Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
This bill eliminates the de minimis import exemption under section 321 of the Tariff Act of 1930, removing low-value informal entry treatment for most shipments. It takes effect immediately for goods originating in China (with a brief 3-day transit exception) and 120 days after enactment for other countries.
Progressives emphasize fairness, enforcement, and revenue use; conservatives emphasize cost and regulatory burden.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-targeted substantive statutory change: it identifies precise amendments to the Tariff Act, sets phased effective dates, and directs the Treasury to carry out specific rulemaking tasks and postal coordination.
This bill eliminates the de minimis import exemption under section 321 of the Tariff Act of 1930, removing low-value informal entry treatment for most shipments.
It takes effect immediately for goods originating in China (with a brief 3-day transit exception) and 120 days after enactment for other countries.
The Treasury must complete rulemaking within 120 days to implement entry procedures, require HTS heading identification (up to 10-digit level) for informal entries, and strengthen penalties.
Technically focused and fiscally modest, but affects many constituencies and requires complex implementation, raising lobbying and procedural hurdles.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-targeted substantive statutory change: it identifies precise amendments to the Tariff Act, sets phased effective dates, and directs the Treasury to carry out specific rulemaking tasks and postal coordination. Those features create a clear legal pathway for the proposed policy shift.
Progressives emphasize fairness, enforcement, and revenue use; conservatives emphasize cost and regulatory burden.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize fairness, enforcement, and revenue use; conservatives emphasize cost and regulatory burden.
Likely supportive overall because the bill closes a loophole that lets goods avoid duties, strengthens enforcement, and targets China immediately.
Concerns would focus on regressive impacts for low-income consumers and small sellers, and the need to ensure revenue supports public priorities.
Generally favorable to closing an enforcement gap and improving revenue collection, but cautious about implementation details and economic tradeoffs.
Support depends on clear phase-in, administrative capacity, and mitigation for small sellers and consumers.
Likely opposed due to expanded government control, higher costs for consumers and small businesses, and increased regulatory burdens on postal services and carriers.
Some conservatives may welcome stronger action against China but still balk at domestic impact.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically focused and fiscally modest, but affects many constituencies and requires complex implementation, raising lobbying and procedural hurdles.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize fairness, enforcement, and revenue use; conservatives emphasize cost and regulatory burden.
Technically focused and fiscally modest, but affects many constituencies and requires complex implementation, raising lobbying and procedur…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-targeted substantive statutory change: it identifies precise amendments to the Tariff Act, sets phased effective dates, and directs the Treasury to carry ou…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.