Feds went on-terminal for Indiana’s chameleon carrier crash—what happens next?

U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy confirmed that Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration investigators were on-terminal at Sam Express yesterday, the Illinois-based carrier at the center of a sprawling chameleon carrier network I’ve been investigating for months, one linked to a crash in Jay County, Indiana, that killed four Amish men last year.

That’s where the easy part of this story ends.

What most people outside this industry don’t understand, what even a lot of people inside this industry don’t fully appreciate, is that the presence of federal investigators at a trucking terminal doesn’t mean what you think it means. It doesn’t automatically mean a raid. It doesn’t mean the carrier is shut down tomorrow. It doesn’t mean the government is dragging its feet if nothing visible happens next week.

What it means depends entirely on how they got there, under what authority, and which agencies were involved. Understanding that distinction is the difference between informed advocacy and armchair quarterbacking.

The Network We In The Private Sector Exposed

For those just catching up, here’s the short version.

Over the past several months, we’ve documented a network of interconnected carriers operating approximately 800 trucks out of shared terminal facilities in the Chicago metropolitan area. The network includes Sam Express Corp (USDOT 3235924), Tutash Express Inc (USDOT 3487141), KG Line Group (USDOT 3487333), AJ Partners LLC (USDOT 3617842), Altex Logistics, DVL Express, VIDMA, Tutash Express 1, Tutash Cargo LLC, and 1st Choice Logistics.

The connections aren’t speculation. They’re documented through shared terminal addresses in South Holland, Markham, and Streamwood, Illinois. Sequential DOT registrations, Sam Express and Tutash Express received their DOT numbers on the same day in September 2020, with KG Line Group registered one day later. Shared VINs: AJ Partners shares 139 VINs with Tutash Express and 36 VINs with KG Line Group, meaning the same trucks are operating under multiple DOT numbers. The same distinctive mountain logo appears on equipment registered to different companies. And KG Line Group’s president was photographed wearing a Sam Express polo at the Broker Carrier Summit in Orlando.

Tutash Express alone has recorded 57 crashes and over 1,800 inspections, with a significant violation rate. Across the network, we’re looking at nearly 100 crashes combined.

This is textbook chameleon carrier behavior. The GAO told us in 2012 that chameleon carriers are three times more likely to be involved in serious crashes than legitimate new entrants. That data hasn’t gotten better. And four men from Bryant, Indiana, Henry Eicher, 50, his sons Menno, 25, and Paul, 19, and family friend Simon Girod, 23, paid the price.

Three Doors and How the Government Can Approach a Carrier

When federal investigators show up at a trucking terminal, they’re walking through one of three very different doors. Each has its own rules, limitations, and timeline. This matters.

Door One: The FMCSA Compliance Review

This is the standard enforcement pathway, the one most carriers encounter. If FMCSA investigators arrived at Sam Express to conduct a compliance review or a focused investigation, they are bound by established procedures.

They follow the FMCSA’s Electronic Field Operations Training Manual (eFOTM), which dictates the scope, methodology, and documentation requirements for every investigation. They pull a sample size of driver qualification files based on fleet size. For a carrier of Sam Express’s size, that might mean 10 to 25 DQ files, not all of them. They review the six compliance factors: general compliance, driver qualifications, hours of service, controlled substances and alcohol, vehicle maintenance, and hazardous materials if applicable. They compare carrier records against the Motor Carrier Management Information System, the Safety Measurement System, and roadside inspection data.

A focused review, which is what most CSA-triggered investigations are, is typically non-ratable. The investigator can’t issue a Satisfactory rating, but they can downgrade to Conditional or Unsatisfactory if they discover patterns of non-compliance. The standard is generally more than 10 percent for any one type of violation, or a pattern that, in a full compliance review, would warrant a rating reduction.

The carrier gets notified of results. If the rating drops to Unsatisfactory, the carrier is ordered to cease operations, but even that process involves notification periods and opportunities for corrective action. It’s not instant.

This pathway is procedurally sound. It is also, by design, methodical. The government has to follow its own rules.

Door Two: The Imminent Hazard Out-of-Service Order

This is the nuclear option. Under 49 USC §521(b)(5)(A), the Secretary of Transportation, through FMCSA’s Field Administrators and Regional Service Centers, can declare a carrier an imminent hazard to public safety and order it to immediately cease all operations. Interstate and intrastate. From all terminals and dispatching locations.

No sample size. No eFOTM procedure. No 45-day notification window. The carrier is done.

Simultaneously, FMCSA revokes the carrier’s operating authority and suspends its USDOT number. Civil penalties run up to $33,252 per violation. Criminal penalties can include fines up to $25,000 and imprisonment. And if the carrier ignores the order, the U.S. Attorney’s Office can seek equitable relief in federal court.

We’ve seen FMCSA use this authority effectively. Monique Trucking in California. Sorbon Transport in Colorado. DND International in Naperville, Illinois, which came after a crash that killed an Illinois Tollway worker. FTW Transport in Texas. The pattern is consistent: post-crash investigations reveal egregious, systemic noncompliance, and FMCSA imposes penalties.

Given what we’ve documented in the Sam Express/Tutash network, nearly 100 crashes, 139 shared VINs between carriers, the same trucks operating under multiple DOT numbers, sequential authority registrations, and four people dead in Indiana, the evidence for an imminent hazard finding is there. Whether FMCSA takes that step depends on what investigators found on-terminal yesterday and what authority they were operating under when they walked through the door.

Door Three: The Federal Criminal Investigation

This is the Beam Brothers’ route. Mount Crawford, Virginia. One of the nation’s largest USPS mail carriers. Federal agents, not FMCSA investigators, but agents from the DOT Office of Inspector General, IRS Criminal Investigation, USPS-OIG, and Department of Labor OIG, raided the facility with federal warrants. They seized records, computers, and everything else. No sample size. No compliance review procedure. The warrants authorized them to take what the evidence supported.

That investigation ran from 2006 through a 2017 indictment, 126 counts, including conspiracy to defraud the United States, wire fraud, and money laundering. The company paid $3.25 million. The four senior officers pled guilty. The investigation revealed that management had been forcing drivers to falsify logbooks and work beyond hours-of-service limits while hauling U.S. mail under government contracts valued at over $500 million.

If the Department of Justice is involved in the Sam Express investigation, and the OIG, the FBI, the U.S. Marshals Service, or any other federal law enforcement entity has obtained warrants, then the rules of engagement are entirely different. They’re operating under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, not the eFOTM. And the timeline, scope, and eventual outcome bear no resemblance to a compliance review.

Why This Matters. We Don’t Have Kings

I want to be very clear about something, and I want the people reading this to actually hear it.

This administration, President Trump, Secretary Duffy, and FMCSA Administrator Derek Barrs, is the most proactive, most aggressive, most hands-on leadership team the Department of Transportation and FMCSA have seen in my lifetime. And I’ve been alive for 45 years. I’ve watched every administration from Reagan to right now.

I have personally met with some of these people. I know that the data and information we have provided have been received and acted upon. I know they are hands-on. I know they care about highway safety. I know they are trying to drive change.

The receipts speak for themselves.

Secretary Duffy launched a nationwide audit of non-domiciled CDL issuance that uncovered systemic noncompliance across 19 states. California alone accounted for over 25 percent of sampled non-domiciled CDLs issued improperly, including one case in which a driver from Brazil received endorsements to drive a passenger bus and a school bus, with credentials valid months after his legal status expired. New York’s audit found 53 percent of sampled non-domiciled CDLs were issued illegally. Minnesota was at one-third. North Carolina at 54 percent.

FMCSA Administrator Barrs put it plainly: “Under the Trump Administration, states have two choices: meet our standards or face the consequences. Following the law is not optional.”

In May 2025, Secretary Duffy signed an order strengthening enforcement of English language proficiency, and more than 11,500 drivers have been placed out of service for failing to comply. By December, 7,500 CDL training schools had been shut down, nearly half of all schools on the Training Provider Registry, for failing to meet readiness standards. The agency removed nearly 3,000 training providers and placed another 4,500 under investigation in what FMCSA called the largest enforcement action ever against low-quality CDL training programs.

This is not an administration that is sitting on its hands. This is the fastest and most decisive regulatory enforcement action I have ever seen in the transportation sector. Period.

But here’s what people don’t understand, or refuse to understand, because it doesn’t fit their narrative.

We don’t have kings.

The President of the United States, the Secretary of Transportation, and the FMCSA Administrator all operate within confines. Legal confines. Procedural confines. Constitutional confines. And those constraints exist for a reason, even when they slow outcomes that feel urgent.

The Confines That Bind

Here’s how rules typically get made at the FMCSA level, because most people have no idea.

