Cross-Border M&A in Trucking, Logistics & Supply Chain: Lessons from Deals That Looked Right and Went Wrong in 2025

Cross-border M&A in trucking, logistics, and supply chain services is often framed as an obvious extension of scale. Freight moves across borders by definition, customer footprints are increasingly multinational, and demand for transportation and fulfillment remains structurally resilient. On paper, expanding a logistics network into adjacent geographies appears to be a natural progression of density, utilization, and margin expansion. In practice, this sector continues to produce one of the widest gaps between transactions that close and transactions that ultimately deliver durable value.

‍

In 2025, the source of this gap is rarely macroeconomic. Demand volatility and cycle risk are well understood and typically well underwritten. Instead, underperformance in cross-border logistics transactions stems from execution complexity embedded in regulation, labor dynamics, routing economics, and customer behavior that does not translate cleanly across jurisdictions. These realities are often underestimated during underwriting and only become visible once governance, incentives, and operating authority shift post-close. Cross-border advisory in logistics exists to prevent acquirers from discovering these constraints after control has already changed hands.

‍

A recurring failure pattern in cross-border trucking transactions is the assumption that asset ownership automatically delivers operational leverage. Buyers frequently underwrite lane density, equipment utilization, and cross-selling opportunities based on the combined network. After closing, they discover that dispatch authority, driver assignment, pricing discretion, and customer prioritization remain locally controlled and culturally entrenched. Attempts to impose centralized routing or pricing optimization often trigger resistance, driver attrition, or service degradation. In these situations, the buyer acquires assets and customers but fails to acquire true operational control, leaving the economic rationale of density largely theoretical.

‍

Revenue stability presents a second area where cross-border assumptions frequently break down. Customer contracts in logistics may appear standardized and long-term during diligence, supporting expectations of predictable cash flow. Post-close experience often reveals that local commercial norms treat contracts as flexible frameworks rather than enforceable commitments. Pricing is renegotiated informally, service levels are governed by relationships rather than written terms, and termination rights are exercised with little regard for contractual language. In cross-border contexts, the distinction between contractual form and commercial behavior becomes critical. Revenue durability that is assumed rather than validated rarely survives a change in ownership.

‍

Labor represents a third and increasingly consequential fault line. Many logistics businesses are underwritten on the strength of their driver base, warehouse workforce, or operational staff. In cross-border transactions, workforce availability is frequently conflated with workforce deployability. Labor laws, union structures, cultural expectations, and regulatory constraints on licensing and immigration materially limit flexibility. Ownership change alone can accelerate turnover if local leadership credibility or incentive alignment weakens. In 2025, with labor markets tight and mobility constrained, labor is often the asset that appears most valuable at signing and proves most fragile after closing.

‍

Despite differences across trucking, warehousing, freight forwarding, and integrated logistics models, these failures share a common root. Buyers underwrite logistics businesses as coherent networks, while in reality they are collections of local operating systems linked by infrastructure rather than governed by uniform control. Performance is shaped as much by informal practices, local decision rights, and relationship capital as by physical assets or technology platforms. Cross-border advisory focuses on identifying this fragmentation early, before valuation and structure harden around assumptions that cannot be enforced.

‍

Experienced acquirers have adjusted their approach accordingly. By 2025, underwriting has shifted away from growth narratives toward execution-first analysis. Buyers concentrate on where routing, pricing, and capacity decisions actually reside, how portable customer relationships truly are, how much margin depends on informal local practices, and how quickly operating discipline can be imposed without impairing service. When these questions lack clear answers, valuation discussions become secondary. In logistics, uncertainty around control and behavior overwhelms even attractive headline growth.

‍

This reality is reflected directly in valuation outcomes. Cross-border transactions in trucking and logistics now carry a discernible discount relative to domestic deals, not because the sector lacks opportunity, but because earnings transferability is uncertain. Local pricing discretion, customer churn tied to individual relationship managers, margin variability by lane or facility, and the difficulty of enforcing standardized performance metrics all contribute to valuation dispersion. Two businesses with identical reported EBITDA can command materially different outcomes depending on how portable their operating discipline is across borders. Buyers pay for repeatability, not reach.

‍

Transaction structure has therefore taken on heightened importance. Earn-outs linked to margin stability or route profitability, staged acquisitions by geography or service line, rollover equity for local leadership, and deferred consideration tied to customer retention are increasingly common. These mechanisms are not merely risk-sharing tools but diagnostic instruments. Buyers use structure to test whether performance survives changes in ownership, incentives, and governance. Where structure is poorly designed or overly optimistic, transactions tend to unravel either through post-close disputes or through slow erosion of value.

‍

Regulatory and border friction further complicate execution. While logistics is less regulated than energy or financial services, it is deeply affected by policy. Cabotage restrictions, driver licensing equivalency, customs and bonded warehouse rules, environmental and emissions standards, and trade and sanctions exposure can materially alter economics. In cross-border trucking in particular, regulatory constraints can eliminate assumed synergies entirely. Successful transactions treat these factors as core underwriting variables rather than compliance considerations to be addressed later.

‍

Post-close integration remains the stage where value is most frequently destroyed. Aggressive, Day One-driven integration efforts often undermine service reliability, which is the foundation of customer retention in logistics. Successful acquirers preserve local dispatch authority and customer management initially, centralize reporting, compliance, and capital allocation before operational change, and introduce network optimization gradually. Incentives are aligned before behavior is altered. In logistics, service failures erode value faster and more permanently than cost overruns. Integration pacing must be calibrated to protect continuity while building durable control.

‍

In 2025, the cross-border logistics buyers that outperform share a consistent discipline. They respect local operating autonomy while defining its limits, underwrite labor and routing realities rather than asset counts, and use transaction structure to validate assumptions over time. They recognize that logistics does not scale through force or speed, but through disciplined governance and trust built at the operating level.

‍

For buyers and sellers alike, cross-border M&A in trucking, logistics, and supply chain rewards realism. Sellers who can demonstrate transferable operating discipline and control achieve cleaner execution and stronger outcomes. Buyers who acknowledge execution risk, structure intelligently, and integrate patiently outperform those pursuing network scale alone. Cross-border advisory remains essential not to globalize logistics overnight, but to ensure that service reliability, margin discipline, and enterprise value survive the border crossing.