Concerns are mounting among US legislators that surging Chinese e-commerce imports are feeding the fentanyl epidemic, as well as costing the country tax revenue.
The emergence of online retail giants Shein and Temu has led to significant online debate over whether the country needs to remove its de minimis policy, which exempts imported goods valued below $800 from duty, to regain lost revenue.
But US Airforwarders Association executive director Brandon Fried said legislators were now concerned less about finances and more about public health.
“There is an emergent camp of legislators and policymakers growing increasingly concerned about links between the fentanyl crisis and the de minimis exemption,” he said.
“Specifically, they are asking how US border security is determining if shipments contain the precursors to these harmful drugs.”
Challenging the de minimis removal from a financial perspective, warning it would amount to a “recessive tax on American consumers” with overseas shippers simply adding costs to end prices, Mr Fried believes work is required to address an inflow of harmful products.
By some counts, de minimis results in three million packages passing through US Customs every day without being checked, up from 2m a day a year ago.
Despite talks between Chinese and US officials this year, Mr Fried said, it was still possible to purchase fentanyl precursors – dual-use chemicals that can be used to produce the drug responsible for 100,000 American deaths a year – online.
“We are asking those on Capitol Hill, and we have members advising lawmakers, on how to address this issue,” he said.
But Mr Fried reiterated his belief that simply removing de minimis exemptions for Chinese importers could prove counter-productive, with the US consumer footing a massive bill, “even if you do have the US president sayng ‘look how much I am collecting from China’”.
And his position is certainly not uncommon; studies from several American universities have suggested removing de minimis could result in a $14bn economic loss.
And one study noted it would be low-income consumers that would be disproportionately hit as they make some 74% of the purchases that benefit from the de minimis rule.