It starts with an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM), in which the agency says, “We’re thinking about addressing this issue, and we want public input.” Then comes the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which is the actual proposed rule with a public comment period. Then comes the Final Rule, which incorporates public comments and sets an effective date. The entire process can take years. Sometimes a decade. Sometimes longer.

There are congressional hearings. Committee investigations. Government Accountability Office reports indicate the GAO has been raising concerns about chameleon carriers since at least 2012. There are appropriations battles. There are Office of Management and Budget reviews. There is the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires agencies to follow specific steps before implementing regulations, and which provides grounds for legal challenge if they don’t.

And then there are the lawsuits.

This administration has faced an unprecedented volume of litigation. By late November 2025, approximately 530 lawsuits had been filed against the Trump administration, compared with fewer than 50 against the Biden administration in the same period and roughly 30 against Obama. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals stayed FMCSA’s interim final rule on non-domiciled CDLs in November 2025, preventing it from taking effect. A rule that was issued as an emergency action, because states were illegally issuing CDLs to unqualified foreign drivers, and people were dying on American highways, was frozen by a court order.

Think about that. The agency identified an imminent hazard. The agency took emergency action. And a court said wait.

That’s not a failure of this administration. That’s the system working exactly as it’s designed to work, with all the friction and frustration that entails. And it’s important to understand that dynamic when you’re wondering why a chameleon carrier network with nearly 100 crashes and four dead Amish men isn’t shut down overnight.

The Political Reality

The political opposition to this administration has reached a point where common-sense safety measures are being fought not on their merits, but on the identity of the person proposing them. Non-domiciled CDL reform, which protects every American on the highway regardless of their politics, is tied up in litigation because of who signed the order. English language proficiency enforcement, a requirement that has been on the books for decades and exists because a truck driver who cannot read road signs or communicate with emergency responders is a danger to everyone, becomes a political football.

Historically, policies like food safety reform, immigration enforcement, and infrastructure investment have enjoyed bipartisan support. Democrats and Republicans have both championed these causes under their own administrations. But the current political environment has devolved to a point where the substance of a policy matters less than the name on the letterhead. Common-sense proposals that previous Democratic leaders have openly supported are now reflexively opposed because of who occupies the White House.

This isn’t about left or right. This is about whether we can have an honest conversation about highway safety without letting partisan tribalism override logic. And right now, that conversation is harder than it should be.

The Resource Problem Nobody Talks About

Here’s another reality check.

FMCSA employs just over 1,000 people, and that number declined in 2025 when 169 employees (13.7 percent of the workforce) accepted Deferred Resignation Program offers as part of a broader federal workforce restructuring. Those 1,000 or so people are responsible for regulating more than 500,000 commercial trucking companies, more than 4,000 interstate bus companies, and more than 4 million CDL holders.

Around 1,000 people. Over 500,000 trucking companies.

That’s why prioritization matters. That’s why the Safety Measurement System exists, to identify the highest-risk carriers and focus limited enforcement resources where they’ll have the most impact. That’s why FMCSA relies heavily on state agency partnerships through the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP), which provides federal funding to state law enforcement agencies to conduct roadside inspections and compliance reviews.

Those state partnerships come with their own complications. Some states have adopted federal regulations wholesale. Others have carve-outs and variations. Some have their own enforcement priorities that don’t perfectly align with federal objectives.

Then there’s the immigration enforcement angle. The 287(g) program, named after Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, authorizes state and local law enforcement agencies to be deputized by DHS to conduct immigration enforcement functions. That’s a completely different department and a completely different statutory authority than FMCSA.

As of September 2025, DHS had signed over 1,000 287(g) agreements nationwide. But just this week, literally two days ago, Virginia’s new governor, Abigail Spanberger, signed an executive directive terminating all state-level 287(g) agreements with ICE, ordering Virginia State Police, the Department of Corrections, and other state agencies to exit the program. This reversed former Governor Youngkin’s directive that had placed state law enforcement into the immigration enforcement business.

The point isn’t to debate whether that’s good or bad policy. The point is that the regulatory and enforcement landscape is a patchwork. Federal agencies have their authorities. State agencies have theirs. Some cooperate. Some don’t. The result is a system in which a chameleon carrier network can operate 800 trucks across multiple DOT numbers from shared terminals in South Holland, Illinois, while the various levels of government determine whose jurisdiction it falls under and what procedures they need to follow.

So, Whats Next?

It depends.

If FMCSA conducted a focused compliance investigation at Sam Express yesterday, we’ll see a rating determination within a defined timeframe. If violations are found, and given what we’ve documented, it would be remarkable if they weren’t, the carrier could receive a Conditional or Unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating would ultimately force the carrier to cease operations, though the process includes notice and opportunity for corrective action.

If the FMCSA has enough evidence to support an imminent hazard finding, and the crash data, shared VINs, and chameleon indicators we’ve documented would seem to provide that basis, they could issue an Out-of-Service Order that shuts the carrier down immediately. However, that order applies to a single USDOT number. If they want to take down the entire network, they’d need to establish a common ownership and common control finding and either issue orders against every entity or consolidate the records as they did with J&L Trucking.

If the Department of Justice is building a criminal case and the OIG, FBI, or other federal law enforcement agencies are involved, we may not see public action for months or even years. Criminal investigations move at the pace of evidence collection, grand jury proceedings, and prosecutorial strategy. The Beam Brothers investigation took over a decade from initiation to sentencing.

The takeaway? 

The fact that federal investigators were on-terminal at Sam Express yesterday tells you something important. It tells you that the people in charge are listening. It indicates that the data and reporting reaching their desks are being acted upon. It indicates that this administration, from the President to the Secretary to the Administrator, is not ignoring the problem.

They are acting responsibly, efficiently, and as aggressively as their authority allows. And in my 25-plus years in this industry, I’ve never seen faster or more decisive action from the federal government on trucking safety issues.

Push them. Hold them accountable. Be vocal. That’s how the system works. But understand that the system has guardrails, and those guardrails, frustrating as they are when four men from Jay County are in the ground, exist because we decided a long time ago that we don’t want a government that can shut down a business on a whim without due process.

We don’t have kings. And most days, that’s a good thing.

The wheels of justice may grind slowly, but yesterday, they were grinding at Sam Express.

REAL-ID, Mail-Order CDLs, and America’s CDL Free-for-All.

Somewhere between a Philadelphia apartment and a flea market in South Texas, between a wire transfer to a Mexican fixer and a California DMV counter that doesn’t blink at a birth certificate listing “No Name Given,” the American commercial driver’s license system broke. Not bent. Not stressed. Broke.

It is so broken that a 2025 federal audit found that one in four non-domiciled CDLs issued by California were improper. It broke so badly that Oklahoma state troopers pulled over commercial vehicles driven by individuals whose official government-issued CDLs listed their first name as “No Name Given.” It broke so completely that for $2,500 wired to the right contact in Mexico, a Honduran national who has never sat behind the wheel of a tractor-trailer can receive a digital Licencia Federal de Conductor, a Mexican federal commercial driver’s license, in his email inbox, printed against a backdrop of his garage door, and use it to drive 80,000 pounds of freight on American highways.

This is not a single problem. It is a constellation of failures, federal, state, and international, that have converged into what U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy called “an imminent hazard on America’s roadways” and “a direct threat to the safety of every family on the road.” At least five fatal crashes in the first eight months of 2025 involved non-domiciled CDL holders. In one, a driver attempted an illegal U-turn on the Florida Turnpike in St. Lucie County, killing three Americans. In another, a March crash in Austin involving 17 vehicles killed five people, including two children.

The crashes are the symptom. The disease is a licensing infrastructure so fragmented, so riddled with loopholes and willful state-level negligence, that it has effectively created multiple open doors for unvetted, unqualified, and in many cases undocumented individuals to obtain credentials to operate the deadliest vehicles on American roads. Those doors have names: AB 60, Driver’s Licenses for All, non-domiciled CDLs, reciprocal license recognition, and the newest and perhaps most brazen of them all, the Mexican mail-order CDL.

The $2,500 CDL You Never Have to Earn

The story of the mail-order Mexican CDL begins, ironically, with a modernization effort. In April 2021, Mexico’s Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Transportes began issuing digital versions of the Licencia Federal de Conductor, or LFC. The move was intended to reduce fraud by replacing hard-copy licenses that had long been counterfeited using materials sourced from China, from the same manufacturer, with licenses bearing the same holograms used by the Mexican government. U.S. Customs had been seizing counterfeit materials from cargo ships for years, but had never connected the dots to the downstream implications for American highway safety.

The digital transition didn’t kill the fraud. It supercharged it.

