Dive Brief:

• Amazon will soon levy a 3.5% fuel and logistics-related surcharge on fulfillment services for third-party sellers as the e-commerce giant battles elevated operating costs, according to an announcement Thursday.
• Starting April 17, the surcharge will be applied to fulfillment fees for the company's Fulfillment by Amazon service in the U.S. and Canada, in addition to Remote Fulfillment with FBA shipping from the U.S. to Canada, Mexico and Brazil. On May 2, the surcharge will also begin applying to Buy with Prime in the U.S. and Multi-Channel Fulfillment services in the U.S. and Canada.
• The surcharge, which Amazon did not provide an end date for, is calculated based on seller fulfillment fees rather than the sale price of the items, according to Amazon. The 3.5% levy equates to an additional $0.17 per unit for U.S. Fulfillment by Amazon services, although it varies based on item size and dimensions.

Dive Insight:

Amazon is joining the list of major logistics providers that are hitting shippers with price hikes and elevated surcharges as fuel costs rise amid the war in Iran. UPS and FedEx's fuel surcharge rates continue to climb, and the U.S. Postal Service plans to launch an 8% temporary price hike on package shipping services April 26.

"We have absorbed these increased costs so far," Amazon said in its announcement. "However, similar to other major carriers, when costs remain elevated, we implement temporary surcharges on our fulfillment fees to recover a portion of the actual cost increases we are experiencing."

Amazon added that its 3.5% price bump "is meaningfully lower than other major carriers" due to work it has already done to lower costs. In recent years, the company has overhauled its inbound fulfillment processes, pushed for order consolidation into fewer boxes and shifted from a national to a regional network model in the U.S.

Some e-commerce experts are skeptical that the surcharge will be a short-term increase. Noah Wickham, VP of sales and marketing at Amazon seller agency My Amazon Guy, said in a LinkedIn post that he expects the company will "keep it regardless" even if fuel prices fall and stabilize.

It's not the first time Amazon has levied a surcharge to account for rising fuel costs. In 2022, the company implemented a 5% fuel and inflation surcharge on Fulfillment by Amazon services. This year, Amazon increased fees on Fulfillment by Amazon services in January, averaging an additional $0.08 per unit sold.

This article was written by Max Garland from Supply Chain Dive and was legally licensed through the DiveMarketplace by Industry Dive. Please direct all licensing questions to legal@industrydive.com.

While the existing contract between global e-commerce retailer Amazon and the United States Postal Service (USPS) expires in 2026, a Reuters report published yesterday shed some light, in regards to the relationship between the parties. According to the report, Amazon and the USPS came to terms on a new agreement, in which the USPS will handle roughly 80% of its existing deliveries, representing around 1.7 billion packages and $6 billion in revenue annually, from Amazon, representing a 20% reduction from current levels, which the report said was initially to be closer to a two-thirds reduction. In December, USPS announced that that shippers of all sizes would be able to access more than 18,000 USPS delivery destination units (DDU) across the country. USPS explained that this will be done through a solicitation process to start accepting around late January or early into February. And it added that in advance of setting up a dedicated bid solicitation platform, the USPS would communicate with shippers, regarding the procedure and also to gauge interest in participation, as well as “fine-tune” the bidding process based on feedback to provide the most effective platform,” with more details announced over the coming months. Adi Karamcheti, Consultant, Professional Services, had a different take on this development, when it was initially announced, saying it does not make sense, in that it seems like an attempt by the USPS to either get more from Amazon or to get UPS to work with them again. “USPS claiming this process is open to shippers large and small, doesn't make a lot of sense,” he said. “You really need to be big in order to directly inject into the Post office network. I'm not sure playing a game of chicken with Amazon is really the best idea. It's a high-risk move. Amazon's reaction could be to build out their network even faster than they are currently doing.” To that end, Amazon has remained on track in building out its network, following its June 2025 announcement, in which it said it was making a $4 billion investment towards tripling its delivery network by the end of 2026, with a focus on small towns and rural areas. Feedback regarding the updated agreement between the USPS and Amazon was well-received by industry observers. “With Amazon and the USPS reaching a new deal, it looks like the USPS has averted a disaster of losing its top customer soon after announcing it would run out of cash in February,” said Paul Yaussy, Head of Parcel Contract Intelligence, at Loop. “Apparently, Amazon is cutting its footprint with the USPS by 20%, which is dramatically different than some reports we had heard saying it could be nearly triple that. So, it would appear to be a win-win for now as USPS avoids having to find a replacement for its largest shipper and Amazon buys more time to execute on its apparent long-term plan of insourcing most of its package volume.” Rob Martinez, founder of San Diego-based Shipware, called it an important announcement, in that Amazon is keeping a low-cost last-mile partner, especially in rural and less populated areas where USPS offers an advantage. “The partnership with the Postal Service helps Amazon manage its delivery costs—Amazon knows exactly how much it costs to deliver a package through its own network compared to handing it off to USPS, often the cheaper choice,” he said. “This helps Amazon protect its profit margins, stay flexible with its delivery options, and avoid building its own network in places where it would not be worth the investment. It's also noteworthy that the announced USPS contract demonstrates that Amazon’s strategy of bringing deliveries in-house has its limits. For the Postal Service, it's quite possibly an existential win. Retaining around 80% of Amazon volume protects a multi-billion-dollar revenue stream and maintains network density. It also signals that USPS remains a critical piece of the U.S. parcel ecosystem despite competitive pressures. USPS remaining viable and relevant preserves a third major delivery option, which is critical leverage in contract negotiations with UPS and FedEx, and it helps keep last-mile pricing in check, particularly for lightweight residential deliveries.” John Haber, Chief Strategy Officer, for Transportation Insight said this announcement was not surprising, adding Amazon and USPS reaching an agreement was expected. “It’s a very interesting and complex situation with many questions,” he said. “Will the USPS make a profit on the new deal with Amazon? Does it have to make a profit? Will Amazon make a profit on the new deal with the USPS? Does it have to make a profit?” This development comes at a time when the USPS’s financial outlook has been under scrutiny for years, due, in large part, to traditional first-class mail, once the backbone of the organization’s business model, having steadily declined as more communication moves online. Over the past 15 years, billions of pieces of mail have disappeared from the system. USPS Postmaster General David P. Steiner said the agency’s financial situation remains serious, with the organization having hired restructuring advisers to review its finances as leaders warn the agency could run out of money by 2027 if major changes are not made. “We are out of cash in 12 months if we don’t do anything different,” he said.

