I was buying a lot of custom, fully populated hobby PCBs and the price has skyrocketed so much that it’s too cost prohibitive to order from JLCPCB. You can order PCBs from Oshpark however the boards don’t come fully populated with all of your components so you would need to order from like Mouser and surface mount all of them yourself (for my application)
To put it in perspective, used to pay about $85-$90 for 10 completed boards —- shipped —- now it is $316ish for 10 boards shipped.
Renaud · 11h ago
It seems Circuit Hub is an alternative. Still more expensive than JLC, but not as high as other US alternatives.
My project uses gerbers and they do not accept them. Will see what I can do
bangaladore · 4h ago
I would be surprised if they didn't manually accept them, but it is a bit strange they don't mention it on their website.
I'd be very surprised if any of these companies they list are willing to give project files for manufacture. I assume they do this because smaller companies and hobbyist see it as more convienient, and to CircuitHub it means less mistakes / time dealing with the customer when they generate their own outputs.
ncr100 · 8h ago
Do you care to speculate the impact?
I speculate this is going to slow down the small hardware hobbyist small business space, by maybe 50%.
To expand, in too many words:
Personally I have a penchant for music synthesizers and many of them are from a one-person shop. I imagine these 3x price increases are going to slow people down. Determined and cost agnostic people will power through this. People who just have an idea and are actually motivated by the past inexpensive PCB prototyping universe, will a lot more about cost and prototyping and a lot less about the problem that they're solving. And I just can't imagine it being anything less than a 50% slowdown for those folks.
firesteelrain · 8h ago
It’s more ham radio related for a niche part of the hobby. Less people will be able to participate due to the higher than normal costs
ycui1986 · 13h ago
the US assembler cost would be $4000 minimum.
varispeed · 13h ago
Probably after weeks of back and forth and then probably needing rework anyway. Also anything over 4 layers would probably need a mortgage.
c22 · 11h ago
I can confirm that stateside fab is insanely expensive compared to China, but I've gotten same-day turnaround on multiple occasions. It's literally the value prop of going local.
CamperBob2 · 13h ago
Still an incredible bargain compared to any US-based production house.
That's always been my problem with buying American. I'd be willing to pay 2x as much to support manufacturers in my own country. Maybe 3x. But 10x-15x as much? EABOD, I'll stick with China. While infuriating, the Trump tariffs are nowhere near enough to alter the outcome of that calculation.
com2kid · 8h ago
On one project I worked on, we tried sourcing prototype boards from an American supplier and they put a bunch of knock-off parts on it.
Meanwhile our Chinese suppliers were honest with us.
The one benefit the American places are supposed to have, they managed to squander through either sheer greed or incompetence.
firesteelrain · 13h ago
I can’t even find somewhere in the US equivalent to JLCPCB for fully populated hobby PCBs!
Plus these are going on high altitude balloons aka throwaway so a lot of people have a hard time spending that
CamperBob2 · 13h ago
I've heard good things about MacroFab in Houston, but no personal experience with them.
hypeatei · 20h ago
I'm glad to see people in this thread saying that this will be an environmental win while we're ending subsidies for "Unreliable, Foreign-Controlled Energy Sources"[0] and "Reinvigorating America’s Beautiful Clean Coal Industry"[1]
There is no good here. I don't when it became popular or acceptable to restrict free trade and ignore reality.
>I'm glad to see people in this thread saying that this will be an environmental win while we're ending subsidies for "Unreliable, Foreign-Controlled Energy Sources"[0] and "Reinvigorating America’s Beautiful Clean Coal Industry"[1]
That statement is pointless. Anything in isolation can be "good", just like if someones house burned down you could say that having insurance was "good" but it ignores the bigger picture.
tempodox · 14h ago
“Beautiful Clean Coal Industry”? Seriously?
BenjiWiebe · 8h ago
I know, I thought it wasn't serious as well, until I went and checked.
Just remember it’s not just crap from Shein, Temu, Ali express that’s being hit. Your former “friends” and long-time trade partners are also being impacted by this blanket policy.
What do you mean by putting "friends" in scare quotes?
ricardo81 · 20h ago
Not GP but presumably implying that is not how you treat friends and/or a policy targetting China has collateral damage.
xethos · 20h ago
> a policy targetting China has collateral damage.
