Nearshoring Is A Strategic Advantage U.S. Companies Shouldn't Ignore
Luis Peralta is CEO of ParallelStaff, helping U.S. companies scale with elite nearshore tech talent across Latin America.
When the Trump administration launched a wide-reaching tariff campaign in 2025, the intention was to protect American manufacturing and rebalance trade relationships. But beyond the immediate impact on goods, the ripple effects of those policies prompted U.S. businesses to reassess how they source services and talent globally—particularly in technology, where speed, adaptability and innovation are essential.
In response, some companies began moving away from traditional offshoring hubs, exploring alternatives like nearshoring—especially in Latin America. While not a universal solution, nearshoring has emerged as a viable option for organizations looking to address long-standing challenges in offshore engagements, such as time zone misalignment, communication lags and geopolitical uncertainty.
The Tariff Wars Reshaped More Than Just Goods
During its peak, the U.S.-China trade conflict imposed over $360 billion in tariffs, increasing costs on everything from electronics to machinery. While much of the spotlight remained on physical supply chains, the downstream effects also impacted digital services.
IT leaders began to scrutinize:
• How reliant are we on teams in countries vulnerable to policy swings?
• Are we sacrificing speed and collaboration in exchange for marginal cost savings?
• How quickly can we pivot if geopolitical or logistical variables change?
The answers were rarely comforting.
Companies that once defaulted to offshore staff augmentation in distant regions like Southeast Asia or Eastern Europe began facing performance issues, not just due to distance and time zones, but also regulatory uncertainty and communication lags. The search for a more resilient, time-sensitive solution pointed south.
Nearshoring: A Growing Option, Not A Cure-All
Enter nearshore software development: a model built not only on cost-efficiency, but on strategic alignment.
By tapping into the talent pool of countries like Mexico, Colombia, Brazil and Argentina, U.S. companies have discovered a workforce that is technically skilled, culturally aligned, and geographically proximate. Nearshoring is no longer about saving money but gaining speed, clarity and control.
Here's why it's flourishing:
Time Zones That Actually Work: Unlike far-shore outsourcing, nearshore partners operate in U.S.-friendly time zones. Daily standups, sprint reviews and real-time collaboration can occur during shared business hours. The result? Faster development cycles and fewer miscommunications.
Cultural And Business Alignment: Latin American professionals are known for their strong English skills and familiarity with U.S. work culture. That cultural overlap leads to smoother onboarding, better teamwork and fewer project delays.
High-Caliber Engineering Talent: The Latin American tech ecosystem has exploded. Governments and private sectors alike have invested heavily in STEM education and digital infrastructure. Today's LATAM developers are fluent in English and Java, Python, .NET and DevOps.
Agility in a Volatile Economy: The global economic landscape is turbulent—rising interest rates, inflationary pressures and labor shortages have made long-term hiring risky. This is where IT staff augmentation through nearshoring becomes a game-changer.
Staff Augmentation: A Scalable Safety Net
The traditional hiring model—full-time, on-site, with a six-month ramp-up—simply doesn't work in today's tech economy. Projects shift. Roadmaps pivot. Budgets get slashed. Companies need a way to scale teams without locking into fixed costs.
That's precisely what nearshore staff augmentation offers: access to vetted software engineers who can plug into your internal teams quickly, work in your time zone and align with your culture, without the overhead of full-time hiring or the lag of offshoring.
It's not just about filling seats; it's about enhancing velocity.
The Risks Behind The Rewards: A Balanced Look At Nearshore Outsourcing
Nearshoring isn't a magic bullet—it's a strategy. And like any strategy, it comes with trade-offs. Here are the common pitfalls leaders should be aware of:
Oversight Still Matters: Nearshore teams may be easier to integrate, but they still require structured onboarding, daily engagement and strong documentation practices. Skimping on these can lead to misalignment or missed deadlines.
Talent Turnover Can Hurt: Latin America's tech talent is in high demand—meaning your star developers could be poached by competitors if not engaged long term. Continuity isn't guaranteed unless you invest in team loyalty and relationship-building.
Communication Gaps Aren't Gone—Just Smaller: While cultural alignment is stronger than with offshore teams, subtle communication issues can still arise. Assumptions around feedback, conflict resolution or even deadlines can vary slightly across borders.
Quality Isn't Universal: The LATAM region is home to world-class engineers—but not every firm or freelancer is created equal. Without a rigorous vetting process, companies risk hiring underqualified talent or teams that overpromise and underdeliver.
In short, nearshoring offers a smarter, faster alternative to traditional outsourcing—but it still demands strategic execution. Success depends on choosing the right partner, setting clear expectations and treating remote contributors like core team members—not contractors.
Looking Ahead
As businesses navigate an increasingly complex global landscape—shaped by economic pressures, shifting regulations and evolving workforce expectations—talent strategies need to be both resilient and adaptive.
