Regulatory Foresight That Anticipated Financial Impact Before Data
Confirmation

My background in logistics and years of negotiating supply chain contracts made it clear early on that the public narrative around tariffs did not reflect how most international shipments actually operate. The overwhelming majority of goods do not move under Incoterms that would place tariff costs on foreign sellers. Instead, U.S. importers are contractually responsible for duties and taxes.

In addition, supply chain contracts are typically fixed for their duration and difficult to renegotiate absent extraordinary circumstances. For foreign sellers to absorb tariff costs, they would have had to break or materially revise existing agreements to lower prices, which was highly unlikely in practice.

Well before the Federal Reserve Bank of New York later confirmed that U.S. firms and consumers were bearing over 90 percent of the tariff burden, I recognized that American importers would absorb most of the financial impact and shared that assessment publicly through published commentary and media.

This mattered because businesses needed a realistic view of their exposure in order to plan, price, and operate effectively. It reflects my approach to legal and regulatory risk not as theory, but as something that must be translated into real world commercial consequences so leadership can act with confidence in changing environments.