It is still a policy from someone threatening economic annexation of Canada. He's dropped the rhetoric, but I doubt he's given up on the concept. "Targeting China" is a very kind, possibly even forgetful, way of phrasing it.
Believe it or not, not everything is about Canada.
Trump hates China. His boss told him to.
xethos · 16h ago
No, but it hardly seems irrelevant when root comment links a Canadian Broadcast Corporation story about Canadian Mom'n'Pop stores
loloquwowndueo · 19h ago
Not everything is about Canada, no.
Mexico has also been disproportionately impacted by these protectionist policies. And that’s just the immediate neighbours with which the US has pursued trade agreements for decades.
loloquwowndueo · 20h ago
Justin Trudeau said it best:
the U.S. launched the trade war against Canada, “their closest partner and ally, their closest friend. At the same time, they’re talking about working positively with Russia, appeasing Vladimir Putin, a lying, murderous dictator. Make that make sense.”
pimlottc · 19h ago
Ah, I was thinking of friends on an individual basis, not in geopolitical terms.
nomoreofthat · 6h ago
Well, this has affected my friendships with Americans. Most of them I’m still friends with, but being politically ambivalent or worse, supporting the president, is no longer acceptable. I tried to be open minded and have friends from different political backgrounds, but at this point if you are not explicitly on our side, you are an enemy and I am no longer talking talking to you. You either oppose the American government or you are evil. There is no alternative remaining at this point, and I’m not friends with evil people.
Waterluvian · 20h ago
I can’t speak for all Canadians but all the ones I know do not see America as a friend or partner anymore. The entire tone has changed in a way I’ve never before experienced.
I think the thing some Americans mess themselves up with is thinking that the world perceives their domestic politics the same way they do. From our level of abstraction, America voted and Americans decided the country is going to be an anti-science, protectionist menace.
IAmBroom · 19h ago
I can't speak for all Americans, but you're not wrong.
Protect yourself. If and when we have enough good governance to be friends again, we'll need your friendship.
Waterluvian · 19h ago
Yeah, that’s probably the other palpable sentiment worth sharing: Canadians badly want to be best friends with Americans. It’s been a very regrettable cultural divorce.
mindslight · 19h ago
Seconded. But also, don't forget that the same exact shit can happen in Canada as well. Especially with a national threat actor now physically next door (little green men, etc).
solox3 · 19h ago
Which straw broke the camel's back. Was it insulting the prime minister as a governor, threatening to annex the territory, threatening to "redraw borders", or calling Canadians "nasty people"?
Waterluvian · 19h ago
I think if we could point to a specific pivotal moment, it was when tariffs were first announced and Trudeau came on TV and discussed the difficult times ahead, the relationship as we knew it being over, and the announcement of counter tariffs and other plans. Then the Premiers announced things like removing American alcohol from shelves (Jack Daniel’s said this week that Canadian sales fell 62%), and shutting down various historical courtesies. For me at least that’s the moment it went from confusion, anger, and frustration to coordinated effort to take a defensive stance against the new aggressor nation.
The petty child-like name calling from the American president was mostly just an evocation of “I’m embarrassed for you.”
mindslight · 18h ago
The comments still focusing on Shein/Temu/Ali are wild. De minimis for China ended back on May 2nd. From what I saw on Aliexpress, it wasn't even a speed bump - the prices just went up, with "customs charges included". I've been receiving orders just fine.
Trump's policies are big on tough talk while actually having the opposite effects of the marketing. High import taxes hurt the pre-imported selection available from domestic retailers, as sellers have to pay the tax ahead of the sale and navigate the uncertainty that the rates might change in the future. Whereas direct-from-China goods already have cash in hand to pay the tariffs, and the only uncertainty is in the few days between purchase and arrival at customs. I expect to be buying many more things direct from Aliexpress, as the tariffs set in, domestic inventory is exhausted, and domestic-seller prices creep upwards.
Furthermore, the high tariffs on China do encourage investments in factories. Specifically, Chinese investment in factories outside of China, for final assembly of products. Investing in the United States would not be prudent, with the environment of political instability. So these policies are effectively strengthening China's relationships with other countries.
Never mind that many of the companies still known for manufacturing quality goods do so in other western countries. If the goal was really to oppose China, then it should have been time to pull together with our allies - not to levy import taxes to keep them (price-) uncompetitive with Chinese products, while alienating them with hostile rhetoric. Ultimately, our adversaries couldn't have dreamed of more favorable policies.