According to Maj. Omar Villarreal of the Texas Highway Patrol’s Commercial Vehicle Enforcement division, the scheme works like this: An aspiring driver, often not a Mexican national but a citizen of Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, Cuba, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Colombia, or Venezuela, hears through informal networks that a Mexican CDL is available for purchase. The buyer emails a photograph of themselves, provides basic biographical information, and wires between $2,000 and $5,000, depending on the state where the transaction is facilitated. What arrives is a digital LFC that, when queried through Mexico’s SCT verification portal, may appear legitimate or redirect to a fraudulent clone website that mimics the official system.

Texas enforcement officers began catching these fakes because of the photos. Where legitimate LFC photos would be taken in a Mexican government facility, the digital frauds showed drivers standing in front of garage doors, against residential backdrops, and against living room walls. The backgrounds told the story the documents were designed to hide: these licenses were never issued in Mexico. Many of the holders had never been to Mexico.

“We started noticing in the Austin area an uptick of commercial vehicles engaged in construction,” Villarreal told FreightWaves. That uptick soon gave way to massive encampments forming outside Texas cities, with 80 to 100 commercial vehicles at a time, housing operators working in short-haul construction and aggregate hauling. “We started seeing this crop up all over the major metropolitan areas of Texas.”

When officers interviewed the drivers, many disclosed they were Central American nationals who had acquired their Mexican LFCs without ever setting foot in a testing facility. The digital transition had opened the door to corruption within the Mexican government, which allegedly began selling LFCs to third-party vendors, who then resold them internationally. The result is a fully operational, transnational commercial licensing fraud operation, one that the Biden-era FMCSA and CVSA showed little appetite to address when Texas first raised the alarm.

Cabotage, the Border Zone, and the Legal Fiction

Under NAFTA and now under the USMCA, the United States, Mexico, and Canada agreed to recognize each other’s commercial driver’s licenses for international commerce. A Mexican driver holding a valid LFC can legally deliver international cargo into the United States, but only within designated commercial zones along the southern border or under limited long-haul authority granted to a small number of Mexican carriers following a 2011-2015 congressional pilot program.

The critical restriction is cabotage. Under 49 CFR § 365.501(b) and 19 CFR § 123.14(c), a Mexico-domiciled carrier may not provide point-to-point transportation within the United States for goods other than international cargo. Period. When a Mexican carrier delivers a load into the U.S., it must either find a return load to Mexico or deadhead home. It cannot haul freight from Dallas to Houston. It cannot pick up domestic loads. The regulation exists to protect American trucking jobs and ensure domestic freight moves on domestic credentials.

In theory.

In practice, as the Trucking and Enforcement Action Coalition noted in its 2025 recommendations, “there is nothing to stop drivers authorized for border-zone-only hauling from operating beyond the zone without proper authorization or language proficiency verification.” State law enforcement cannot enforce federal cabotage rules. FMCSA has statutory authority to levy $10,000 civil fines for cabotage violations, but has a longstanding pattern of failing to follow through. The result is a system where the rules exist on paper and evaporate on the highway.

And here is where the mail-order Mexican CDL becomes more than a fraud problem. Under reciprocal recognition, a Mexican LFC, even a fraudulent one, is treated as a valid credential if it appears legitimate. A driver who purchased a digital LFC for $2,500 from a contact in Mexico City can present it to a U.S. motor carrier as proof of qualification. Unless that carrier takes the extraordinary step of verifying the license in Mexico’s SCT database and cross-referencing the CURP, an 18-character personal identification code unique to each Mexican citizen, there is no practical way to distinguish the fraud from the real thing.

Texas tried to close this gap. In 2023, the state legislature unanimously passed SB 672, requiring foreign CDL holders operating outside border counties to possess valid U.S. work authorization documents. The law classified both Mexican and Canadian CDLs as government records, giving prosecutors grounds to charge possession of a fraudulent LFC as tampering with a government record. Enforcement of the new law reduced crashes in Texas. But it also pushed the operators out of state, to Colorado, to Pennsylvania, to California, to Washington, where they found more permissive environments and, in some cases, the opportunity to trade their fraudulent Mexican LFC for a genuine American CDL.

AB 60, Driver’s Licenses for All, and the Gateway to a CLP

California’s Assembly Bill 60, signed into law in 2013 and effective January 2015, allows undocumented immigrants to obtain a California driver’s license without proof of legal presence in the United States. The applicant needs proof of identity, which can include a Mexican passport, a Mexican Federal Electoral Card, or a foreign consular ID, and proof of California residency, which can be established with documents as informal as a cell phone bill, a letter from a nonprofit, or an attestation from a faith-based organization.

More than one million AB 60 licenses have been issued since the program’s inception. The licenses bear the notation “Federal Limits Apply” and cannot be used for federal identification purposes. And critically, AB 60 does not authorize the issuance of a commercial driver’s license. A CDL in California still requires a valid Social Security number.

That is the letter of the law. But the letter and the reality occupy different zip codes.

What AB 60 does provide is a state-issued identity document. It creates a documented residency. It establishes a person in a system. While the license itself cannot be upgraded to a CDL, it provides the bureaucratic foundation on which other credentials can be stacked. An individual with an AB 60 license has passed both the knowledge and driving tests. They have established residency. They have a government-issued photo ID with an address. For someone seeking to navigate the patchwork of state CDL programs, particularly the non-domiciled CDL pathway, that foundation is the first brick in the wall.

The same principle applies in Minnesota, where Governor Tim Walz signed the Driver’s Licenses for All bill in March 2023, effective October 1 of that year. The law removed the requirement to prove legal presence in the United States for a standard Class D license. An estimated 81,000 undocumented immigrants in Minnesota became eligible. The law includes strict privacy protections prohibiting the Minnesota Department of Public Safety from sharing applicant information with federal immigration authorities.

Washington state has followed a similar trajectory. Before the 2025 federal crackdown, Washington was issuing non-domiciled CDLs with what federal auditors later characterized as grossly insufficient verification. In one case identified by the FMCSA, Washington authorized a non-domiciled CDL to a Ukrainian citizen without verifying the individual’s lawful presence in the United States. An internal review discovered that 685 non-domiciled drivers were incorrectly given regular CDLs or learner’s permits rather than limited-term credentials.

The pattern across these states is not identical, but the architecture is the same: create an accessible entry point for a state-issued identity document, build privacy walls that prevent federal immigration authorities from accessing the resulting data, and then fail to adequately police the pathways between that entry-level document and the commercial credentials that allow someone to operate 80,000 pounds of steel at 65 miles per hour.

‘No Name Given’ and the Identity Verification Insanity 

In September 2025, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt posted a photograph on X showing a New York state CDL seized during Operation Guardian, a joint operation between the Oklahoma Highway Patrol and ICE along Interstate 40. The CDL listed the driver’s first name as “No Name Given.” The operation resulted in the apprehension of 125 undocumented immigrants from nine countries operating commercial vehicles.

The image detonated on social media. But the reality behind it is both more nuanced and more damning than the viral moment suggested.

In many cultures, Afghanistan, Indonesia, parts of South Asia, and the Middle East, individuals use a single name. There is no surname, no given name, and no family name division. When these individuals present identity documents at an American DMV, the documents may list only one name, with the first-name field left blank or populated with “No Name Given.” California DMV policy requires clerks to transcribe names exactly as they appear on the presented identity documents. If the birth certificate or passport says “No Name Given” in the first-name field, that is what goes on the license.

The policy is defensible in isolation. The problem is what it reveals about the broader system. If a state is issuing CDLs, credentials that under the Real ID Act are supposed to represent some of the most secure identity documents in the nation, credentials that in their REAL ID-compliant form bear a star indicating the holder has been vetted to enter a nuclear facility, to individuals whose identity documents cannot populate a first-name field, the question is not whether mononyms are culturally legitimate. The question is whether the identity verification process actually verifies anything.

Federal auditors apparently concluded it was not. The FMCSA audit that prompted Secretary Duffy’s September 2025 emergency action found that California, Colorado, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, and Washington all exhibited “systemic non-compliance” in their CDL issuance patterns. California alone had 62,000 unexpired non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs in its system. More than 25 percent of those reviewed were improperly issued. Some licenses are extended four years beyond the expiration of the holder’s legal authorization to be in the United States. In one case, California issued a CDL with school bus and passenger bus endorsements to a Brazilian national whose legal presence had already expired.

Pennsylvania, the state that issued the non-domiciled CDL shown in the image at the top of this article, was identified as one of the six states with licensing patterns inconsistent with federal regulations. Over 12,000 active non-domiciled CDLs exist in the Pennsylvania system. FMCSA issued eight mandatory corrective actions to the state, including an immediate pause on all non-domiciled CDL issuance and a full internal audit of every transaction.

