a hearing be held at least 45 days after the mailing. The fee fails if a majority of owners send in written protests. Larry Gross, executive director of the Coalition for Economic Survival, said that in L.A., landlords will likely pass on the fee increase to tenants who renew a lease or sign a new lease. He expressed concern about the regressive nature of the fee, which will disproportionately hurt low-income residents, since they will pay the same amount as wealthier residents. City Councilmember Adrin Nazarian, who represents the eastern San Fernando Valley, expressed a similar concern at Friday's City Council meeting as he cast the lone 'no' vote. He pointed out the dramatic hike that residents of a four-unit building will see in the first year. 'That unit is going to pay as much as a home in the wealthiest parts of the city,' he said. Councilmembers John Lee, Traci Park, Monica Rodriguez and Imelda Padilla were absent from Friday's vote. City leaders said that a program to help low-income residents afford the fees will be expanded, also arguing that the last trash fee increase was 17 years ago. Without the fee hike, the general fund would lose about $200 million in the next budget year, since the city has been partially subsidizing trash pickup, according to city officials. The fee increase is planned as the city faces a nearly $1 billion budget shortfall and the potential elimination of thousands of city jobs. Mayor Karen Bass is scheduled to release her proposed budget, and her plan for closing the financial gap, later this month. Part of the shortfall is due to labor costs and recent pay increases for some workers, including for police officers and firefighters, that were approved by Bass and the council. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. on Friday blasted the trash fee hike and accused Bass and the City Council of mismanagement through overspending, 'unaffordable' labor contracts and 'policies that have driven businesses out of the city, resulting in lower business tax and sales tax revenue.' 'The mayor and City Council may want taxpayers to bail out Los Angeles, but it's more likely that taxpayers will bail out of Los Angeles,' the association said. Several Bureau of Sanitation employees spoke in support of the fee at Friday's City Council meeting. Charles Leone, a coordinator with Service Employees International Union 721, which represents sanitation workers, told the council that the fee should have gone up 'decades ago' and described the hard work that goes into picking up the trash. 'They took on the homeless crisis — head on, they take out the trash every single day, they lift up the mattresses every single day, they address the couches every single day, the list goes on and on,' he said. The council last year raised sewer fees for all property owners. Landlords who own units that are rent-stabilized — the vast majority of units in the city — typically can't pass on water costs, which are linked to sewer costs, to their tenants, according to city officials.
