This is one outlet's own report from Forbes — the article as it was filed.
AIPROPX ReportForbes · 2h ago
Why The Yen Isn't The Supply Chain Story Importers Should Be Watching
Retail Why The Yen Isn't The Supply Chain Story Importers Should Be Watching By Izzy Rosenzweig ,
Forbes contributors publish independent expert analyses and insights. Izzy Rosenzweig, CEO of Portless, covers e-commerce supply chains. Follow Author Aug 05, 2026, 05:53pm EDT --:-- / --:-- This voice experience is generated by AI. Learn more . This voice experience is generated by AI. Learn more . Summary Recent US-Japan intervention to stabilize the yen won't significantly alter e-commerce import prices, as it's monetary policy and most trade is dollar-denominated. The true pressure on landed costs stems from the Middle East conflict. This crisis is causing ocean carriers to impose emergency fuel surcharges due to rising bunker fuel prices, impacting all importers. Air freight is also affected as airlines cut capacity over the region, leading to higher rates and volatility. Brands, having diversified factories, now face the critical need to diversify shipping routes and modes, avoiding reliance on single corridors, especially those under geopolitical strain, to prevent supply chain disruptions.
On August 2, Washington and Tokyo spent an estimated $59 billion buying up the Japanese yen after it hit a 40-year low against the dollar. For any e-commerce brand that imports from Asia, it reads like the kind of news that should change the price of its goods. It won't.
This is monetary policy, not trade policy. Officials were explicit that the goal was to stop excessive volatility and disorderly movements in the currency, not to touch trade terms. Yes, a weaker yen can make Japanese goods cheaper for a dollar buyer, but less than it sounds. Most trade is invoiced in dollars, not yen , so a currency swing barely moves a U.S. importer’s actual invoice in the short run, and exporters often hold prices rather than pass the discount along. Even where it helps, it only touches the cost of the goods, not the tariff or the freight to carry them, and those are the costs in play right now. If you were importing from Japan last month, your duty is unchanged this month.
The pressure on landed costs is coming from a few thousand miles to the west, and it's the story importers should actually be watching.
What's moving landed costs right now is the conflict in the Middle East , and it's hitting both ways a product moves, by ocean and by air.
With the Strait of Hormuz—roughly a fifth of the world's oil and gas—under pressure , bunker fuel in Singapore, the world's largest bunkering port, has jumped. Very-low-sulfur fuel oil is up 24% to $785 a metric ton , with marine gas oil up a third. Carriers are passing it straight through as emergency surcharges. CMA CGM added $150 per container on long-haul services from August 1, MSC $289 per container on Asia-Europe lanes and ONE $75 per container from August 15 . Those surcharges don't care whether you're a giant importer or a Shopify brand. They land on everyone's freight bill.
Carriers pulled capacity over the region as jet fuel spiked and Middle East airspace closed, and Air India alone suspended or reduced 29 international routes between June and August before it began restoring them as tensions eased. The volatility is the point. A large share of the world’s air freight doesn’t ride in dedicated freighters. Roughly 40% moves in the belly-hold of passenger planes , so when a carrier adds or cuts passenger flights over a region, cargo capacity and rates move with it, in both directions and on short notice.
This is already showing up in how brands behave. At Portless, the questions from merchants over the past few months haven’t been about the yen or monetary policy. They’ve been about fuel surcharges and delayed shipments, and that anxiety has moved fastest among brands on the longest lanes. Those are the ones most exposed to a disrupted corridor.
None of this is about one country or one currency. A brand can have nothing to do with Japan and still get hit, because the exposure isn’t tied to where you sell. It’s tied to the corridor your product moves through.
The past few years taught brands to diversify their factories. This is the same lesson one step downstream. Diversify the way a product actually moves.
That means not leaning on a single mode or corridor. If everything you ship rides in a container, a stuck ocean lane stops the whole business. If everything rides in the air, a fuel-driven capacity cut does the same. And if all of it, air or ocean, routes through a region under this kind of pressure, you have a single point where your entire supply chain can fall apart.
The practical move is to weight toward the lanes that aren't under strain, which for most brands means routing through Asia rather than the stressed Middle East corridor, and splitting volume across modes so a disruption in one doesn't take down the whole flow. Most brands can't say how much of their volume runs through the Middle East until a surcharge hits the invoice. Knowing that number ahead of time is what separates a routing decision from a scramble.
I’ve argued before that moving production to Vietnam doesn't really end a brand's dependence on China , and that selling into a single country is a bigger risk than sourcing from one . This is the same blind spot, one step further down the supply chain. The route is the part almost no one stress-tests until a lane closes.
This flare-up will ease, as these things always do. The exposure it revealed won’t. A brand can source from three countries and sell into a dozen markets and still be stopped cold if everything it ships moves through the same pressured corridor. The Middle East is the test of which brands built a second way through and which only assumed they had one.
AIPROPX is an independent multi-source news index — we track, compare, and connect coverage from across the web into one place you won't find anywhere else.
