FIATA fired a formal shot across IATA’s bow on 28 May 2026. The Geneva-based federation, representing 50,000 freight forwarding and logistics firms across 150 territories, invoked the IATA-FIATA Consultative Council (IFCC) review mechanism under Resolution 801c, Article 4.2. The target: IATA’s proposed changes to the Direct Air Waybill (DAWB) framework, adopted at the Cargo Agency Conference (CAC) and set to take effect 1 July 2026.
The freight forwarding community had roughly six months from first sight of the proposals to full implementation. FIATA says that is nowhere near enough. The association conducted extensive global consultations with forwarders, airlines, insurers, legal experts, and shipper representatives. Their conclusion was consistent: the changes create legal uncertainty, expand liability beyond operational control, and arrive at the worst possible time for a market already under significant geopolitical and commercial pressure.
What the DAWB Changes Actually Mean for Forwarders
The core issue is liability allocation. Under the proposed framework, freight forwarders could become liable for shipments even when acting purely as a shipper’s agent and not named as shipper on the air waybill. Australia’s Freight and Trade Alliance flagged a specific risk: Dangerous Goods liability could transfer to forwarders even when documentation, cargo declarations, and packaging information sit entirely with other supply chain parties.
FIATA put it plainly in its review request:
“Several stakeholders noted that the current proposals may significantly expand liability exposure towards freight forwarders even where they act solely as agents of the shipper and do not control the underlying cargo information or compliance processes.”
Insurers added weight to this concern, warning that liability disconnected from operational control creates real uncertainty around insurability and claims handling.
IATA’s Rationale and Why Forwarders Reject It
IATA’s director of legal services, Carlos Tornero, stated the airlines’ position directly:
“Airlines have essentially entered into a contract with an entity they do not know and have not performed due diligence, anti-money laundering or sanctions and embargo compliance checks. Importantly, they have not negotiated a rate prior to having a shipment land on their warehouse floor.”
IATA argues that DAWBs are largely used for high-risk shipments where forwarders act as agents of shippers, not agents of airlines, and that airlines carry compliance risk they cannot see or manage.
FIATA does not dispute the compliance problem. What it disputes is the solution. The federation and its members argue that responsibility must stay with the party exercising actual operational control. Shifting liability to forwarders who neither control cargo information nor perform the relevant compliance functions does not fix the problem. It just moves the risk to a party with less ability to manage it, while established recourse mechanisms and increasing disputes across the entire air cargo chain.
A Decade of Governance Disputes Behind This Fight
This row did not appear from nowhere. The Cargo Agency Modernisation Programme (CAMP), launched around 2012 to replace the traditional airline-agent relationship with a principal-to-principal model, collapsed and was quietly abandoned by 2021. Arguments over governance of IATA’s Cargo Accounts Settlement System (CASS) were central to that failure. In 2015, FIATA objected to mandatory CASS participation, citing lack of meaningful influence over governance. In 2024, forwarders revolted against new IATA financial security requirements for CASS associates, calling them punitive and damaging for smaller operators. TIACA publicly questioned whether CASS still operates as a neutral platform.
The DAWB dispute is the latest chapter in the same story. Over 20 years, freight forwarders have grown from airline intermediaries into major global logistics operators. Governance structures have not kept pace. FIATA represents 104 Association Members and more than 4,700 Individual Members worldwide. Those members are not prepared to accept liability frameworks written without their meaningful input, particularly when the timeline ran from January communication to March adoption to July implementation with limited broader consultation at each stage.
Cargo Solutions Network Perspective
For independent freight forwarders, this dispute is not abstract. If IATA’s DAWB changes proceed as adopted, SME forwarders face expanded liability on shipments where they have limited or no control over compliance processes. That means greater exposure, higher insurance complexity, and more legal uncertainty, all without corresponding operational authority. Larger forwarders have legal teams and to manage this. Smaller operators do not.
At Cargo Solutions Network, we build tools for the freight professionals who move real cargo every day. The liability and governance battles at the top of the industry have direct consequences for how independent forwarders quote, book, and manage risk on every shipment. Clarity in liability frameworks is not a bureaucratic nicety. It is the foundation of every rate you quote and every booking you make.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a Direct Air Waybill (DAWB)?
A Direct Air Waybill is an air waybill issued directly between a shipper and an airline, with a freight forwarder acting as the shipper’s agent rather than as a principal. The DAWB framework governs how liability and compliance responsibilities are allocated between these parties.
Why is FIATA objecting to the IATA DAWB changes?
FIATA argues the proposed changes expand freight forwarder liability beyond their actual operational control. Forwarders could be held liable for Dangerous Goods and compliance failures on shipments where documentation and cargo information are managed entirely by other parties. FIATA also objects to the accelerated timeline, from January communication to July implementation, which it says did not allow sufficient legal, insurance, or operational review.
What is the IFCC review mechanism?
The IATA-FIATA Consultative Council (IFCC) is a formal body providing a structured channel for dispute resolution and consultation between IATA and the freight forwarding community. FIATA invoked the IFCC review mechanism under Resolution 801c, Article 4.2, to formally request a structured review of the DAWB changes before the 1 July 2026 implementation date.
What does IATA say about the changes?
IATA argues that under DAWB arrangements, airlines unknowingly contract with parties on whom they have not conducted due diligence, anti-money laundering, or sanctions and embargo compliance checks. IATA says the changes are necessary to address genuine compliance risk exposure for airlines when shipments arrive without prior rate negotiation or shipper verification.
What happens if the changes take effect on 1 July 2026?
If implemented as adopted, freight forwarders could face significantly expanded liability on DAWB shipments, including potential Dangerous Goods liability where they do not hold operational control. Insurers have flagged uncertainty over insurability of these expanded risks. Existing recourse and claims handling mechanisms could be disrupted, increasing legal disputes across the air cargo supply chain.
Cargo Solutions Network is built by freight professionals, for freight professionals. While industry bodies debate liability frameworks, independent forwarders need tools that work now. CSN gives you a completely free booking portal to quote, book, and manage air cargo shipments globally, with zero subscription fees and no territory limits. Ship smarter. Keep your margin.
