Geopolitical instability and cross-border complexity leading European businesses to place greater emphasis on customs management, survey from Customs Support Group reveals
- Nearly half of 200 European manufacturing businesses surveyed (44 per cent) say customs is becoming a strategic priority, due to growing concerns about the global trading landscape
- However, 70 per cent of firms still outsource customs clearance tasks due to capacity issues or a lack of internal specialists
- One in three companies admit their response to trade uncertainty is mainly reactive, with only 18 per cent making proactive preparations for disruption
- More than half of firms (56 per cent) face risks from goods misclassification, with one in three never reviewing classifications and 28 per cent already seeing negative impacts
A comprehensive survey of European manufacturing firms has revealed geopolitics, volatile markets and an ever-growing web of regulations are turning customs and trade compliance into a strategic priority around the boardroom table.
However, a lack of specialist knowledge and internal capacity is leaving firms at risk from rising complexity despite this increased focus on customs, the second Strategic Radar Customer Survey from Customs Support Group (CSG) has revealed.
For the survey, Europe’s leading independent provider of customs clearance and trade solutions evaluated the responses of almost 200 European manufacturing and retail companies.
Nearly 44 per cent of surveyed companies say their customs function has increased in importance, with 18.5 per cent describing this as a significant rise – but while this strategic importance is rising, many organisations lack customs-specific expertise and staffing capacity.
John Wegman, CEO of Customs Support Group said:
“The survey shows a paradox. Customs and trade compliance is more important than ever, but many companies are understaffed in this area and act reactively rather than proactively.
“This is a risky combination in a geopolitically unstable environment. Luckily, external trade advisors and specialised customs brokers fill the gap, being positioned as long-term strategic enablers, rather than purely operational suppliers.”
Despite its growing strategic importance, operational customs clearance remains outsourced in many companies – with 70 per cent of companies surveyed relying on this service due to not having internal teams.
More than a third (38 per cent) say the lack of specialised customs knowledge remains the main reason for outsourcing, with a further third citing a lack of capacity. Just under 30 per cent consider outsourcing to be more cost-effective, with added advantages such as access to digital solutions and support with rapidly changing regulations.
There is also considerable reluctance when it comes to staffing. Although 23 per cent have hired staff in their customs compliance departments in the last two years, only six per cent are planning further hires, while 58 per cent have no plans for expansion.
The survey also revealed that while customs declarations are often outsourced, goods classification still remains an in-house responsibility – with 60 per cent classifying goods entirely in-house and a further 20 per cent combining internal expertise with external support.
However, just 30 per cent have a high level of confidence in their own goods classification, with only around one in three companies reviewing classification annually, and another third never having conducted a review.
As a result, more than half of the companies surveyed (56 per cent) are exposed to latent misclassification risks, and 28 per cent already report negative consequences such as higher costs or customs audits.
“This discrepancy between responsibility and review practice is worrying,” added John Wegman.
“Those who set classifications once and then do not review them regularly create unnecessary risks – from additional payments to audits and operational delays. When in-house capacity is limited, partial outsourcing to trusted external partners can help close the gap.”
In contrast to last year’s survey, artificial intelligence plays a less prominent role in 2026. No company relies entirely on AI for classification, with only 24 per cent using AI regularly or occasionally for goods classification. Notably, 55 per cent still refrain from implementing AI for these tasks.
“This reluctance is justified,” added John Wegman. “Goods classification carries major compliance implications, and organisations don’t want to risk an algorithm misclassifying goods and triggering costly penalties.
“Human expertise – what we call ‘Real Intelligence’ – remains the foundation. That said, AI can still add value by consolidating data and supporting analysis, while leaving the final classification decision to experienced specialists.”
The Russia–Ukraine war remains the most significant external disruptor for manufacturing businesses (32 per cent), followed by the Red Sea crisis (23 per cent). US tariff tensions were also cited by more than 21 per cent of companies.
However, more than 40 per cent of companies haven’t implemented specific actions in response to geopolitical tensions and 75 per cent report no response to global tariff tensions.
One in three companies describe their approach as predominantly reactive, responding only once issues arise, while around 10 per cent remain largely passive and dependent on external support. Only 18 per cent of companies report an active, forward-looking approach proactively planning for trade and regulatory disruption.
“This is not sustainable,” added John Wegman.
“Looking ahead, a reactive approach to this is unlikely to remain viable, as regulatory pressure, enforcement intensity and geopolitical volatility are expected to force more proactive and structured responses.
“Organisations that delay preparedness may face higher compliance risk, cost exposure and operational disruption when reactive options narrow.”
To download an in-depth analysis of the report, visit www.customssupport.com/the-strategic-power-of-customs-in-an-uncertain-trade-landscape