Many companies that source products internationally and rely on ocean transportation to the U.S. do not have an established strategy for obtaining optimal rates and service. While some organizations have an established international logistics group, others view international shipping more as a task—or as a type of “utility cost”—where ocean transportation is treated simply as a spot-market expense. However, establishing a structured and strategic approach to managing inbound ocean shipments can yield significant benefits in cost control, service performance, and inventory management. In fact, a well-designed ocean transportation strategy provides the framework to shift from reactive to proactive logistics planning. Now, let’s consider some of the key factors. 1. Volume projections The very first agenda item is to forecast shipping volumes. Interestingly, knowing exactly where suppliers’ shipping locations are located is not always apparent to companies. However, it’s necessary to identify origin and destination locations, the total number of twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs), and any shipment seasonality. This information is vital when sharing projections with carriers to negotiate volume commitments and rates. 2. Contracting vs. spot market strategy Some companies ship exclusively via the spot market, meaning these rates are determined by the supply and demand for sailing slots at a specific time. While this strategy might work for companies that ship a limited number of ocean containers, it’s generally not effective for companies that move higher volumes of shipments and TEUs. Spot ocean container rates can fluctuate significantly. For example, when companies attempted to beat tariff implementations applied to imports, spot container rates skyrocketed. However, once the tariffs were implemented, spot rates dropped drastically. Fixed annual contracts provide more stable rates and are less sensitive to market swings, allowing for more accurate management of an ocean transportation budget. 3. Ocean carrier selection and diversification Ocean carriers manage their own operations, including vessel scheduling, maintenance, and cargo handling. It’s essential to conduct thorough research to establish clear criteria for carrier selection. Key factors to evaluate include cost, transit time, service reliability, geographic coverage, and port accessibility. To mitigate risk and ensure service continuity, companies should avoid over-reliance on a single carrier and instead pursue a diversified carrier strategy. 4. Freight forwarder and NVOCC relationships Freight forwarders act as intermediaries, coordinating multiple aspects of the international shipping process on behalf of the shipper. Their services typically include arranging transportation, preparing documentation, and providing additional support such as customs brokerage. When evaluating freight forwarders, it’s critical to consider more than just cost—factors such as customer service quality, shipment visibility tools, and issue resolution capabilities are equally important. Non-Vessel Operating Common Carriers (NVOCCs) function similarly to ocean carriers, despite not owning or operating their own vessels. They issue their own bills of lading and assume responsibility for managing shipments from origin to destination. As with freight forwarders, selecting the right NVOCC requires evaluating service reliability, global coverage, and their ability to manage logistics across complex trade lanes. 5. Lane and port strategy Once supplier and customer locations have been defined and projected shipment volumes are estimated, it becomes essential to optimize origin and destination ports to balance both cost and service. Developing a port strategy should include primary and alternate ports to account for potential disruptions such as congestion, labor disputes, or seasonal delays. Port decisions must align closely with inventory management and purchasing strategies. For instance, a shipment originating in Asia may be routed through West Coast ports, followed by inland transportation via rail or drayage to the final destination. Alternatively, the same shipment could be routed through East Coast ports. While this typically involves longer transit times, it may offer cost or service advantages depending on market conditions and the location of the final delivery point. Route selection should consider transit time, rate variability, and network efficiency to ensure optimal supply chain performance. 6. Performance metrics and KPIs As previously noted, a freight forwarder that provides visibility into shipments is important. Companies should use the technology available to develop meaningful key performance indicators (KPIs). Monitoring shipment service levels and carrier performance is vital to holding partners accountable. Common KPIs include on-time delivery, dwell time, container utilization, cost per unit, and container detention and demurrage charges. 7. Risk management and contingency planning Proactive risk management is essential to maintaining a resilient supply chain. Disruptions such as labor strikes, severe weather, geopolitical instability, or unexpected market shifts can significantly impact ocean transportation. To mitigate these risks, organizations should develop comprehensive contingency plans that include alternative ports of entry, backup carriers, and flexible routing options. In some cases, it may be necessary to expedite shipments or delay them strategically to ensure alignment with inventory and purchasing strategies. A well-prepared contingency plan should account for a wide range of potential disruptions—including geopolitical events, pandemics, carrier alliance shifts, and port closures. Having predefined protocols in place allows for faster decision-making and minimizes the impact of unforeseen events on cost, service, and overall supply chain performance Developing and implementing a structured ocean freight strategy enables organizations to transition from a reactive approach to a proactive, strategic model for managing international logistics. This shift enhances financial control, improves service reliability, and strengthens resilience against disruptions. In today’s increasingly complex and dynamic global trade environment, a well-executed ocean transportation strategy is essential for achieving long-term supply chain efficiency and customer satisfaction. Tom Schaefges is a senior project manager with St. Onge Company and has more than 25 years of experience in supply chain and logistics across both corporate and consulting roles. His industry experience includes work in food service, retail, heavy manufacturing, transportation, food production, and third-party logistics. He can be reached at [email protected]