As the USMCA approaches its first joint review, the trade community is preparing for a pivotal renegotiation — not a rubber stamp. Altana's expert survey of 62 senior trade professionals reveals broad consensus: the agreement will survive, but only with significant amendments addressing Chinese supply chain influence, tighter enforcement mechanisms, and a new paradigm built on component-level visibility. The findings point to an era where knowing what's in a product matters as much as knowing where it ships from.

The USMCA Scorecard: How Effective Has the Agreement Been Since 2020?

Before looking ahead to the joint review, experts assessed USMCA's track record across seven core objectives. The verdict: strongest on digital trade modernization and trade volume growth, but weaker on reducing dependence on non-North American inputs and curbing transshipment — precisely the areas now dominating the review agenda.

USMCA Effectiveness Across Core Objectives (% Rating Effective)

Key Insight

The effectiveness gap tells the story of the review itself. Where USMCA scores highest — modernizing digital trade (89% effective) and increasing trade volumes (94%) — there is less urgency for change. Where it scores lowest — reducing dependence on non-North American inputs (68%) and addressing transshipment (73%) — the pressure for reform is most intense. This pattern directly explains why China-related enforcement and supply chain visibility have risen to the top of the negotiation agenda.

Conditional Renewal, Not a Clean Extension — Experts Expect Major Renegotiation

Nearly two-thirds of trade leaders surveyed expect the USMCA joint review to result in conditional renewal with substantial amendments — not a straightforward extension. This signals an industry bracing for meaningful renegotiation of core provisions around rules of origin, China policy, and enforcement.

Most Likely Outcome of the USMCA Joint Review

Confidence in Predictions

Expected Timeline for Resolution

Key Insight

While 74% of respondents expect a substantive resolution by the end of 2026, only 16% believe that will happen during the actual July review window itself. The implication: the formal review is less of a decision point and more of a starting gun — kicking off an intense negotiation cycle that will stretch through the rest of the year and potentially beyond. For businesses making long-term investment decisions, this extended uncertainty is itself a cost.

While headlines focus on immediate disputes like automotive rules or energy, the broader risk is that the rolling review process discourages the multi-decade capital commitments required for true North American nearshoring.

— Corporate Executive, North American Trade

Chinese Transshipment Is the #1 Flashpoint Heading into the Review

When asked to rate the importance of ten negotiation issues, addressing Chinese transshipment and non-transformation through Mexico and Canada emerged as the highest-priority "Critical" issue. Nearly 57% of respondents rated it critical — far outpacing any other single issue. Combined with 89% agreement that transshipment is a "significant and growing problem," China's supply chain influence dominates the review agenda.

Negotiation Issues Rated "Critical" by Trade Leaders

Expert Agreement on China's Role in North American Supply Chains

Industries Most Vulnerable to Chinese Transshipment

Key Insight

The China question isn't an abstract policy debate — it's the central organizing issue of the review. With 86% of respondents agreeing that Chinese FDI in Mexico poses a national security risk, and electronics and semiconductors (66%) plus automotive (56%) identified as the most vulnerable sectors, trade leaders see a systemic challenge that the current USMCA framework was not designed to address. Notably, 69% believe the U.S. will successfully compel Mexico and Canada to adopt aligned China restrictions — but that still leaves significant skepticism about trilateral alignment.

The most underreported issue is Mexico's role as a conduit for Chinese goods and investment to circumvent U.S. tariffs.

— Trade Compliance Professional

The hidden vulnerability of North American supply chains to Chinese capital and intermediate goods — while policy focuses on final assembly, the real risk is deeper in the supply chain.

— Financial Analyst / Risk Advisor

Component-Level Visibility Is the Next Enforcement Paradigm

A striking 87% of trade leaders agree that component-level supply chain visibility — knowing what's in a product, not just where it ships from — will become the dominant enforcement paradigm in trade agreements. This represents a fundamental shift from documentation-based compliance to data-driven transparency.