Nearshoring won't replace all forms of global outsourcing, nor will it be the right fit for every company. But for organizations seeking closer collaboration, faster execution and more predictable operations, it offers a pragmatic alternative worth considering—provided it's approached with clear goals and realistic expectations.
Rather than ask whether nearshoring is better than offshoring, the better question might be: What mix of talent models will make us most responsive, most competitive and most resilient in the years ahead?
Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Why USA Rare Earth Stock Fell Today
China and the U.S. have apparently signed a trade deal that will free up rare earth magnet exports from China. USA Rare Earth doesn't yet make magnets, but wants to. For the time being, the company has no revenue and no profit. 10 stocks we like better than Usa Rare Earth › Shares of USA Rare Earth (NASDAQ: USAR) stock fell an unlucky 13% through 1:30 p.m. ET Friday. And why? Well, last night President Trump announced the signing of a trade deal with China, and this morning, China's Ministry of Commerce confirmed the news, stating its intention to "approve export applications for items subject to export control rules," as CNBC just reported. China's referring first and foremost to applications for the export of rare earth magnets. And the reason this is bad news for USA Rare Earth is that the company is itself trying to break into the rare earth biz, by mining, processing, and supplying rare earths extracted from a mine in Sierra Blanca, Texas. Any increase in cheap rare earth exports from China could torpedo USA Rare Earth's business model, which is really predicated on China not allowing rare earth exports, such that rare earth sourced from within the U.S. will be the only way U.S. companies can access the products at all. Still, a couple caveats are worth pointing out. First and foremost, USA Rare Earth -- which only formed in 2019 -- doesn't actually mine any rare earths itself... yet. The company has no revenue, operating profit, or free cash flow whatsoever. Its entire $40 million net profit over the past year came from the "gain on fair market value of financial instruments" it holds. As such, it doesn't really matter what China does (or doesn't do) until USA starts producing some rare earths of its own, and proves itself a viable business. Unless and until that happens, I consider the stock entirely speculative -- and probably a sell. Before you buy stock in Usa Rare Earth, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Usa Rare Earth wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $704,676!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $950,198!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,048% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 175% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 23, 2025 Rich Smith has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Why USA Rare Earth Stock Fell Today was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
PCE Inflation Increased In Line With Expectations
It's been an eventful week in terms of stock market information, leading to new all-time highs — or very near — on the major indexes. That doesn't mean all the news was great; it does mean that the biggest potential headwinds have thus far missed the marketplace, and may have already blown past us. Take tariffs, for instance. On April 9th, as indexes were falling off a cliff for a week of trading, President Trump pushed pause on his reciprocal tariff initiatives — +20% for the EU, +25 for auto imports, +49% on Vietnam, etc. — for 90 days. Yesterday, just a couple weeks from the end of that 90 days, a White House spokeswoman said those tariff deadlines were 'not critical.' Market participants rejoiced, taking this news to mean those reciprocals have been removed completely. It hasn't led to any firm trade deals with any of the U.S.'s trading partners, and now with the reciprocal tariff threat removed, they may not come at all. The U.S. has put a +10% tariff on imported goods, which so far looks to be absorbed reasonably well in the economy. There is also a framework of a new trade deal with the UK, but based on the circumstances that followed, we may expect no hard news coming on this front, either. The other threat this week came from tensions in the Middle East between Israel and Iran, into which the U.S. engaged last weekend, bombing nuclear development sites within Iran. Uncertainty gripped the markets to start the week, but as each day passes without a major international incident traced to this series of events, investors have grown comfortable in its bullishness. Pre-market futures are up this morning again. The Dow has amassed +160 points, the S&P 500 +20 and the Nasdaq +85 points. Bond yields are down nearly 20 basis points (bps) from this time a week ago: the 10-year today stands at +4.26%, the 2-year +3.73% and the 30-year — which gained prominence after tipping +5% a couple weeks ago — stoutly holds at +4.82%. This morning, the latest Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) report has been released. For the month of May, the headline PCE Index month over month was in-line with expectations at +0.1%. This matches the previous month's unrevised headline, as well. Year over year PCE was also as expected: +2.3%. The prior month was revised up 10 bps to +2.2%. Stripping out volatile food and energy prices, the core PCE level month over month reached +0.2% — higher than the +0.1% expected and the highest level since February. Core PCE year over year reached +2.7%, following +2.6% in April — both of which are +10 bps higher than anticipated. However, on Personal Income for May we swing to a negative -0.4% from an expected +0.3%, the first negative print since September of 2021, when the Covid pandemic was finally winding down. It also amounts to a big drop from the downwardly revised +0.7% the previous month. Personal Spending swung to -0.1% from an estimated +0.1%, while Real Spending sank to -0.3% from 0.0% projected. Here's how this data might be chalked up to tariff distortions: those earlier higher-than-normal levels in February, March and April were pretty clearly a pull-forward of tariff realities to come. Today's big