Duffy’s Emergency and the Court’s Pause

On September 26, 2025, Secretary Duffy announced an emergency interim final rule that immediately restricted non-domiciled CDL eligibility to holders of H-2A agricultural worker visas, H-2B temporary worker visas, or E-2 treaty investor visas. Employment Authorization Documents alone, the work permits that had previously been sufficient, would no longer qualify. The rule required states to use the USCIS SAVE database to verify every applicant’s immigration status, mandated in-person renewals, and required states to maintain documentation for at least two years.

The rule affected approximately 200,000 active non-domiciled CDL holders and 20,000 CLP holders. FMCSA estimated that only about 6,000 drivers annually would qualify under the new restrictions, a roughly 97 percent reduction in the eligible applicant pool.

“What our team has discovered should disturb and anger every American,” Duffy said. Licenses to operate a massive, 80,000-pound truck are being issued to dangerous foreign drivers, often times illegally. This is a direct threat to the safety of every family on the road, and I won’t stand for it.”

California was given 30 days to comply or face withholding of $160 million in federal highway funds in the first year, with the amount doubling in year two. Washington suspended all non-domiciled CDL processing. Colorado, South Dakota, Oregon, Wisconsin, New Mexico, Georgia, and others followed with pauses of their own.

Then the courts intervened. On November 13, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a stay pending review, preventing the interim final rule from taking effect until further notice. States were technically free to resume issuing non-domiciled CDLs under the pre-existing regulatory framework. But many did not. California, Washington, Texas, Colorado, South Dakota, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and New York remain subject to corrective action plans that require them to demonstrate compliance with pre-existing federal rules before resuming issuance.

The legal limbo is precisely the kind of environment in which fraud thrives. The rules are unclear. The enforcement is inconsistent. The political pressure cuts in multiple directions. And every day, freight still needs to move.

How the Doors Connect

What makes this crisis so intractable is that each of these problems, the mail-order Mexican CDL, the state license-for-all programs, the non-domiciled CDL pipeline, the “No Name Given” identity gap, and the unenforced cabotage rules, does not exist in isolation. They form an ecosystem.

Consider the path. A Central American national enters the United States without documentation. He establishes residency in California and obtains an AB 60 driver’s license using a consular ID and a cell phone bill. He now has a state-issued photo ID. He obtains a work permit through an asylum claim or other immigration proceeding. He now qualifies for a non-domiciled commercial learner’s permit. He passes the CDL knowledge test, takes a skills test at a third-party testing facility, and obtains a non-domiciled CDL.

Or consider the alternative path. The same individual never enters the formal system. He purchases a Mexican LFC for $2,500 from a contact reached through a WhatsApp group. Because the United States recognizes Mexican CDLs under the USMCA reciprocity agreement, a motor carrier hires him to drive. He operates not within the border commercial zone, but across the interior, because no one enforces cabotage rules. If stopped by state law enforcement, he presents the digital LFC. The officer, without access to Mexico’s SCT verification system or training on how to spot the telltale signs of fraud, the garage-door photo, the mismatched CURP characters, the fabricated verification website, has no mechanism to distinguish the document from a legitimate one.

Or consider the legislative path. In October 2025, Representative Beth Van Duyne of Texas introduced the Protecting America’s Roads Act, which would codify Duffy’s emergency restrictions, end reciprocal recognition of Mexican and Canadian CDLs unless authorized by statute, limit non-citizen CDL terms to the shorter of the I-94 expiration or one year, and authorize 287(g) agencies to report unlawful CDL operators. The Texas Department of Public Safety has separately petitioned FMCSA to amend 49 CFR § 383.23 to remove reciprocal recognition entirely, requiring all foreign CDL holders operating domestically to obtain a non-domiciled CDL with proper work authorization.

These are the right ideas. But they arrive years late and against a backdrop of court stays, state resistance, and the relentless economic pressure of a freight market distorted by the very practices the reforms target. Carriers built on non-domiciled CDL labor, operators who survived the Great Freight Recession by hiring drivers willing to run 1,000 miles in a day, sleep in the truck, accept below-market rates, and ignore hours-of-service rules, are not going to restructure their businesses because of a stayed interim final rule.

Whats Next

The honest answer is that no one knows. The D.C. Circuit stay means the emergency rule is frozen. The corrective action plans for the six identified states create a patchwork of suspended issuance. The Protecting America’s Roads Act has been introduced but not passed. The State Department paused H-2B visa processing for commercial truck drivers in August 2025, further constraining the legal labor pipeline while doing nothing to address the illegal labor market.

Meanwhile, the Mexican mail-order CDL business continues to operate. The digital LFC can be purchased worldwide. The informal networks that connect buyers in American cities to sellers in Mexican government offices, former government offices, or people who have purchased digital infrastructure from government offices are not affected by American regulatory action. They are affected by Mexican law enforcement action, which has been minimal.

What would actually fix this is not complicated in concept, though it is enormously difficult in execution. End reciprocal recognition of foreign CDLs for all domestic operations, full stop. Require every driver operating a commercial vehicle on American roads to hold an American CDL issued through a verified, standardized process that includes SAVE verification, English-language proficiency testing at the point of CDL examination, and biometric identity confirmation. Fund FMCSA enforcement of cabotage rules so that the $10,000 fine authority it already possesses becomes a deterrent rather than a dead letter. Mandate that state DMVs cannot issue any CDL, domiciled or non-domiciled, to an applicant whose identity document cannot populate a legal first and last name through primary source verification. And build a unified federal database of all non-domiciled CDLs with real-time status tracking.

None of this requires new technology. It requires political will, state compliance, international coordination, and the kind of sustained regulatory attention that the trucking industry has been denied for decades, while the aviation industry receives as a matter of course. The FAA does not allow foreign nationals to purchase pilot certificates by mail. It should not be this easy to purchase the credentials to operate a vehicle that weighs more than a loaded school bus.

The license in the photograph that prompted this article, a Pennsylvania non-domiciled CDL, Class A, issued to a foreign national, marked “Limited Term”, is not, by itself, evidence of fraud. It may be entirely legitimate. But it is a symbol of a system that has lost the ability to distinguish the legitimate from the fraudulent, the qualified from the dangerous, and the documented from the disappeared. When a government issues a license to operate an 80,000-pound vehicle to a person whose name it cannot verify, whose work authorization it does not track, and whose driving competence it outsources to a third-party tester it does not audit, it has not issued a license. It has issued a prayer.

On American highways, prayers are not an adequate safety plan.

USPS quarterly parcel volumes fall 12% as e-commerce plan implemented

Side view of a USPS van being loaded from the rear by letter carrier.

The continued decline in mail and parcel volume contributed to a 64% drop in controllable income for the U.S. Postal Service during the first quarter, underscoring why Postmaster General David Steiner is pushing to grow revenue through higher rates and a new program aimed at attracting retailers to handoff e-commerce shipments for last-mile delivery.  

More than 1,200 companies have shown interest so far in bidding for last-mile service, Steiner said in a presentation to the USPS Board of Governors on Thursday afternoon, adding that programs for first-mile package collection from retailers, as well as returns, could be established later this year. 

The fact that results went south during the strongest shipping period of the year, when seasonal surcharges and higher rates are applied, raises questions about the level of progress five years into a transformation plan designed to increase efficiency. Steiner, who took the helm last summer, acknowledged that more work remains to make the organization financially sustainable.

Postal Service operating revenue dipped 1.2% to $22.2 billion, while expenses increased 4.6% to $23.5 billion, year over year for the three months ended Dec. 31, according to financial results released Thursday. Transportation costs, which have been heavily targeted by a multi-year transformation strategy, rose 2% to more than $2.4 billion. Controllable income, essentially adjusted operating income that excludes expenses such as workers compensation that are out of management’s control, plunged to $350 million from $968 million. 

Net loss for the quarter totaled $1.3 billion after the Postal Service posted a $144 million profit in the prior year period. Beyond lower revenues and higher costs, the bottom line was impacted by increases in unfunded employee and retiree benefit costs, such as workers compensation, that are mandated by law. Last year, the USPS lost $9 billion, with a controllable loss of $2.7 billion, despite a short-lived profit during the first quarter.

Parcel revenue was essentially flat on a volume decrease of 243 million pieces, or 12.1%. Strong demand for USPS Ground Advantage, the organization’s economy product with two-to-five day service standards, and price increase for package services (catalogs and other large printed media) helped offset revenue decreases in Priority Mail and Parcel Select services resulting from increased last-mile competition for e-commerce delivery, in-sourcing from major customers like Amazon, and the trend away from expedited products, according to the Postal Service. Volumes declined in all parcel categories except Ground Advantage.

First-class mail revenue increased 1% on a volume decline of 702 million pieces, or 6.1%, versus the same quarter last year. Marketing mail revenue fell 2.7% on a 10.9% decline in volume. 

