Suspension of the de minimis administrative exemption for imports $800 or less

108 points by burnt-resistor 3 hours ago on hackernews | 46 comments

dawnerd | 2 hours ago

mcmcmc | 2 hours ago

It truly boggles the mind how Trump managed to sell tariffs as anything other than a tax on American consumers

porkshoe | an hour ago

He gets away with it because a lot of right-wing elites _love_ the idea of taxing consumption rather than income (or, heaven forbid, wealth).

Additionally, Trump, Hassett, etc are still blaming Biden for inflation caused by the tariffs... and a lot of their base would rather believe that than admit that they got suckered by an obvious scam.

technothrasher | an hour ago

> Trump, Hassett, etc are still blaming Biden for inflation caused by the tariffs

I'm starting to see this backfire with a lot of "personal responsibility" type old-school republicans to whom I talk. They're getting fed up with the administration just blanket blaming anything bad on Biden. Whether that will translate to actual political change, I do not know. But I found it interesting that I'm hearing the frustration more lately.

jeremyjh | an hour ago

Narrator: It did NOT translate to actual political change.

TheOtherHobbes | 31 minutes ago

It doesn't need to translate to actual political change. It needs to translate to them staying at home instead of enthusiastically voting for more sadistic traitorous insanity.

Which is looking quite likely.

Although it does assume there are no peculiar and unexpected anomalies with the vote counting.

LastTrain | 47 minutes ago

It will not because there are still immigrants and trans people to hate.
He doesn't actually "get away" with it. A lot of people, left and right, are unhappy about tariffs. But for now, he controls the executive, so it is what it is.

LastTrain | 48 minutes ago

This is entirely in the “rights” control right now, any of them “unhappy” with it are outliers.

fragmede | 35 minutes ago

We'll have to wait and see how many of those outliers end up voting, and how.

Forgeties79 | 32 minutes ago

His core base (a solid 25-50% of the party) would rather die than vote for a democrat and all this DSA scare mongering is only entrenching them further/pulling the more moderate among them back into the fold.

The blue wave will likely be a result of blue turnout and some small number of red sitting at home. And sadly the senate is still a toss up

The problem is it was never an executive power to begin with. The unitary executive theory pushed by the Heritage Foundation is counter to everything the US was founded on. Decisions from the current SCOTUS are questionable given the conflicts of interest with certain spouses and the endless improper gifts.

pstuart | 50 minutes ago

A lot of his base believe his lie that the other countries are paying the tariffs.

His followers are literally beyond reason and will accept anything he says. It's so very depressing.

Populists of all stripes love tariffs and the illusory promise of autarky. We didn’t see Biden remove any of Trump 1’s tariffs and not a single Democrat in congress has committed to repealing the tariffs.

jacobolus | 18 minutes ago

> managed to sell tariffs

He didn't manage to sell them. Everyone hates the tariffs, which are widely understood to have contributed to high prices and economic stagnation.

bayarearefugee | 2 hours ago

goes into effect 12 days before a midterm election that is already starting to look like a blue tsunami.

It's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it pays off for 'em.

biglyburrito | an hour ago

Never interrupt your enemy when they are busy making a mistake.
Never assume your enemy is making a mistake either, unless you possess the gift of perfect knowledge.
Assuming there is no chicanery

adastra22 | 23 minutes ago

midterms are in November?

jacobolus | 20 minutes ago

"The compliance date for 19 CFR 145.12(a)(2)(v) and (vi) is on October 22, 2026"

downrightmike | 2 hours ago

What does this actually mean?

actionfromafar | 2 hours ago

The people in charge betting they only need to count the "red" ballots this time?

motionlessveloc | an hour ago

Means you can no longer legally buy far cheaper prescription medicines from Canada, Mexico, India, China etc and ship them to the US.

Their own primer on the topic: https://www.personalimportation.org/understand-the-issue

dawnerd | an hour ago

That’s not what it says. It’s still legal. You just have to pay duties. It’s also not just on medication. They shared these rules a while ago too.

matthewdgreen | 54 minutes ago

Canadian pharmacies already pay tariffs. What does this actually change?

reddozen | 48 minutes ago

Your comment is nonsense.

Canadian pharmacies pay Canadian tariffs. Americans pay American tariffs. American importers are no longer exempted from paying American tariffs applied by the US government for goods de minimis goods they import from Canada.