627467 · 18h ago
It's funny to see so much ideological incoherence:
> we should consume local produce, is more sustainable and supports local communities
> what's your carbon footprint?! You fly around in jets 3 times a year?!
> let's buy 30c disposable crap from across the world while essentially subsidizing advanced industrialization of societies completely disconnected from our own
mindslight · 17h ago
At least it's possible to tease out some nuance between those topics. Unlike all the people still simping for the Manchurian candidate's immediately self-defeating policies - let's compete with China through stiff import taxes that directly hurt American businesses, let's be strong by alienating our allies, let's fix the market for manual labor by arresting individual illegal immigrants while giving passes to big businesses employing them at scale, let's fix inflation and government overreach by printing $5T of new money and spending it on unaccountable jackboots. It's perversely amazing how this whole movement continues to run on empty spectacles and identity politics. When it finally burns through its fervor, all of the existing problems are still going to be there, plus a whole host of new problems.
djoldman · 19h ago
In a world with no friction, one would want tariffs to apply to all goods. The de minimis exemption dealt with the fact that it was a PITA to do all the paperwork etc. that accompanies a tariff.
Obviously the main problem is that tariffs do not lead to positive future outcomes for the country levying them.
eviks · 4h ago
In a world without friction tariffs wouldn't exist since they represent friction
frogperson · 10h ago
is there anything the republicans cant make worse?
skybrian · 12h ago
Maybe it will help if the Supreme Court rules the right way on tariffs?
bananapub · 21h ago
fascinating how the reporting doesn't clarify that it's not just a bunch of busy work and a tax on Americans, but that the US didn't even bother making the system exist before introducing the rules. from last week:
> “Key questions remain unresolved, particularly regarding how and by whom customs duties will be collected in the future, what additional data will be required, and how the data transmission to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection will be carried out,” DHL, the largest shipping provider in Europe, said in a statement.
Good find - it is pretty crazy how this impactful change (I can see the logistics/supply chain subreddits abuzz with this news) isn't at all clearly defined. Per your link:
> They cite ambiguity about what kind of goods are covered by the new rules, and the lack of time to process their implications.
RobotToaster · 20h ago
Royal mail in the UK had to flat stop accepting parcels to the USA for several days just to have time to put in place a stopgap measure.
I now have to pay an extra £1.50 "administration charge" for every gift I send to a friend in the USA, despite gifts under $100 still being exempt.
IAmGraydon · 20h ago
It’s worse than that. After they realized that they had no system to support their idiotic plan, they tried to make it every other country’s problem by requiring that the vendor making the sale (in the other country) collect the tax and remit it to the US before the package gets here. Previously, tariffs were collected in the US at the port of entry or on delivery for smaller packages, and the sender didn’t have to worry about collecting them. This change is what caused all of the foreign postal services to halt service to the US.
No comments yet
linuxftw · 20h ago
Customarily duties are paid by the importer, often through a broker. How will this be handled for small items? Most likely a business will import products in bulk and pay the duties as normal.
How will it work for small, one off purchases? Well, I don't see how the tax payers are under any obligation to streamline that for people. The net effect will be to buy from US suppliers/importers, not directly from overseas.
DisjointedHunt · 13h ago
The de-minimus exception on China was dropped in May. China is 75% of exceptions.
This simply expires the exception for the remaining 25%.
ReptileMan · 20h ago
In Europe I am forced to pay 20-sh percent VAT on shipping + cost of goods when importing and eventually above 150 eur a small customs duty.
The US Deminimis seemed quite generous. No wonder it is removed.
integralid · 8h ago
But you pay the same tax on domestic goods, it's just included in the price you see.
I know that you obviously know this, so it's a weird thing to mention in context of (additional) taxing of foreign goods.
ReptileMan · 2h ago
Yes but when you import from countries that don't have VAT is different than countries that have VAT. When you import something from the UK (have vat) what you pay is much closer to the list price of the item than the US.
frantathefranta · 13h ago
The interesting thing is that at least my shipments from Aliexpress to the EU were always invoiced at $3-5 no matter how much I actually paid for them, circumventing the need to pay tax and duty on packages. I wonder if they’ll do the same now for the US, because my last packages (to the US) were delivered in February and were invoiced at the correct amount (though they were not above the de minimis amount)
Fade_Dance · 11h ago
This has been a widespread phenomenon in the US since forever in the private shipper space. "Mark as gift" "value is $5".