On the positive side, the USPS was able to deliver mail and packages within two and a half days on average compared to 2.8 days and on-time delivery scores were higher across nearly all product types, with the best scores coming at the post office level, according to the financial report. The Postal Service actually demonstrated the largest performance improvement among major parcel carriers, meeting on-time delivery standards 94.1% of the time during December compared to 90.4% in 2024, according to data analytics and consulting firm ShipMatrix

ShipMatrix’s methodology excludes delays caused by weather, but the Postal Service is required to report service performance without regard to circumstances beyond its control, something Steiner said he is working to correct because it doesn’t provide useful information for customers.

Compared to last year, the Postal Service recorded a 23% reduction in calls to its customer care center and a 44% decline in package related customer service inquiries, which management attributed to technology investments and better logistics planning.

“While we are pleased that the holiday quarter was quite strong with regard to service improvement as measured by our on-time delivery scores and other important service performance metrics, we continue to face difficult systemic financial and business model headwinds,” Steiner said in the earnings announcement. “To right our financial ship, we are aggressively pursuing growth strategies — which include creating new opportunities for businesses to leverage our vast last-mile delivery network – and driving greater efficiencies throughout our operations. We are convinced that these efforts, if combined with needed regulatory, administrative, and legislative changes, can meet the needs of the American public and return the Postal Service to long-term financial stability and strength.”

Last-mile e-commerce revenue 

Leadership says it needs to achieve further operational efficiencies, boost revenue by offering more innovative products that increase demand, and secure legislative and regulatory reforms for the turnaround plan to succeed.

Steiner last month launched a revenue initiative aimed at driving greater use of the last-mile delivery network by large e-commerce merchants and logistics intermediaries. Shippers who drop off bulk parcel loads can now digitally bid for access to local post offices for doorstep delivery. Steiner’s predecessor, Louis DeJoy, forced large shippers to deliver parcels to intermediate distribution centers— so the Postal Service could do the sorting itself and charge higher rates — instead of thousands of destination delivery units. But the system was only open to direct shippers, not logistics providers, and was only used by a limited number of very large companies because of the high volumes required to make it economical. 

“Allowing customers to bid on last mile capacity is building a new win-win partnership model. It improves their service while reducing their costs and builds revenue for the Postal Service,” the Postmaster General told the board. 

The new way “is more transparent, better adapted to today’s e-commerce landscape and, most of all flexible, to their needs. And to date, more than 1,200 companies and individuals have requested to join the portal. Not all 1,200 will be qualified bidders but the sheer number shows the dramatic interest in our last mile. Why this matters is that we’re giving customers the ability to fit our network to their business. No longer forcing their business to fit our bureaucracy,” Steiner added.

The last-mile bid portal is a model for how the USPS can innovate to get better asset utilization and grow. “We must be willing to test new models like last mile bidding and then scale what works,” he said.   

“As we look at 2026, I see growth priorities in finding and enhancing strategic partnerships that expand reach, volume and relevance, bolstering flagship products that improve service and reliability — improvements that customers can really feel, leveraging our first-mile assets and capabilities from collection to retail to returns to upstream logistics so we can capture value earlier in the pipeline. I believe that these things we can control can help us evolve, help us create and maintain a stronger, more modern posture in today’s market.”

Structural hurdles

Mail volumes, including bulk marketing mail, have declined 50% since 2007, according to the Postal Service. Despite these declines, mail services still accounted for more than half of operating revenue in 2025. While the postal carrier has received some additional pricing flexibility from the Postal Regulatory Commission in recent years, mail services are still subject to an inflation-based price cap system that officials argue limits their ability to offset declining volumes or generate increased revenue. 

Steiner last month asked the Postal Regulatory Commission to provide the Postal Service with unlimited power to raise prices for all first-class mail, marketing mail, newspapers and magazines, areas where the agency dominates the market. Direct mailers and other critics warned against granting unrestricted rate increases, saying the recent proliferation of hikes in mailing rates and stamp prices has driven away customers and that further price increases will hurt the public and businesses alike. 

“USPS cannot afford to continue prioritizing packages over mail and penalizing its biggest revenue generator,” said Kevin Yoder, executive director of Keep US Posted, an advocacy group that includes nonprofit organizations, newspapers, greeting card publishers, magazines, catalogs and small businesses fighting for an affordable Postal Service. “The package growth DeJoy [the previous postmaster general] sought has not, and will not, materialize. While businesses and consumers have many private sector options for package delivery, we all rely on USPS to deliver the mail, and it’s the only service provider that delivers anywhere in the U.S.  It’s easy to attribute decreasing mail volume to the growth of digital communication, but the fact is that price increases and productivity declines are pushing even more mail out of the system. The USPS cannot continue to vampirize the mail, its biggest revenue source, and compromise the mail delivery on which both Americans and businesses depend.”

One reason costs continue to rise is that the number of delivery points keeps growing. Last year, the USPS delivered to 1.8 million more addresses than in fiscal year 2024. The combination of more daily stops and lower mail volume has resulted in a drop in the average number of pieces delivered per delivery point per day from 5.5 pieces in 2007 to 2.4 pieces in 2025, a decline of 57%, according to the national post. 

The Postal Service continues to press Congress and regulators to lift onerous retirement benefit and worker compensation requirements that other agencies and private companies don’t face. It also wants the ability to diversify pension investment vehicles beyond bonds, a higher statutory debt ceiling, and more flexibility over pricing to better respond to market conditions and recoup costs.

Click here for more FreightWaves/American Shipper stories by Eric Kulisch.

USPS proposal requiring small parcel dimensions raises compliance fears

USPS solicits retailers to reserve last-mile delivery capacity

Canada Post, letter carriers hammer out details on final contract

UPS sees higher profits in 2026 from network, Amazon downsizing

When drivers say no: Truckers speak out about unsafe working conditions

Truck drivers across the U.S. say they are increasingly pressured to operate equipment they believe is unsafe — from dilapidated trailers, to overloaded tankers and malfunctioning braking systems — and some say speaking up can cost them their jobs.

Two former truck drivers interviewed by FreightWaves, who requested anonymity due to fear of retaliation, described what they say were repeated attempts by their former employers to push productivity over safety. 

Their experiences highlight both the risks drivers face on the road and the legal protections available when drivers refuse unsafe work.

“This trailer is not safe to move”

One former over-the-road truck driver said the Texas-based company he worked for repeatedly attempted to pressure him into hauling damaged or improperly repaired trailers, including equipment with brake defects, alignment problems and visible structural damage.

“I told them flat-out, this trailer is not safe to move,” the driver said, describing an incident involving a trailer that had recently rolled over. “They kept trying to push me anyway.”

In another exchange, the driver said he made clear he would not attach to unsafe equipment.

“I told them, ‘This trailer is not safe to move. I am not going to hook up to this thing,’” he said. “They were trying to push me anyway.”

He said dispatchers sometimes urged him to continue driving equipment that should have been taken out of service — even after licensed mechanics warned the carrier that the trailer could not legally return to the road.

Ultimately, the driver refused. “Part of my job is to check that equipment before it goes on the road,” he said. “If I touch the road with unsafe brakes and someone gets hurt, that’s on me.”

He said his decision to refuse unsafe equipment may have prevented a serious accident and that his motivation was never personal retaliation.

“This isn’t about vengeance. It’s about safety,” he said. “There are other companies doing the same thing, and it gives the whole industry a bad name.”

“There are other companies doing this,” he added. “And unless drivers know their rights, it keeps happening.”

“They counted bathroom breaks against productivity”

A driver based in Illinois, who is pursuing an OSHA whistleblower complaint against his former company, described a workplace culture in which drivers were penalized for stopping — even to use the restroom — because non-driving time was treated as unproductive under the carrier’s internal metrics.

He said drivers were given a basic reference sheet showing which activities counted toward productivity (i.e. loading, unloading, fueling and similar tasks). “Outside of those listed categories, most on-duty time when the truck wasn’t moving would lower your productivity average,” the driver said. “There was never a clear written explanation of how time spent waiting in line, sitting in traffic, in the shop, calling dispatch, or handling normal needs like restroom breaks was actually calculated. Because of that, drivers were often unsure how much of that time counted and how much did not.”

The driver said he raised repeated concerns about basic human needs, weight compliance and safety inspections — all documented in emails and messages — but received no corrective action before being terminated.

He has since filed a retaliation complaint under federal whistleblower statutes.

Alleged pressure to overload tankers

The Illinois-based truck driver said he also faced systemic pressure from his previous employer to overload fuel tankers beyond legal limits to meet productivity and financial targets.

“If truck stop shows they only have space for 7,500 gallons, you should load 7,500,” the driver said. “The expectation was to average roughly the maximum legal load (around 7,800 gallons). If a location only had space for less, I would load what fit, but that shortfall affected the running average. Drivers were then expected to bring the average back up on later loads, which created pressure to push higher numbers over time.”