Component-Level Visibility as Enforcement Paradigm

USMCA Effectiveness: Addressing Transshipment

Importance of AI & Technology in Enforcement

Key Insight

The enforcement gap is real: while 73% rate USMCA somewhat or very effective at addressing transshipment, 87% simultaneously agree that current rules of origin are insufficient to prevent circumvention. The reconciliation is clear — the framework has value but needs a new enforcement layer. With 58% rating AI and advanced technology as "Very Important" to the review outcome, the industry sees technology-enabled visibility as the bridge between today's documentation-based system and tomorrow's component-level reality.

As supply chains have grown more complex, enforcement has grown more difficult. Production networks extend well beyond direct suppliers. Inputs cross multiple jurisdictions before final assembly. Excess capacity in non-market economies, indirect routing, and minor transformation practices have increased pressure on customs authorities to verify origin, tariff treatment, and regulatory compliance with limited upstream visibility. Economic security now depends on visibility.

Diego Marroquin Bitar

Center for Strategic and International Studies

Supply chain traceability and enforcement gaps are being overlooked. Current discussions emphasize rules of origin and China restrictions, but the lack of component-level visibility across industries leaves loopholes for circumvention.

— Corporate Executive

Many discussions focus on thresholds and tariffs, but few address how companies can realistically verify and trace component origins at the subassembly level. Without stronger enforcement mechanisms and digital traceability, the rules themselves are just words on paper.

— Trade Compliance Professional

Enforcement Over Escalation — Experts Favor Smarter Rules, Not Just Higher Thresholds

On the politically charged question of whether to raise regional value content (RVC) thresholds, trade leaders send a nuanced message: enforce what we have before piling on new requirements. 82% agree that enforcement of existing rules matters more than raising thresholds, even as 87% acknowledge higher thresholds could reduce non-North American content.

Expert Views on Rules of Origin & Enforcement

Forced Labor Enforcement Outlook

North American Integration: 5–10 Year Outlook

Broader Strategic Factors Shaping the Review Outcome

Key Insight

The trade community is hoping for — and expecting — evolution: better enforcement of existing rules, gradual phase-in approaches (favored by 87%), and deeper North American integration over the next decade (expected by 76%). At the same time, the push for U.S.-specific content requirements and other blunt-force threshold increases signals something larger. USMCA is no longer just an economic-growth trade agreement — it is increasingly a geopolitical instrument, and the 2026 review may be the moment that transformation becomes explicit.

The 2026 USMCA review is being redefined by non trade issues like border security, fentanyl trafficking, and Mexico's judicial reforms, which the U.S. is now using as direct leverage for market access. Simultaneously, a quiet but aggressive tightening of rules of origin is transforming the pact into a geopolitical fortress.

— Industry Association Leader

Methodology

This survey was conducted as part of Altana's Future of Trade Forum series in Spring 2026. Respondents were screened for professional involvement in USMCA or North American trade operations and familiarity with the 2026 joint review process. The conversational survey format combined structured quantitative questions with open-ended qualitative prompts to capture both measurable consensus and nuanced expert perspectives.

Expert Respondents

47%

Corporate Executives

53%

USMCA Is Primary Focus of Their Role

81%

Directly Involved in USMCA Trade Operations

Respondent Roles

USMCA Involvement Level

Percentages are calculated based on valid responses per question. Some questions allowed multiple selections, so totals may exceed 100%. Figures are rounded to the nearest whole percentage point. Survey conducted by Gather on behalf of Altana, Spring 2026.

The USMCA Joint Review 2026: What Trade Leaders Expect

The USMCA Scorecard: How Effective Has the Agreement Been Since 2020?

Key Insight

Conditional Renewal, Not a Clean Extension — Experts Expect Major Renegotiation

Key Insight

Chinese Transshipment Is the #1 Flashpoint Heading into the Review

Key Insight

Component-Level Visibility Is the Next Enforcement Paradigm

Key Insight

Enforcement Over Escalation — Experts Favor Smarter Rules, Not Just Higher Thresholds

Key Insight

See What's Inside Your Supply Chain

Methodology