The issue of course is that it's fraudulent. It remains to be seen how closely the US is going to be enforcing it. I have a feeling Chinese shippers will be under the most scrutiny.
wan23 · 12h ago
Generous is a strange choice of word - it's like implying the government is entitled to its own citizens' money, and we should consider ourselves lucky that they weren't taking as much of it.
ReptileMan · 2h ago
I mean in the US constitution it is explicitly stated that interstate commerce is under the USG hat. So yes the government is entitled to it's citizens money when they cross the border.
cyberax · 9h ago
VAT is just a sales tax. Here in WA we pay ~10%.
em-bee · 3h ago
the point of the de minimis exemption was that you didn't pay the equivalent of the sales tax on imported items valued less than $800. as a result the imported item could be up to $80 cheaper than the same item bought locally.
sleepyguy · 20h ago
The consumer and small business lose, all because China couldn't resist taking advantage of the program. Now, simply ordering any item from Canada or Europe that is not available in the US will incur costs that are several times the item's value.
Why not just end De Minimis to China and leave it for the rest of the world that doesn't take advantage of it and reciprocates with their own De Minimis for US Imports?
throwrt5ur33 · 6h ago
If consumers and small businesses weren’t ordering in the first place, then there would be nothing to “take advantage.”
yunohn · 1h ago
Exactly. Don’t blame exporters; nothing ships without an order.
Same with illegal immigration: Trump & others could hire only legal locals at their hotels/resorts/farms - but don’t. So we go in circles about how to “solve” it.
Unpopular, but same with drugs: dealers/cartels aren’t forcing anyone to snort cocaine or do heroin. They do horrific things otherwise, but users share blame for the actual drug use.
the_mitsuhiko · 20h ago
> all because China couldn't resist taking advantage of the program
It’s not China but businesses. Mostly Chinese businesses but it’s still a lot of individual companies that utilize it.
ReptileMan · 20h ago
Because then you will order from Kyrgyzstan. The same way EU trade with Kyrgyzstan jumped like 100 fold after the sanctions against Russia.
sleepyguy · 20h ago
No, because I like to order items from Canada and the EU that will now incur an enormous duty. A t-shirt from Canada or Germany will incur additional fees of $50 -$250 USD, depending on where it is cleared.
There is the law of unintended consequences. Other countries will now make American small business products much more expensive to export. Why would they give a De Minimis to these small businesses when the USA doesn't reciprocate?
You're only thinking about China and not the rest of the World. US small businesses buy things (under $800) from countries like Canada and the EU, and were able to do so because of De Minimus. Canadians could buy things from US small businesses without worrying about duties as long as it was under $500.
Now even the smallest item, even a gift from abroad worth $20, will incur a duty of $50-$250 plus administrative fees from the carrier.
AnonC · 19h ago
This (targeted deminimis removal for China alone) is a difficult problem to solve reliably and complex. As seen with Nvidia chips or other products with export controls, in this case sellers will find a way to buy from China and route it through other countries to benefit from the exemption. In the end, sales by China may not be dented as much as one may believe it to be.
I understand your point that removing it for all is a blunt instrument and causes different problems and harms. Hopefully some policy adjustments are made with some trade offs.
sigwinch · 13h ago
I read $80-$200.
ReptileMan · 20h ago
Usually taxes are percentage of the value of the import. Where do you get those 250$?
> Other countries will now make American small business products much more expensive to export.
They already are/were. From EU it never made sense to buy anything from small US business - with the absurd shipping costs and VAT.
sleepyguy · 19h ago
>Usually taxes are percentage of the value of the import. Where do you get those 250$
If the sending country doesn't collect customs duties for the US, then the US will place a flat fee of $250 on the item regardless of its value.
>From EU it never made sense to buy anything from small US business, with the absurd shipping costs and VAT.
Perhaps in your case, but some products are specialized or of much higher quality than can be found in the USA.
LightBug1 · 20h ago
New Temu marketing to US Customers: "Shop like a hundred-aire !!!"
nemo44x · 20h ago
The EU is working on a similar thing. The concept has been exploited by global drop shippers and sites like Temu. Obviously there will be some disruption as everyone adjusts.
maxerickson · 20h ago
Trade restrictions are mostly stupid (short term restrictions tied to clear objectives can make sense). If local businesses are paying taxes to import goods in bulk, we should alleviate that, not add friction to small transactions.