He said internal metrics penalized drivers who stayed under legal maximums, while rewarding those who loaded heavier — even when doing so risked violating weight limits.

“Internal driver averages were shared, and drivers below target were highlighted while those above target were praised,” the driver said.

He said he raised concerns with human resources but received no corrective response.

“I asked HR, how is it that drivers are being praised for loading over legal limits?” he said.

Brake warnings and productivity pressure

The Illinois-based driver said he also experienced pressure to keep operating trucks with unresolved safety warnings, including brake-system alerts.

“I got an ABS warning — ‘service now’ — after offloading diesel,” he said. “It was telling me to go to the shop.”

Instead, he said he was instructed to keep driving and let a different shift handle repairs.

“I told my lead there was an ABS issue, and he told me, ‘No, the night driver will take it later,’” he said.

The driver said waiting for guidance on safety concerns was itself treated as a performance problem.

“My lead is not a mechanic. He can’t decide what’s safe,” he said. “If there’s a brake issue, the truck has to go to the shop.”

He added, “Waiting for an answer about a safety issue also counted against my productivity.”

What drivers can do when conditions are unsafe

Federal and state laws provide truck drivers with protections when they refuse to operate unsafe equipment or report violations.

Drivers facing unsafe conditions are advised to:

  • Document everything, including dispatch messages, repair orders, photos and ELD records
  • Report safety concerns in writing, using internal safety channels
  • Refuse unsafe work, when operating the vehicle would violate safety laws
  • File a whistleblower complaint if retaliation occurs, particularly under the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) or applicable state laws

Truck Parking Club hits 4,000 locations, targets 10,000 by year-end

A semi-truck parked at a Truck Parking Club location in front of a building with a large yellow "TRUCKPARKINGCLUB.COM" sign, highlighting a reservable private truck parking space offered through the Chattanooga-based platform.

Truck Parking Club, the digital marketplace connecting commercial drivers with private parking spaces, announced it has reached 4,000 Property Member locations across 49 states, with plans to more than double that figure to 10,000 locations by the end of 2026.

The Chattanooga, Tenn.-based company added 1,000 locations in just three months and now offers over 66,000 instantly reservable truck parking spaces, addressing a national shortage of 1.7 million spaces that costs the trucking industry more than $100 billion annually.

Its rise is meteoric. The platform’s growth has attracted major carriers, with 92 of the top 100 U.S. carriers now using Truck Parking Club. The company was recently ranked No. 24 on the FreightWaves FreightTech 25 list for 2026.

To better understand the growth story, FreightWaves spoke with Reed Loustalot, chief marketing officer at Truck Parking Club.

Growing from 4,000 to over 10,000 locations would more than double the company’s footprint.

The math is straightforward, if daunting: add 6,000 new properties in roughly 11 months. That means recruiting thousands of individual business owners who have never considered parking semi-trucks as a revenue stream.

To accomplish this, Loustalot describes the recipe for success as extreme amounts of work and building a community and ecosystem to support it.

Beyond the milestone: A remarkable growth story

Loustalot doesn’t want the story to just be about hitting big round numbers. Reaching those numbers has taken Truck Parking Club on an odyssey in search of additional pavement to book.

Loustalot noted Truck Parking Club attended over 70 shows last year to expand reach and respond to feedback that the platform solves problems across the supply chain.

“That could be a storage company or a repair shop or a trucking company or a warehouse,” Loustalot said. Year to date, the company has already attended seven trade shows by early February.

Some of the biggest contributors are trucking companies with yard space, repair shops, self-storage facilities, towing companies and even third-party logistics providers with extra yard space. The variety of potential places to park translates into endless leads.

Truck Parking Club’s efforts have taken it to dozens of supply chain conventions, including self-storage shows, trucking conferences, towing shows and retailer conventions — anywhere a company with extra space might consider listing a spot.

“You’re going where they go,” Loustalot said. “And there’s a reason we do this.”

He described the strategy as a shotgun approach. “It’s a shotgun because it’s literally how wide our market is. And if we’re serious about adding 6,000 locations in 11 months, we have to cast as wide a net as possible while maintaining a high bar for quality and thoroughly vetting what we actually onboard to the app.”

There is a method to the madness, and it runs through the community the company has cultivated.

The right partners and the value of skin in the game

Behind the growth numbers lies a business model that Loustalot describes less as a tech platform and more as stewardship of small-business communities. When a driver books a spot through Truck Parking Club, the majority of every transaction goes directly to the property owner — whether that’s a family-owned repair shop in Akron, Ohio, or a regional trucking company with extra pavement.

“When you park at Rick’s Repair Shop in Akron, Ohio, and you pay with Truck Parking Club, you’re paying Rick,” Loustalot said. “In a way, I think we really need to talk more about how we’re building essentially an ecosystem of all these local businesses and drivers and fleets, and they’re essentially transacting and meeting, and we’re kind of the stewards of that community.”

The company acts as gatekeeper: handling onboarding, customer service and quality control. But the core is an ecosystem where hosts and drivers transact directly, with built-in incentives to keep standards high.

Drawing a comparison to ride-sharing platforms, Loustalot explained how accountability drives quality. The company has accumulated many tens of thousands of reviews across its properties and plans to make ratings affect visibility to drivers.

“It’s like Uber,” Loustalot explained. “A good rating keeps quality high because hosts know they need to deliver a great experience to stay visible. Drivers review seriously because they know the next person relies on that information.”

Unlike government-funded parking projects that may lack long-term maintenance incentives, property owners on the platform have financial motivation to keep their lots in good condition. If they want to continue earning revenue, they need to maintain positive reviews and provide reliable service.

“The only way we provide an excellent experience at that volume is by creating a system where properties are incentivized to improve based on feedback,” Loustalot said.

“Bar none, our aim is to provide drivers an excellent experience,” he added. “They know they’re going to have a spot, they can rely on it, they know they can trust the listing page, they know they can trust the photos, they know they can trust the reviews.”

Winning over both drivers and their fleets

Loustalot noted one recent trend is the nation’s largest trucking fleets warming to the idea of paying for driver parking.

“Not many do it yet,” Loustalot admitted, “but more will. We’re removing the traditional reasons they said no.”

For large fleets that are onboarded, Truck Parking Club’s biggest champions are often the drivers themselves.

Company drivers regularly tell Truck Parking Club that they pay for parking themselves to avoid trading $10 for an extra 50 or more miles of productivity. Parking peace of mind translates into more miles and a larger paycheck.

The company is working to convert more fleets into paying for their drivers’ parking, addressing traditional barriers.

“If historically what it’s meant for a big fleet to pay for a driver’s parking is either you just blindly trust the random receipt that your driver gave you or you don’t, and then go through the work of building the infrastructure to reimburse that money on paychecks,” Loustalot said. “We remove all of that because a fleet with us has one source of truth for payments and receipts.”

Fleet managers can track every location, payment and booking frequency. They can view photos, security features and available amenities for each location their drivers use.

It can also be a cash-generating option for fleets with a large real estate footprint. Many large carriers own or lease yards with underutilized space. The platform allows them to monetize that excess capacity while providing solutions where they need additional storage.

“I don’t care if it’s five trailers or 500 trailers,” Loustalot said. “I don’t care if it’s one location or 100 locations. We’ve done it all.”

The business case for fleet-paid parking extends beyond driver retention. Safety concerns play a role, as drivers parking in unauthorized locations create liability. Asset utilization matters too. When drivers shut down four hours early because they’re uncertain about finding parking, both the company and driver lose money.

Loustalot adds that for smaller fleets that can’t afford real estate, temporary or long-term parking can help them grow their business.

“We’ve had carriers tell us they have customers asking them to do projects in Ohio, and the carrier says no because they don’t have a yard there,” Loustalot said. “We can literally, on a month-to-month basis, give them access to flexible storage space.”

This flexibility allows carriers to take on new business without committing to multi-year leases.

Enhancing driver flexibility and the Super Trucker Membership

The flexibility theme extends to drivers as well. The company recently launched its first membership subscription, called the Super Trucker Membership, priced at $9.99 per month.

Members receive 5% back on every booking compared to the standard 1% return for non-members. The rewards accumulate in what the company calls “Club Cash,” a wallet feature tied to user accounts.

The membership also provides five free refunds and five free booking changes per month. Previously, all bookings were non-refundable due to the payment system structure. Now members can cancel and receive their money back in Club Cash for future bookings or move a reservation to a different date, all through the app without calling customer service.

“This is ultimately all about providing flexibility, because that’s how drivers are most affected,” Loustalot said. “They have flexible options, they have limitless places to park, and they always know they’re going to have a spot. That’s the world we’re trying to create.”