drop in spending likely has less to do with a weakening consumer than it does an unwinding of those earlier pre-tariff stockpiles. Now, with tariff levels beginning to disappear, we may expect a smoothing-out of this data over time. Finally, Consumer Sentiment from the University of Michigan survey came in as expected for June at 60.5. This follows something of a trough the prior three months, which struck three-year lows in April and May at 52.2. Both the assessment of current conditions and future expectations jumped from somewhat depressed prior levels. For now, attention pivots back to Capitol Hill, where Republican senators continue to toil over forging a Big Beautiful tax-cut and anti-immigration Bill to present to President Trump by the 4th of July — one week from today. It seems from this vista to be an uphill slog; for one reason, the changes made in the Senate means the revised bill may not re-pass the House. But if they somehow do get this bill over the finish line, it will bring profound changes to the market. Perhaps this helps explain why markets are trading at all-time highs, as well? Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research ( Zacks Investment Research
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Bank of America says tariffs might spark a ‘reshoring' boom—but experts say it might be a double-edged sword for the economy
Evidence of a U.S. manufacturing slowdown is mounting, according to the Bank of America Institute. Tariffs could help reduce that slowdown and bring more advanced production back stateside, but improving productivity might happen without increasing employment. President Donald Trump has been adamant his tariffs will bring factory jobs back to American shores. Higher import taxes will likely push manufacturers to move operations back to the U.S., according to Bank of America economists, but so-called reshoring might incentivize firms to put more robots than humans on the assembly line. A lack of skilled labor and high costs remain big impediments as companies come home, BofA warns. Automation might be the key to unlocking reshoring, potentially boosting the sluggish productivity of American manufacturers without meaningfully increasing employment. Evidence of a slowdown in the sector is mounting, according to a recent report from the Bank of America Institute. New orders for manufactured durable goods fell in April, while the famous manufacturing Purchasing Managers' Index has signaled a contraction since March. Focusing on small businesses, BofA's internal client data shows deposit growth from manufacturers has also declined. 'It's possible, right, that these [tariffs] could support momentum going forward and potentially reverse some of that slowdown, especially for certain subsectors within the industry,' the report's author, BofA economist Taylor Bowley, told Fortune. 'But tariff costs and labor issues do exist.' Reshoring has been all the rage in corporate America after Trump's first trade war with China—and the COVID-19 pandemic—highlighted risks to global supply chains. The Biden-era CHIPS and Inflation Reduction Acts, meanwhile, heavily subsidized companies willing to make semiconductors and clean energy technology in the U.S. While U.S. manufacturing accounts for just 8% of total employment, reshoring has created 2 million jobs in the past 15 years, according to a May note from BofA economists. Half of those new positions have been created in the past five years, they noted, though the trend has slowed since peaking in 2022. In a survey of 56 analysts across the bank, covering roughly 1,200 firms worth over $38 trillion in market cap, roughly 60% said production will continue to move back to the U.S.—at least modestly—if tariffs remain high. Those following industrials and manufacturing expect the greatest shift to the U.S. There are still obstacles to coming back stateside, though. In the BofA survey, 54% of the analysts said issues finding skilled workers would be a significant impediment for companies. Higher labor costs are one of the primary reasons manufacturers shifted away from the U.S. in the first place, Bowley said. While a 2024 survey from the Cato Institute found 80% of Americans think the country would benefit from increasing manufacturing employment, just a quarter believe they would be better off individually working in a factory. If firms struggle to fill positions, Bowley said, they are forced to figure out how to improve productivity without hiring people. 'And that's where this conversation around automation and productivity comes in,' she said. Two-thirds of respondents to the BofA survey said any production shift to the U.S. would require significantly more automation than an offshore factory. That makes more advanced industries the best candidates for moving back to the U.S., BofA economists said, like auto assembly and high-end furniture. 'Millions and millions of human beings screwing in little, little screws to make iPhones,' as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick suggested? Not so much. Meanwhile, Lutnick's ability to continue making trade deals might matter most to small businesses. They account for 98% of American manufacturing, according to the U.S. Small Business Administration, and many rely on cheap imports. 'A lot of them depend on a specific part—for example, to complete their manufacturing process—that simply isn't made domestically,' Bowley said. Therefore, for smaller manufacturers, tariff uncertainty makes planning capital expenditures especially difficult, even if their products become more competitive domestically. With profit margins and productivity lagging other industries in the U.S., passing price hikes on to consumers is the obvious response. However, if firms need to absorb some of the cost to keep customers, Bowley said, reducing inventories, operations, or headcount are other potential options. 'Reshoring in that aspect for smaller firms is kind of a double-edged sword,' she said. Nonetheless, sales are expected to grow in the coming months, Bowley said. But businesses might start feeling the squeeze, she added, when inventories start running low in the second half of the year. This story was originally featured on Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