ReptileMan · 20h ago
Temu pays vat and import duties in EU.
nemo44x · 18h ago
No they don’t. But they will soon.
insane_dreamer · 19h ago
This is one of the very few (only?) moves by this Admin that I agree with. Yes, it's hurts hobbyists ordering from AliExpress, but it's a loophole that has been largely exploited.
caseysoftware · 21h ago
Seems like a positive development from an enviromental point of view.. less low quality crap from Shein and Temu means less energy shipping it and less garbage later. Win win.
Cheer2171 · 20h ago
Sure, tell me more how it is awesome that I can't order $100 of dollars of small bulk electronic components for my hobby work direct from Huaqiangbei and get them here in a week. There is no US manufacturer replacement. Instead I have to turn to an import/export middleman also sourcing from Huaqiangbei but at 4x cost to me.
The environment cost is higher with the middleman "small business" because they need their own logistics (likely Amazon). So instead of a carrier driving from the boat to USPS/OnTrac, it goes into the warehouses at Amazon. Wow! Thanks! World saved! In the eloquent words of our dear leader: SAD!
cosmicgadget · 18h ago
I don't understand, can't they ship as they do now and your hobby simply got a bit more expensive?
In any event, volumewise I presume Ali does more environmental damage than hobby electronics being shipped through Amazon.
withinboredom · 20h ago
Just think of all the American robot jobs this will produce for our AI overlords! More people than ever will be able to stay home and fuel the underground drug trade and/or porn industry: tax free!
No comments yet
HarHarVeryFunny · 20h ago
If people need clothes they are going to buy clothes, and it makes little difference (other than cost to American consumer) whether it's direct from Shein/etc or bought off Amazon from some American manufacturer. For every shipping container full of Chinese product, there are going to be thousands of Amazon delivery trucks out delivering it to people houses.
It's easy to be snobbish about "low quality crap" from Shein etc if you have the money and preference to buy better, but for many people cheap stuff from China, whether bought in Walmart or online, is a godsend.
In terms of jobs and American manufacturers, there is zero demand for clothing sweatshop jobs in America, just as you don't see Americans lining up to replace illegals for low wage crop picking jobs.
All this is doing is making things more expensive for consumers. It's a consumer tax paid for by those who can least afford it.
emptysongglass · 20h ago
And note that basically no other developed country had this carve-out except the US. People are foaming at the mouths about this issue, but no one pointed a finger at the EU or anywhere else.
signal11 · 20h ago
I’m not sure I follow. The UK and other European countries have equivalents, although the term “de minimis” isn’t used. The UK has a £135 limit, Germany iirc had €150. This is the limit for duty exemptions, VAT still applies.
emptysongglass · 20h ago
You are correct that technically this is true. The EU has proposed to eliminate the threshold [1] but in practice EU consumers have not seen the benefit of the de minimis practiced by the US: try and import goods below the threshold from outside the EU and you will be hit by a variety of fees [2], making it uneconomical for a consumer to buy anything from outside.
"You are correct that technically this is true" is an odd way to admit your statement was completely false.
emptysongglass · 19h ago
But it's not. I do not enjoy the benefits of a de minimis as a resident of Denmark. Every policy set in place is to discourage my enjoyment of a de jure de minimis.
If you import goods into this country at below the threshold, you are very likely to pay more than the original price of the good itself. That's the truth. There is de minimis in name only.
integralid · 8h ago
>try and import goods below the threshold from outside the EU and you will be hit by a variety of fees [2], making it uneconomical for a consumer to buy anything from outside.
This is completely false. I buy tons of cheap things from outside of EU, including China, and they're insanely cheap (often for the price of quality of course). Maybe it's a Denmark problem?
emptysongglass · 5h ago
What country are you in?
watwut · 20h ago
EU does not demand foreign company collect their own internal taxes and send them over.
There is a reason shipping stopped.
emptysongglass · 20h ago
Look at my other comment. Most countries in the EU levy their own import fees that essentially make any de minimis in practice null.
US consumers have long enjoyed the privilege of actual de minimis, that is straight to their door, no fuss, no additional fees goods below the threshold.
cyberax · 13h ago
> EU does not demand foreign company collect their own internal taxes and send them over.