The platform serves diverse use cases beyond standard overnight parking. Drivers use the service for storing trucks near their homes, taking 34-hour resets near attractions and parking during vacation time.

“We hear stories like using a spot for five days so we could go to the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade,” Loustalot said. “We’ve got a bobtail location on the beach in Florida, and there’s people there all the time. You think they’re just hanging out in the truck? No, they’re going to the beach.”

Looking ahead: Locations as service nodes

Loustalot doesn’t shy away from ambitious predictions about Truck Parking Club’s trajectory. Within three years, he expects the company to become the largest single entity parking trucks in the United States — handling millions of bookings annually.

“That is where we will be in not a very long time,” Loustalot said. “And if it takes three years, it takes three years. That’s not a long time.”

The long-term vision extends beyond parking reservations. Loustalot describes each location as a “node” around which useful services for truckers can aggregate: food, repairs, potentially even electric vehicle charging — whatever the market demands.

“Every single one of our locations is its own little node,” Loustalot said. “And the services that are useful to truckers will aggregate around the nodes. Food, repairs, charging, whatever services the market demands will appear.”

The company has already seen some electric vehicle charging companies list spaces on the platform — not for charging yet, but because they have unused space while infrastructure is built out. Formal partnerships remain on the horizon.

“Any one of those folks is welcome to work with us right now,” Loustalot said. “As time goes on, we’ll pay attention to what there’s demand for, and how it would work, and how it would improve the experience drivers would have with us, and we’ll evaluate it.”

The ultimate goal, Loustalot said, is a world where drivers have unlimited, reliable options — where the anxiety of finding a spot disappears entirely.

“That’s the world we’re trying to create,” he said. “Drivers have flexible options. They have limitless places to park, and they always know they’re going to have a spot.”

Freight market tightens in Q4 despite subdued volumes, U.S. Bank data shows

Line of semi-trucks on a U.S. interstate highway, illustrating tightening freight market capacity and rising truckload rates in Q4 2025 according to U.S. Bank Freight Payment Index data

U.S. Bank released its Freight Payment Index on Tuesday, showing that the fourth-quarter freight market saw a slight increase in shipment levels while capacity continued to contract. The capacity contraction pushed shipper spending to its highest level since early 2024, even as freight volumes remained historically low.

For shippers accustomed to a buyer’s market, the data suggests the window may be closing.

The U.S. Bank National Shipments Index posted a modest 1.5% sequential increase from the third quarter but declined 4.9% compared with the same period in 2024. Meanwhile, the National Spend Index surged 4.6% quarter over quarter and rose 5.2% year over year — the first annual spending increase in three years.

One sign of continuing capacity tightening is the widening gap between spending and shipments. This indicates shippers faced substantially higher costs to move only marginally greater volumes of freight.

Capacity squeeze driven by exits and enforcement

Several factors contributed to the capacity crunch in the fourth quarter. Prolonged market downturns prompted carriers to downsize fleets and reduce the number of independent contractors.

The total number of carriers operating also decreased throughout the year. Stricter government regulations added pressure, with tougher English Language Proficiency standards removing thousands of drivers from service.

The Department of Transportation temporarily paused the issuance of non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs) to certain non-citizens and non-permanent residents. The rule potentially affects nearly 194,000 CDL holders, though a court case has suspended its implementation for now. The regulatory environment remains uncertain.

Economic data offered little support for demand recovery. Manufacturing output showed no month-over-month growth for four consecutive months, and the ISM Manufacturing Index reached its lowest level since October 2024 in December. Retail sales through October were flat month over month and rose only minimally above inflation over the past year.

Consumer activity also played a part in dampening demand. Federal Reserve Beige Book reports indicated cautious discretionary spending among middle- and lower-income households, while higher-income groups generally maintained their spending habits, partially offsetting weakness in other segments.

Spot and contract rates climb as fuel costs fall

Rate data from DAT Freight & Analytics confirmed the capacity-driven pricing environment. Spot market rates — typically a leading indicator for contract rates — rose an average of 10 cents per mile, a 4.8% increase over the third quarter. Year over year, spot rates gained 5.1%, substantially higher than the 1.4% annual gain in the third quarter.

Contract rates posted 1.4% sequential growth for the second consecutive quarter, with year-over-year increases of 2.9% compared with the fourth quarter of 2024.

Fuel costs did not drive the higher spending. Average fuel expenditures declined 2.9% from the third quarter, dropping 1 cent per mile. The national average price for on-highway diesel fuel was 5.2 cents per gallon lower than the previous quarter. This leaves capacity constraints as the primary driver of elevated costs.

Regional performance mixed

Regional data showed inconsistent recovery patterns.

The Northeast emerged as the top performer, with both quarterly and annual increases in shipments and spending. The Northeast Regional Shipments Index rose 4.2% from the third quarter and 12.1% year over year, while spending increased 5.5% quarter over quarter and 16.7% year over year.

Modest manufacturing improvement in New York state and New England, combined with resilient spending from higher-income households, helped offset reduced spending by lower- and middle-income consumers.

The Southwest faced the greatest challenges, with shipments down 25.4% year over year despite a 5.4% quarterly rebound. The annual shipment average fell 31.6% compared with 2024 — the steepest decline among the five regions.

Despite softer volumes, shipping costs surged due to tighter capacity, likely influenced by stricter English Language Proficiency requirements for drivers. Cross-border movement dipped 0.8% from the quarterly average, and inbound truck traffic from Mexico declined 1.3% compared with October and November 2024 figures. The Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas reported falling retail sales early in the quarter.

The West recorded a slight 1.3% quarterly shipment decline but ended the year 5.4% higher than 2024. The annual average rose 3.2% — notable given declines of more than 16% in both 2023 and 2024. Tariff-related trade policy changes in 2025 boosted import volumes.

Early reports indicated slight dips in seaport and land port volumes from the third quarter. The Port of Los Angeles cited trade policy uncertainty for lower volumes in November and only a minor year-over-year increase in October. Land port truck traffic in October and November was 2.9% below the third-quarter average.

The Midwest posted a 3.5% quarterly shipment increase but remained 3.3% below the prior year — the least severe year-over-year decline among 2025 quarters.

Manufacturing signals were mixed, with the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland reporting a minor decline in demand for manufactured goods early in the quarter, while the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago noted modest improvement in construction, manufacturing and consumer spending.

Besides the West, the Southeast was the only region with consecutive quarterly shipment declines, down 2.4% in the fourth quarter for a two-quarter total drop of 4.4%.

A federal government shutdown likely affected northern parts of the region, where many government employees reduced spending. The Federal Reserve noted declining consumer confidence in the quarter’s first six weeks, reduced new manufacturing orders amid tariff uncertainty, and more cautious discretionary spending from middle- and lower-income households.

Year over year, Southeast shipments dropped 5.9% — the second-largest decline behind the Southwest. Spending rose just 0.7% quarter over quarter (the smallest gain among regions) and 2.3% for the second half of the year (also the lowest).

Outlook points to tighter capacity

The fourth-quarter data confirms a gradual shift toward a moderately tighter market. Capacity contraction drove rates higher despite sluggish demand. For 2025 overall, the index fell 9.9% from the 2024 average — less than half the 20.4% decline seen in 2024. Freight volumes appear to have stabilized near their lowest levels, positioning the market for potential recovery if broader demand strengthens.

First look: Tough market for brokers evident in RXO 4Q earnings

RXO management in its third quarter earnings call, several weeks after the fourth quarter already had begun, said things were not going the way the brokerage would have desired. Several key numbers in RXO’s fourth quarter earnings released Friday morning backed that up.

Various numbers showed just how tough the quarter was for RXO, the latest data in line with challenging results reported by standalone brokers and the brokerages within trucking companies. Those various results show what happens when the freight market suddenly gets stronger, as it did in the last four to five weeks of the quarter, and 3PLs face the reality of filling earlier booked capacity with higher-priced truckload rates.

Adjusted EBITDA for RXO (NYSE: RXO) in the quarter was $17 million. That was down from  $32 million in the third quarter but also was down from $42 million in the fourth quarter of 2024. The adjusted EBITDA margin in the third quarter was 2.3%; in the fourth quarter, it dropped to 1.2%. A year ago, the EBITDA margin was 2.5%.

The outlook isn’t much better. RXO said it expects its first quarter adjusted EBITDA will be between $5 million and $12 million, which would be a downturn from the fourth quarter. It would also be far less than the $22 million in the first quarter of 2025.

1Q Brokerage volume to drop

RXO said its Brokerage volume in the first quarter would be down 5% to 10% from a year earlier.

“In the fourth quarter, tightening in the freight market accelerated, driven by continued reductions in truckload capacity,” CEO Drew Wilkerson said in a prepared statement released by RXO with its earnings. “This impacted our buy rates and squeezed our Brokerage gross margin.”

