Trump's Tariffs Require Customs Agents To Check All Mail from China
Eliminating tariff exemptions will increase import delivery times and make direct-to-consumer goods more expensive.

President Donald Trump announced his promised tariffs on Saturday and paused those levied against Mexico and Canada on Monday for 30 days. In addition to threatening to impose double-digit duties on all products imported from Canada, Mexico, and China (whose tariffs took effect on Tuesday), each of the president's executive orders eliminates duty-free exemptions for low-dollar-value imports, known as de minimis exemptions. Eliminating these exemptions would increase the price of goods from international bargain brands enjoyed by cash-strapped consumers.
De minimis is Latin for "concerning trifles," per Merriam-Webster. The aptly named exemption applies to shipments "imported by one person on one day having an aggregate fair retail value in the country of shipment of not more than $800," according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The Congressional Research Service (CRS) reports that the U.S. imported $54.5 billion worth of de minimis products in 2023, 34 percent ($18.4 billion) of which came from China.
Chinese e-commerce firms Temu and Shein had grown to make up 17 percent of the entire American discount market by 2023, according to the CRS. These discount brands contract with Chinese firms to make and ship goods directly to consumers, avoiding expensive tariffs via de minimis, explains Bloomberg. This business model caters to lower-income Americans who are willing to wait weeks instead of days to save more of their hard-earned dollars. Eliminating the de minimis exemption means that the cheap consumer goods sold by these brands will be subjected to the additional 10 percent duty on Chinese products, some fraction of which will inevitably be passed on to American consumers.
The rule announced by CBP to carry out Trump's executive order imposing duties on China goes even further, requiring formal inspection for all mail shipments from China "without regard to their value." Christine McDaniel, senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center, tells Reason that this will require CBP to subject roughly 917 million more parcels to formal entry, a process so complex that CBP recommends importers outsource it to third-party brokers (whose services cost around $100). McDaniel says processing so many more parcels "could be prohibitively costly in terms of resources for CBP."
Compliance is so complicated that the United States Postal Service (USPS) temporarily suspended international package acceptance of inbound parcels from China and Hong Kong, it announced in a Tuesday service alert. Less than 24 hours later, the USPS resumed service saying that it and "Customs and Border Protection are working closely together to implement an efficient collection mechanism for the new China tariffs to ensure the least disruption to package delivery." The "least disruption" is no disruption at all; delayed deliveries and the expense of customs brokers are additional costs that will be passed on to consumers without the de minimis exemption.
The elimination of de minimis exemptions would have applied to Canada and Mexico before Trump wisely paused tariffs on these countries for 30 days. Trump described the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA) as "the fairest, most balanced, and beneficial trade agreement we have ever signed into law" and "the best agreement we've ever made" in 2020. The USMCA commits its signatories to "individualized de minimis exemption thresholds, including 800 USD for goods entering the United States, 117 USD for goods entering Mexico, and 150 Canadian Dollars (CAD) for goods entering Canada," per the CRS.
By threatening to eliminate de minimis exemptions for Canada and Mexico, Trump entertains violating "the best agreement [he's] ever made." If repealed, poorer American consumers would bear an even higher cost than in the Chinese case because, curiously, the tariffs Trump levied against our two neighbors and closest trading partners are 15 percentage points higher (25 percent) than those imposed on China (10 percent).
As with Trump's other protectionist policies, the White House frames the elimination of de minimis as a national security imperative and necessary to reduce overdoses from opioids and fentanyl. The U.S. has been losing the war on drugs by criminalizing supply for decades. Repealing tariff exemptions isn't going to change this stubborn reality, it will only compound American suffering.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
China has been using an exemption in customs law to avoid all import inspections and taxes for deliveries below 800. They break up large shipments to smaller deliveries to avoid customs regulations.
Stop defending their open violations of US law.
Why don’t you trust a communist dictatorship?
Section 230 allows the CCP to do all the good Samaritan moderation it wants.
Thank goodness!
To make cheap stuff? Absolutely.
Haven’t the reason writers learned that being mean to Trump will bring the ire of the ‘libertarian’ commenters, because everything he does is just and right?
How’re you doing Sarc?
Sarc's bum is so sore from orange man bad he's has to use a hemorrhoid donut just to take a poo.
Sad.
Could we get some decent trolls up in here?
Trump cut their funding. It's only going to get worse from here.
Law says that packages less than $800 sent to individuals are exempt from the tariff. China was in compliance.
Thank goodness the Chinese dictatorship has you to defend them.
Communist China American citizens share interests against their common enemy, the US government. If you don't come down on the same side as the CCP on some issues, that tells you everything you need to know about your principles.
Molly may be a lefty, but on this issue she's apparently to the right and on the side freedom relative to you.
So . . . we haven't been checking packages coming in from China?
True MG...but now the de minimis exemption is gone.
The whole world has been using that exemption, and it's what the law says. It's not illegal to obey laws.
Let me know how you feel about the $10,000 bank reporting limit and people who broke up transactions to skirt it. Whose side were you on, the people skirting the law or the government?
One is targeted at Americans, the other is targeted at not americans
So... when Americans comply with the law that's good but when foreigners comply with the law that's... bad?
So they haven’t been checking for explosives, drugs, etc?
I think the slowing down of Government initiatives to make the USA become a baby-dependent of China is the point.
Or is it common knowledge that a package from next door takes longer and costs more due to unicorns in the sky?
It's Walmart that is making us dependent on China, with the Waltons getting rich. Not people buying stuff direct from Temu at like 1/4 (or less) the cost Walmart sells it for.
Or maybe Walmart is just a benefactor of Globalist Governments (hut hum: U.N.) insisting a 0% Tax in their trade and 90% subsidized shipping rates.
