As the dust settles on the actual percentage levels of the renewed U.S. tariffs, a deeper and more persistent challenge is coming to the surface.
It has less to do with tariff schedules or policy shifts, and much more to do with something manufacturers struggle with every day:
There is no structured, scalable way to collect and validate material-level data from suppliers.
Companies know they need this information. Regulations now require detailed, item-level insights such as:
In practice, however, the process for gathering this information has barely evolved.
In many organizations, material data still moves in a way that looks painfully familiar:
Engineering asks for “proof,” sourcing asks for “confirmation,” quality requests “certificate consistency,” and trade compliance hopes it all matches when it reaches customs documentation.
The result is:
This is no longer sustainable — especially when material-level information becomes mission-critical for cross-border compliance.
When discussing this with manufacturers, the same question always surfaces:
At which point in the collaboration process should material data become authoritative?
Is it:
There is no universal answer yet, but the pattern is remarkably consistent across companies.
At the same time, compliance risks and penalties for incorrect filings are becoming very real. Inaccurate or incomplete certificate data can trigger shipment delays, duty re-calculations, and even retroactive investigations.
Tariff pressure is simply accelerating a shift that was already overdue:
From document-driven collaboration to data-driven collaboration with suppliers.
The manufacturers who solve this will not only improve compliance resilience, but also strengthen supplier integration and supply chain master data overall.
We are hosting an interactive insider webinar in the 3rd week of December, where we will discuss:
If you’d like to attend, send us a message to receive an invite.