Policy Brief · September 2023

De Minimis Threshold

$800 per person per day — the U.S. de minimis threshold, the highest among America's top trading partners

Policy Brief: De Minimis Threshold | WCIT

1What Is a De Minimis Threshold?

In an international trade context, a "de minimis" refers to shipments of imports falling below a minimum value that are eligible for duty-free entry, subject to certain conditions. Per Section 321, 19 USC 1321, the de minimis threshold for imports into the United States is $800 per person per day. The United States currently has the highest de minimis threshold among its primary trading partners and one of the highest thresholds in the world.

U.S. De Minimis Threshold Compared to Top 5 Trade Partners
Figure 1: U.S. De Minimis Threshold Compared to Top 5 Trade Partners. Source: Global Express Organization; U.S. Census Bureau.
Top 5 De Minimis Shipment Origins (2021)
Figure 2: Top 5 De Minimis Shipment Origins (2021). Source: U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

2Impact on Consumers & Small Businesses

In 2015, the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act increased the de minimis threshold from $200 to $800. According to George Mason University's Mercatus Center, the higher threshold has lowered costs for consumers and small businesses, as more and higher-value shipments are now exempt not only from duties and taxes but also from Customs brokerage fees, handling charges, and time delays typically incurred during Customs processing.[1]

$200→$800 Threshold raised in 2015
Volume growth FY 2016–2021
$750M+ Annual shipments in FY 2021

Since the de minimis threshold was increased, the annual volume of e-commerce shipments valued at $800 or less tripled — from roughly $250 million in FY 2016 to over $750 million in FY 2021.[2]

3Why Is the Threshold Under Scrutiny?

The primary criticisms of a higher de minimis threshold are twofold: (1) it creates a tax advantage for some entities, and (2) it potentially creates a vulnerability that bad actors can exploit to smuggle illicit goods into the United States.

The Counterargument

De minimis is not a tax relief — rather, it is a statute that allows for low-value items to legitimately and transparently enter the United States tax-free.[3] Although de minimis shipments are exempt from taxes and duties, they are not exempt from Customs screening and are inspected at the same rates as higher-value shipments using an expedited entry process.[4]

4Congressional Response

As of September 2023, two bills in Congress seek to change de minimis rules.

  • The De Minimis Reciprocity Act of 2023 (S.1969), sponsored by Sen. Cassidy [R-LA] and cosponsored by Sen. Baldwin [D-WI] and Sen. Vance [R-OH], would: forbid all Chinese imports from entering the U.S. via de minimis procedures; lower the threshold to match each trading partner's own de minimis level for shipments originating from the U.S.; and require CBP to collect more information on de minimis packages.
  • The Import Security and Fairness Act (S.2004 / H.R.4148), sponsored by Sen. Brown [D-OH] with bipartisan support in both chambers, would: prohibit imports via de minimis procedures from countries that are both non-market economies and on USTR's Priority Watch List; and require CBP to collect more information on de minimis packages.

5Impact on Washington State Businesses

If passed, these bills could significantly impact Washington state businesses and the broader U.S. trade economy in three key areas:

  • Greater stress on limited CBP resources: An additional 22,000 Customs officers would be needed to subject de minimis packages to standard screening procedures.[5]
  • Higher costs for consumers: The absence of de minimis trade could result in significant cost increases. For example, with no de minimis threshold, a $50 package could nearly double in cost due to the brokerage and merchandise processing fees required by typical Customs procedures.[6]
  • Less opportunity for small businesses: Participating in the e-commerce economy via de minimis is an essential growth channel for many small businesses. Lowering de minimis would disproportionately impact small businesses, which import in smaller batches and have less administrative capacity than large businesses.[7]

6WCIT Recommendations

The Washington Council on International Trade recommends that Congress does not pass legislation that would lower de minimis or otherwise increase costs for consumers and businesses. Concerns over compliance or illegal activities are better addressed through other, targeted measures.

Congress should direct CBP to increase its efforts at transparency and data collection to address misinformation about the uses of de minimis. Congress should also clarify that de minimis shipments, while exempt from duties, are subject to the same trade policies as shipments above the threshold.

Lowering de minimis would strain Customs resources, raise costs for everyday consumers, and disproportionately harm the small businesses that rely on e-commerce trade to compete and grow in the Pacific Northwest and across the United States.

References

  1. McDaniel, Christine. "A Trivial Legal Issue with Nontrivial Economic Consequences." George Mason University Mercatus Center, February 15, 2018, para. 9–12. https://mercatus.org/research/policy-briefs/trivial-legal-issue-nontrivial-economic-consequences
  2. U.S. Customs & Border Protection. CBP Trade & Travel Report, Fiscal Year 2021. April 2022, pg. 18. https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/...
  3. Lee, Mara. "CBP Trade Policy Director: de Minimis is No Loophole." International Trade Today, April 24, 2023, para. 1. https://internationaltradetoday.com/...
  4. U.S. Customs and Border Protection. "De Minimis Webinar Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)." July 18, 2023, questions 11 & 16. https://www.cbp.gov/trade/basic-import-export/e-commerce/de-minimis-webinar-faqs
  5. National Foreign Trade Council. "De Minimis: A Vital Tax Exemption." para. 5. https://www.nftc.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Facts-The-De-Minimis-Tax-Exemption.pdf
  6. McDaniel, Christine. "Solving The Big Problems that Come in Small Parcels." Forbes, July 5, 2023, para. 8. https://www.forbes.com/...
  7. McDaniel, Christine. "A Trivial Legal Issue with Nontrivial Economic Consequences." George Mason University Mercatus Center, February 15, 2018, para. 6–13; 24–26. https://mercatus.org/research/policy-briefs/trivial-legal-issue-nontrivial-economic-consequences