How Manufacturers Can Rethink The Supply Chain In A New Era of Risk

Summary

The article explains why supply chain compliance has moved from a back-office chore to a boardroom priority for US manufacturers. Rising global tensions, new tariffs and tighter enforcement have increased the cost of non-compliance and exposed visibility gaps across complex, cross-border supply chains. Despite many firms taking steps to improve security, significant confidence and ownership gaps remain, leaving manufacturers exposed unless they reframe compliance as a strategic advantage.

Key Points

70% of manufacturing respondents took steps in the last 12 months to address supply chain security as part of national security compliance programmes.
61% of manufacturers who recognise supply chain security as a risk do not feel confident in managing that risk.
In 2024, regulators imposed an estimated $3.3 billion in penalties for transaction-monitoring violations — a 100% year‑on‑year increase.
Leadership and legal teams disagree on ownership of national security compliance: 43% of executives say the C‑Suite is in charge, but only 25% of in‑house counsel agree; conversely, 35% of legal respondents say they own it while just 6% of executives concur.
Just 45% of manufacturers strengthened supply chain or third‑party due diligence in the past year, and 72% neglected to increase board or executive oversight of national security compliance.
Recommended actions: prioritise transparency and end‑to‑end visibility, build cross‑functional teams with clear responsibilities, engage the board, and take proactive steps (audits, incident plans, training).

Content Summary

Manufacturers face unprecedented complexity: global sourcing, multiple vendors, international payments and shifting regulations all create vulnerabilities. The Eversheds Sutherland 2025 report shows many manufacturers have started addressing supply chain security, but most do not feel truly ready to manage national security compliance risks.

Regulatory scrutiny is intensifying. Enforcement around trade fraud, tariff evasion and transaction monitoring has led to rising penalties and reputational damage. The article highlights that non‑compliance is costly and that a single error in vendor screening, shipment tracking or payment monitoring can trigger major investigations and supply disruptions.

The piece argues the gap between action and readiness stems from limited resources, unclear ownership and a reactive mindset towards compliance. To close the gap, manufacturers should invest in systems for end‑to‑end visibility and real‑time monitoring, form resilient cross‑functional teams, ensure board‑level engagement, and adopt proactive audit and training regimes.

Context and Relevance

This is timely for CEOs, COOs and compliance leads in manufacturing: geopolitical tensions, tariff changes and national security rules are making compliance both more demanding and more predictable. Treating compliance as a resilience and trust builder — not merely as a cost centre — aligns with broader trends in supply‑chain de‑risking, nearshoring and digital monitoring. Firms that act now can reduce regulatory exposure and gain a competitive edge by assuring customers and partners of reliable, transparent operations.

Why should I read this

Short and blunt: if your business moves parts, payments or paperwork across borders, this article saves you wasted hours. It cuts to why regulators are now a major operational risk, shows where most firms are falling short, and gives clear, practical moves to tighten up before a slip costs you millions or your reputation. Read it if you want to stop firefighting and start protecting growth.

Author style

Punchy — the authors blend legal expertise with practical takeaways. Where the piece is most useful is in reframing compliance from a reactive, siloed task into a cross‑functional strategic priority.