Nearly everything you’ve bought in the last five years arrived in a steel box made by one of four companies. On Tuesday, the US Department of Justice alleged those four companies — and seven of their executives — spent years making sure it stayed that way, and that you paid more for the privilege.

The superseding indictment, unsealed in the Northern District of California, charges four of the world’s largest shipping container manufacturers with conspiring to fix prices and restrict output of standard dry containers — the unrefrigerated steel boxes that carry the bulk of global trade. Between them and two uncharged co-conspirator companies, the defendants comprise an estimated 95 percent of that market.

The conspiracy, which prosecutors say ran from at least November 2019 through January 2024, roughly doubled container prices during one of the most chaotic periods in modern supply-chain history. The affected commerce totals approximately $35 billion, according to the Justice Department.

This is not a niche industrial product. Shipping containers are the circulatory system of global trade. When their price doubles, the cost pulses through every port, warehouse, and retail shelf on the planet.

The corporate defendants are China International Marine Containers (CIMC), Singamas Container Holdings, Shanghai Universal Logistics Equipment (known as Dong Fang), and CXIC Group Containers. The seven indicted executives include CEOs and senior officers from each firm. One — Singamas marketing director Vick Nam Hing Ma — was arrested at Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris on April 14, 2026, as he allegedly prepared to board a flight to Hong Kong. French authorities intercepted him as part of what the DOJ called “Operation Midnight.” His extradition to the US is pending. The other six executives remain at large.

Cameras, Quotas, and a Penalty Fund

According to the indictment, the scheme was remarkably organized. In November 2019, executives from CIMC, Dong Fang, CXIC, and an unnamed co-conspirator met at CIMC’s headquarters in Shenzhen and agreed to restrict container production by limiting factory shifts, capping output per production line, and banning new manufacturing facilities.

To enforce compliance, the group installed 87 video surveillance cameras across 49 dry container production lines. They established a fund to financially penalize any company that exceeded its quota. By September 2020, they had refined the scheme further, allocating specific production volumes for individual customers — including major US-based shipping lines and logistics companies. Singamas and a second unnamed co-conspirator joined by March 2020.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Omeed Assefi said the manufacturers agreed to wage “war” against smaller independent factories that dared undercut the cartel’s prices.

They knew the risk. In one email exchange cited by prosecutors, an executive wrote: “I feel very uneasy reading your report. Maybe we should delete this string of emails after reading?” Another warned they risked “violat[ing] the Monopoly Law or being accused of price manipulation by our customers.”

The Pandemic Windfall

The timing was, from the cartel’s perspective, devastatingly effective. The conspiracy began just as COVID-19 upended global shipping. Americans stuck at home ordered record volumes of goods — medical supplies, home office equipment, electronics — precisely when container supply was being deliberately choked.

The financial results speak for themselves. CIMC’s container manufacturing profits climbed from approximately $19.8 million in 2019 to $288 million in 2020 and $1.75 billion in 2021 — a near-hundredfold increase over two years. Singamas swung from a $110 million loss in 2019 to $186.8 million in profit by 2021.

Container prices more than doubled between 2019 and 2021. Those costs moved through supply chains into consumer prices at a moment when household budgets were already strained.

The Opening Argument

The indictment charges one count of violating Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Maximum penalties are 10 years in prison and $1 million in fines for individuals, and $100 million for corporations — though fines can reach twice the gain from the crime if that exceeds the statutory maximum.

Whether US prosecutors can bring the six at-large defendants to trial is another matter. Five are believed to reside in China, which does not extradite to the United States; one — Singamas CEO Siong Seng Teo — is believed to reside in Singapore. The case against Vick Ma, the sole defendant in custody, will be the first test.

The Justice Department framed the indictment as a milestone in international cartel enforcement, and the evidence — internal emails, production quota agreements, a surveillance apparatus spanning dozens of factory floors — is voluminous. But an indictment is an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

The broader question is whether this prosecution changes anything structurally. If 95 percent of the world’s standard dry containers were manufactured by a handful of companies willing to allegedly install cameras to police each other’s output, the remaining 5 percent was never going to discipline prices on its own. The containers are still moving. The goods are still arriving. The question is what they really cost — and who, if anyone, is watching.

Sources