When things don't make sense it's always because the 'Gun' tool is being used to ensure it doesn't make sense.
Haven't done this in a while.
Over the prior 4 years, a *ctrl-f* on the main page of my hometown newspaper would often net 0... sometimes 1 or 2 hits for "Biden"-- and many of those shared headline with "Trump". During those self-same 4 years of the Biden admin, "Trump" searches would usually net around 4 to 7 hits. So I thought I'd hit the home page and check for "Trump" now that the man is for reals the president:
*ctrl-f Trump 1/21*
Here we go:
Holy shit, they have a new section: Trump administration:
HAAAA!
Ok, what's here:
Phew... there we go.
Why would an incoming administration care so much about the Yosemite reservations system that it needs to be shut down pending review?
Because it costs money to run and, in case you hadn't noticed, the country is broke.
I would say that's like going on a "diet" by taking the sprinkles off your cake, but sprinkles affect the caloric content of a cake maybe 100,000x as much as reservations to Yosemite affect the national debt.
Hi Molly I’m so glad communist China has you to defend them.
Is it not a Federal agency? Is this not part of the Executive Branch?
Is Trump not head of the Executive Branch?
Is Trump supposed to not do his job?
His job is to administer the government, not cripple it.
Why would the new president care about something under the executive branch?
I think a better question is why the fuck are you defending the Yosemite reservations system?
Because stupid.
I think this is the point. It's okay for Walmart and other retailers to sell cheap Chinese crap at a big markup. But try to buy it direct as a consumer for 1/4 (or less) the price? Too bad, you don't count.
When you chose to buy at Walmart YOU chose it to be okay.
I'm really not buying this Walmart won't eat the cost of my $1 transaction you're trying to paint.
The de minimis rule is written into federal regulations. It can not be changed without going through the proper procedures. This is another illegal act by Trump.
Maybe you better notify your [D] representatives and get them to change it since they were the one's that made Executive Order Tariffs a thing.
Funny. I don't remember you yelling and harping when Biden increased Tariffs by EO.
Implementing tariffs is different but related to the de minimis rule.
IC... So it's (D)ifferent with Trump?
Yes it is different, in that Trump is violating the APA.
Shut up you dirty commie faggot.
Your username is accurate. You knowledge of the APA is low.
“You knowledge of the APA is low.
The fuck does that even mean?
That is my point. You don't know and it is important to this article.
This coming from the same stupid lefty cunt that tried lying about "secure information" yesterday.
Eat Kurt Cobain's breakfast, you fucking vermin.
Yes it is different, in that Trump is violating the APA
As did Biden
https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/justices-say-biden-administration-may-have-evaded-federal-law-in-quietly-removing-trump-era-immigration-rule/
Not quite = APA. The law Congress passed grants POTUS Trump the discretion to adjust de minimus.
No it does not. It empowers the Secretary the discretion if they follow the proper procedures.
Ever wonder how you can order something from China for shipping costs not much more than what it costs to send a first class letter in the US.
There are international treaties that require reciprocal delivery in country for postal mail. So, if someone I send someone in the UK a letter I pay the US post office, but the royal mail delivers it for me. If they send it here they pay locally, but the US mail delivers it.
To game this system, China massively subsidizes the postal rates for international mail leaving China, so the businesses there will pay almost nothing, but due to treaty obligations the US post office has to take it from the port and deliver it. So they might send something to Podunk Iowa from China for $2, even though it costs the post office here $10 to get it from Los Angeles to Iowa and deliver it.
So they can ship from the other side of the world for less than what I have to pay to send something one state away. And ratepayers here get to make up the difference.
Not the precise issue above but, frankly, fuck China. They're not operating in good faith, they game the system every way they can, and if something slows down their massively subsidized shipping I really can't be bothered to care. They've long since used up any good will I might have harbored.
I'm confused about what you tax fans expected. There are only two taxes which don't have to pry into everybody's business -- head tax and property tax.
Get a receipt when you pay your $40,000 per adult head tax, and you won't have to pay it again until next year. No one needs to see an ID, just pony up the $40,000 in cash, get your receipt. About the only intrusiveness is proving you're underage.
Get a receipt for your property when you pay its 10% property tax. Self-assess its value, and if you sell it for more, your self-assessment was perjury; pay all the retroactive and pro-rated tax you skipped since you bought it, plus interest and penalties. No one needs to know who you are; if a property tax isn't paid, they know where the property is and can take it over.
Consumption and income taxes require massive intrusiveness to make sure you declare your yard sales, that time you traded a root canal for deck work, that no undeclared income shows up in your bank account, that your ATM withdrawals match your cash buys.
So go ahead and weep and moan. You wanted tariffs, you get tariffs, and the bureaucracy and police state that are included.
We're not complaining about the tariffs though - *you* are.
We went over this . . . yesterday? The day before? We understand the tariffs will raise prices. We know they will raise prices. We know they are bad economics.
They are, however, great tools of foreign policy. Which they're being deployed as. And they're working so far.
"They are, however, great tools of foreign policy."
"Great"? Like the Smoot-Hawley tariffs?
I hear there's some USAID glowies looking for work, maybe they can apply for the job.
>Eliminating tariff exemptions will increase import delivery times and make direct-to-consumer goods more expensive.
Yes. We know.
I really don't care, Margaret.
This will never not be a great retort.
Isn't that the retort about Domestic Taxes being silently flagged by the Tariff outrage?
Man orders drill online from AliExpress, gets photo of drill instead:
Totally cleared customs, though:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXLxnJIppLc&t=28s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1Aut4lK9KU
Thank goodness Donald Trump is protecting America from dollar store merchandise that is too cheap. Think of all the American jorbs that can be created making hair clips, coffee filters, and knockoff toys for that nephew you love but don't love that much.