The container shortage nightmare that paralyzed global shipping during the pandemic years wasn’t just bad luck. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, it was at least partly a crime. On May 19, 2026, the DOJ unsealed a sweeping indictment accusing four of the world’s largest container manufacturers and seven executives of orchestrating a global price-fixing and supply manipulation scheme, with prosecutors describing the case as one of the most significant international antitrust investigations in recent years, involving an estimated $35 billion in affected commerce. 

Read the full DOJ announcement here.

Transportation consultant Thomas Witt notes that any shipper who struggled to find containers between 2020 and 2024 now has reason to look at that period differently.

Who Was Charged and What They Supposedly Did

The four companies named are China International Marine Containers Group (CIMC), Singamas Container Holdings, Shanghai Universal Logistics Equipment — which marketed containers under the brand name Dong Fang International Containers — and CXIC Group Containers. Together, the six companies referenced in the indictment manufactured approximately 95% of the world’s standard dry containers at the time the alleged collusion began.

The mechanics of the alleged cartel are specific and damning. The DOJ alleges that senior executives met at a CIMC facility in Shenzhen in November 2019 and agreed to restrict production levels. The companies then installed covert monitoring cameras across manufacturing facilities to track the competition’s’ production output, work shifts, and operating schedules in order to enforce the cartel agreement. In one email cited by prosecutors, a Singamas executive reportedly warned colleagues after a 2019 meeting to “keep a low profile” to avoid accusations of price manipulation.

The alleged conspiracy ran from at least November 2019 through at least January 2024 — covering almost the entire period of pandemic-era container scarcity and record freight rates.

One executive is already in custody. Vick Nam Hing Ma, Marketing Director of Singamas, was arrested at Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris on April 14, 2026, and is currently awaiting extradition to the United States. Six other named executives, including the executives of CIMC and Singamas, remain at large.

What the Numbers Reveal

The picture laid out in the indictment gives a clear sense of the scale of the alleged windfall. Container prices roughly doubled between 2019 and 2021, according to the DOJ. CIMC’s container manufacturing profits supposedly rose from $19.8 million in 2019 to $288 million in 2020 and $1.75 billion in 2021. Singamas supposedly swung from a $110 million loss in 2019 to a $186.8 million profit by 2021.

Those figures track directly against what shippers were experiencing. Drewry reported in August 2021 that dry freight container prices had reached historic highs, and freight rates on Asia-Europe and transpacific lanes set records that the industry had never seen. The DOJ’s case does not allege that the manufacturers fixed the freight rates charged by shipping lines — but by controlling the supply and price of the equipment itself, the alleged cartel created conditions that fed directly into the broader disruption.

What This Means for Shippers

Thomas Witt points to a structural vulnerability this case puts in sharp relief: over 95% of the world’s intermodal shipping containers are manufactured in China, with CIMC alone producing more than 1.2 million TEUs annually as of 2025. That level of geographic concentration in a single critical piece of global commerce infrastructure carries real risk — and this indictment is the starkest illustration of that risk to date.

For shippers, the immediate practical implications center on legal exposure. Companies that purchased containers or spent money on elevated container leasing rates during the alleged conspiracy period — November 2019 through January 2024 — may have standing to pursue civil antitrust actions. Individual defendants face up to 10 years in prison and $1 million in fines if convicted, while corporate penalties are capped at $100 million, though that ceiling can rise if twice the gain from the offence or twice the losses suffered by victims exceed that amount.

Use up and down arrow keys to resize the meta box pane.

The longer-term question this case raises is whether the global shipping industry — and the governments that regulate it — will take the concentration of container manufacturing seriously enough to diversify it. For now, the answer to that question remains open.

About Thomas Witt

Thomas Witt is an international transportation consultant with decades of experience helping businesses navigate the complexities of global shipping and logistics. His work spans ocean freight, air cargo, supply chain strategy, and cross-border trade, with a focus on helping importers and exporters make smarter, more informed decisions. Through his website and advisory work, Thomas Witt provides timely analysis on the issues and developments shaping international transportation today.