The squeeze was clear in looking at sequential data on revenue versus the cost of transportation. In the third quarter, RXO had revenue of $1.42 billion and transportation costs of $1.14 billion. In the fourth quarter revenue rose to $1.47 billion, up 3.5% but RXO also saw a 5.2% gain in the cost of transportation to $1.2 billion. 

The bottom line GAAP net loss was $46 million in the fourth quarter. That was more than a $25 million GAAP net loss in the fourth quarter of 2024, and $14 million in the third quarter.

It wasn’t just a squeeze in margins that affected RXO. It also reported a decline of 4% year-on-year in brokerage volume. The positive side in that number is that LTL volume was up 31% from a year ago, but truckload brokerage declined 12%.

The brokerage margin at RXO also showed weakness in the fourth quarter, coming in at 11.9%. Sequentially, that was down from 13.5% in the third quarter and 13.2% a year ago. 

Weaker gross margin in 1Q

RXO sees a downturn in its gross margin, predicting a first quarter gross margin of between  11% and 13%. The gross margin in the fourth quarter was 14.8%, compared to 15.5% in the fourth quarter of 2024.

With that sort of financial performance, it was no surprise that RXO, in announcing its earnings, tried to play up various positive data. The company said its Managed Transportation unit in the quarter was awarded more than $200 million of freight under management, which allowed an “increase (in) the synergy loads provided to Brokerage.”

 But even with that optimistic outlook , Managed Transportation revenue declined to $133 million from $141 million a year ago. That was down sequentially from $137 million. 

RXO also used the opportunity to disclose it had replaced a $600 million unsecured revolving credit facility with a $450 million asset-based revolving credit facility. The transaction was completed at some point in the first quarter.

More articles by John Kingston

Werner settlement ready to go in drivers’ lawsuit that dates to 2014

Amazon’s LTL offering reaching out to shippers as possible customers: report

NFI’s Brown, others win another round in dismissed New Jersey indictment

FMC fines MSC millions for Shipping Act violations

The Federal Maritime Commission said it has fined Mediterranean Shipping Company $22.67 million for three types of Shipping Act violations.

The decision followed an enforcement proceeding for three types of Shipping Act violations by the Swiss-based carrier. The Commission’s Bureau of Enforcement, Investigations, and Compliance (BEIC), through its Offices of Investigation and Enforcement, investigated and prosecuted.

The Shipping Act of 1984 requires ocean carriers to file agreements with the FMC covering  rate discussions and service contracts, and bars unfair practices such as excessive rebates or discriminatory rates.

Published estimates peg privately-held MSC’s revenue at $38.4 billion in 2025. 

The probe alleged that MSC violated the Shipping Act over the course of several years. The first, which occurred from 2018-2020, related to MSC’s billing of customs agents for demurrage and detention charges, or late fees, even though the agents were not involved in moving the cargo. The FMC affirmed an earlier decision of an Administrative Law Judge. The civil penalties for these violations totaled $65,000.

The investigation also affirmed an ALJ finding that MSC failed to include in its published tariff from 2021-2023 late fees for non-operating reefers (NORs). The agency modified the initial decision to reflect knowing and willful violations starting only from the point of MSC’s March 2022 statement to the Commission that it would modify its tariff. The penalties for those violations totaled $9.46 million.

In the third instance BEIC alleged that MSC overcharged its customers demurrage and detention fees for use of said reefers. The Commission reversed the ALJ’s determination that MSC’s NORs “billing system” mistake did not violate a portion of the Act, but held that overcharges occurred in about 23% of all NOR bills during the entire year of 2021. 

“Therefore, the Commission concluded that MSC’s billing was not merely the result of a mistake but rather that it constituted an unreasonable practice within the meaning” of the Act. It assessed a penalty of $5,000 per violation, or a total of $13.145 million.

Find more articles by Stuart Chirls here.

Related coverage:

Maersk posts Q4 pre-tax loss, will cut 1,000 jobs

Panama targeted Canal ports contract, China company claims

Carriers say military to secure Red Sea voyages

Leaner inventories weaken ocean demand, a harbinger for higher tender rejections, increased truck rates

Amazon posts Q4 gains from fulfillment orders and faster last-mile delivery

Amazon beat reported mixed financial results in the fourth quarter on Thursday, with revenue surpassing Wall Street estimates, while earnings slightly missed projections

During Amazon’s earnings call, CEO Andy Jassy touted the e-commerce segment’s ability to deliver more essentials to more customers as key growth drivers during the fourth quarter.

“For the third year in a row, globally, in 2025, we achieved both our fastest-ever delivery speeds for Prime members, while also reducing our cost to serve,” Jassy said.

However, shares tumbled more than 8% in after hours trading on the company’s forecasted capital expenditures of about $200 billion for 2026, higher than expected.

The e-commerce and cloud services giant’s (Nasdaq: AMZN) net sales for during the quarter rose 14% year-over-year to $213.4 billion, exceeding estimates. Net income was $21.2 billion ($1.95 per diluted share), an increase from the previous year, although the $1.95 EPS missed analyst expectations.

In North America sales — the company’s largest e-commerce segment — increased 10% year-over-year to $127.1 billion. Operating income climbed to $25 billion, supported in part by improved fulfillment-network efficiency.

In the U.S., Prime members received more than 8 billion items the same or next day in 2025, up over 30% year over year, with groceries and everyday essentials accounting for roughly half of that volume. Same-day delivery remains Amazon’s fastest-growing delivery option, used by nearly 100 million U.S. customers last year.

“Our regionalization has improved local inventory placement, leading to faster delivery at lower costs,” Chief Financial Officer Brian Wachter said, adding that the company continues refining how inventory is positioned to reduce distance traveled and package handling across the network.”

Amazon said it expects first-quarter 2026 net sales of $173.5 billion to $178.5 billion, representing 11% to 15% year-over-year growth, including a roughly 180-basis-point benefit from foreign exchange. 

Operating income is forecast at $16.5 billion to $21.5 billion, compared with $18.4 billion a year earlier, reflecting about $1 billion in higher Amazon Leo-related costs as satellite operations scale, along with continued investment in quick-commerce offerings and more aggressive pricing in international stores.

Amazon said it plans to invest about $200 billion in capital expenditures across the company in 2026, a sharp increase from roughly $131 billion spent in 2025, underscoring its aggressive push to expand infrastructure capacity.

The bulk of that spending is expected to go toward data centers, fulfillment operations, delivery infrastructure and automation.

“We see strong demand for these services, and we continue to like the investments in this area,” Wachter said during the call. “I would add that, you know, if you look at the capital we’re spending and intend to spend this year, it’s predominantly in AWS, and some of it is for our core workloads, which are our non-AI workloads, because they’re growing at a faster rate than we anticipated. But most of it is in AI, and we just have a lot of growth and a lot of demand.”

AmazonQ4/2025Q4/2024Y/Y % Change
Net revenue$213.4B$187.8B14%
Operating income$25B$21.2B18%
North American sales$127.1B$115.6B10%
International sales$50.7B$43.4B11%
Adjusted earnings per share$1.95$1.864.8%

Key fourth-quarter financial metrics.

Nashville-based Quickway Transportation, affiliates file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy

Quickway Transportation and its affiliate entities, Quickway Logistics and Quickway Carriers, have each filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, according to court filings submitted in late January.

Quickway Transportation listed between $0 and $50,000 in estimated assets and liabilities and fewer than 50 creditors in its voluntary Chapter 11 petition, which was signed by Brian Hall, CEO of Paladin Capital Inc., the company’s parent operator.

Separate but similar Chapter 11 petitions were also filed by Quickway Logistics and Quickway Carriers on the same day.

The bankruptcy filings follow a previously disclosed operational wind-down. In a WARN notice filed with the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Quickway Transportation permanently shut down its facility in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, on June 15, resulting in layoffs for 45 employees.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration records show Quickway Transportation remains listed as an active interstate carrier with 228 power units and 319 drivers as of Feb. 4, though the company reported more than 21.7 million miles driven in 2024.

Quickway Transportation is based in Brentwood about 11 miles south of downtown Nashville.

Affiliate Quickway Carriers, which operates 89 power units and 125 drivers, also remains listed as active in SAFER records 

The filings add Quickway to a growing list of trucking and logistics companies seeking court protection amid prolonged freight market weakness and ongoing cost pressure.

Quickway Transportation has faced scrutiny in the past over labor practices. In 2022, an NLRB administrative law judge ruled the company acted legally in shutting down a Kroger-served facility in Kentucky after a Teamsters union vote, though the decision criticized Quickway’s anti-union tactics and cited two executives for labor law violations, according to prior FreightWaves reporting.

This is a developing story that FreightWaves will continue to cover.