This post is about American importers no longer having exemption on tariffs they would have otherwise paid to the US government.

At no point has Canadian pharmacies ever paid American tariffs. This is fiction you invented.

matthewdgreen | 42 minutes ago

I don’t know what you’re saying, but for those confused. Starting in 2025, the de minimis exception was removed. This added delays to purchases of drugs from Canada to the US, and required consumers to pay new duties. These duties were collected by the pharmacies at order time, or at least my experience was that the pharmacies would charge your card for them. This is the common sense understanding of what I said above.

These duties were annoying but bearable. However these new changes will effectively shut down all consumer orders of drugs from Canada starting on Oct 22. So if you need these drugs to stay alive, order them right now.

PS This new rule is going to put my family’s health at risk and I’m deeply pissed about it. Having some HNer pick this moment for pedantry is incredibly on brand.

BHSPitMonkey | 40 minutes ago

Well... the legal route is no longer "far cheaper" than domestic supply.

trashface | an hour ago

Various pharmacies in Canada will accept a US prescription and send you the medication via mail, usually at far cheaper than what you would pay for the same in the US.

This prevents it.

CubsFan1060 | 35 minutes ago

Interesting. Got some examples of the pharmacies?

k12sosse | 13 minutes ago

Okay Kash, you almost got him this time.

techmunky | an hour ago

Is this even in CBP's wheelhouse or is this another egregious overreach?

adbachman | an hour ago

this is their thing, yeah.

the C in CBP, "Customs", is specifically this kind of stuff.

cjkaminski | an hour ago

If only it were so simple. Many of CBP's policies are clearly defined by U.S. Congress (most recent example, which actually establishes CBP: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/644/...). That said, Congress appears to have ceded their oversight role by allowing these rules to change without comment.

WarOnPrivacy | 47 minutes ago

> Congress appears to have ceded their oversight role

If there is one most-bipartisan-thing-ever, ceding oversight is it. ex:FastTrack Trade

happyopossum | an hour ago

There's nothing in the CBP rule that prohibits importing prescriptions, although there will no longer be a duty exemption for them. The rule is about suspending the 'de minimis' exemption for shipments valued under $800...
Wasn't that already suspended in, like, 2025?
I believe it had a phased rollout, which impacts all parcels soon.

Someone1234 | an hour ago

I flagged this and wanted to explain my reasoning.

At the time of writing, the article states something that its own link doesn't support (i.e. it is inaccurate). CBP hasn't "suspended all personal prescription importation." What they've done is removed De Minimis Exemption (i.e. duty free below $800), and that's it. Meaning you can still important personal medication before and after Oct 22nd, what has changed is that now it is subject to normal duty.

Do I think this is bad for people importing personal medication? Absolutely I do, and I oppose it. However, I don't think misstating the argument is constructive nor warranted. You could make the argument using the facts on the ground, and then re-state that in the thread title.

So the story is worthy of discussion, and interesting (even the personal medication POV). But this link and this title aren't "it." Hopefully we can get a higher quality source and title on this topic.

TheOtherHobbes | 16 minutes ago

It's not as simple as "You will now pay duty." Senders will be required to pay bond, and there will be a crushing load of new paperwork. Combined with extra duty, that will have the same effect as an outright ban.

This will be financially catastrophic for many Americans who may suddenly have to find hundreds of dollars a month.

JohnMakin | 51 minutes ago

weird title change.

MadrasTh0rn | 48 minutes ago

Trump is trying to trade the petro dollar and opec for Venezuelan oil that will tank the dollar and make debt unpayable (every advisor has said this), how he's trying to make medicine unaffordable before alternatives are ready. Sheesh.

Every use case for tarrifs include got subsidy and small trade barriers so it can grow with market share.

Blackthorn | 29 minutes ago

Hasn't it effectively been suspended for over a year now?
Yes, and it has driven the decline of Temu and Shein
This is actually tragic.

I worked for an online pharmacy in Canada for many years, and it’s fraught and full of grey areas for sure. But so so many Americans count on importing generics to afford their medication. You’re talking several times the price difference for the same pills, life changing amounts of money for older people on fixed incomes with health problems. They will simply not be able to access their medication anymore.