Let me introduce you to VAT.
erinnh · 11h ago
They dont demand it. Its a possibility that the company can do to make shipping easier for the customer.
If they dont, the package will be inspected in the destination country and taxed there. Making the shipment take longer and more expensive for the customer, as shipment companies levy additional fees.
seltzered_ · 12h ago
Hi Keith, i met you 13-14 years ago in the austin startup weekend / coworking space.
I'm happy if there's an environmental improvement from this (never bought from the stores you mentioned), but a counterpoint may be in how all this impacts those trying to operate repair shops, labs, and teach science. Bunnie Huang had some arguments on tariffs back in 2018: https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/2018/new-us-tariffs-are-a...
Not to mention that giving foreign storefronts a tax advantage is questionable at best. Do we really want to advantage random temu/aliexpress shops at the expense of brick and mortar retailers or even amazon, who at least employ local warehouse workers?
theamk · 20h ago
A lot of the stuff I am buying in China (electronic components and modules) either does not exists in US shops, or exists with very high markup (3x-5x). And even the stuff that is sold in the US is same Chinese parts, but imported by seller instead of me - so it gets more expensive as well.
I don't think this will give big advantage to US shops, it will mostly be extra expenses for consumers.
gruez · 20h ago
>A lot of the stuff I am buying in China (electronic components and modules)
Surely you must realize that's a very atypical use case and is dwarfed by people buying cheap clothes and trinkets? Just go to aliexpress or temu right now and see what the items on the front page are. It's not niche components that you can only order from china, it's the same cheap shit you can order off amazon or buy at a local discount retailer.
withinboredom · 20h ago
No. The US gave it to Walmart instead; local retailers were fucked decades ago.
gruez · 20h ago
That's why I said "brick and mortar retailers", not "locally owned". Moreover despite whatever misgivings you have about walmart's business practices, they at least have more attachment to the local economy than a random e-store shipping out of shenzhen.
withinboredom · 19h ago
I don’t have any misgivings. I just read the news.
rcpt · 12h ago
Thanks Jill Stein. There's a 3,500% tariffs on solar panels now btw.
ajross · 20h ago
It's only a win if it's replaced with lower-energy domestic alternatives, though. (Which, needlessly to say, don't remotely exist in almost all cases.) If your argument is that we just don't buy it at all, that's just cheering for economic contraction. I don't think you've thought things through if so.
People think that this just means that their nieces will stop buying junky fast fashion or whatever but that their own clean aescetic lifestyle will be unimpacted. But, no, that avocado toast is bankrolled by your employer and IRA and investment accounts or whatever, none of which are prepared for a 10% GDP contraction (or whatever) because the rubes can't buy their skorts anymore.
Economies are boats. We all sink or swim together.
watwut · 20h ago
Environmental point of view would welcome wind electricity and generally pretty much any other administration
brookst · 20h ago
That’s true, but “this policy will be good for the environment” is not the same thing as “the people who instituted this policy are unequivocally good for the environment”.
watwut · 20h ago
That is true but environmental impact is minimal and likelihood that it is genuin care about environmental even smaller.
brookst · 20h ago
True, but not everything needs to be about declaring people saints or demons. It’s possible to consider a policy’s actual real world impact without turning it into further proof of your strongly held convictions.
watwut · 20h ago
The comment was not about the policy’s actual real world impact. That is what I said in my second comment.
That comment was not an attempt to evaluate the policy, bit an attempt to make it sound better due to made up environmental concern.
We are overall already treating too many clearly bad faith arguments as if we all were naive polaynnas. There is no reason to insist on that as mandatory strategy.
cosmicgadget · 18h ago
How is shipping huge volumes of cheap plastic and single-use items a "made up environmental concern"?
Dylan16807 · 3h ago
Mostly this is going to change which models people buy and make them go through distributers with less variety, not reduce wasteful production and designs.
For the actual shipping, even if we pretend this rule removes the trip across the ocean, that trip across the ocean would have let out a very small amount of pollution per pound. Worrying about cargo ships is iffy to begin with. But GP was talking about the concern being made up, not the underlying issue they're pretending to be concerned about. Fake motivations in a bad faith argument.
scotty79 · 20h ago
That depends on how inefficiently substitute item is made. It's entirely possible that making a thing domestically will produce more CO2 than making it far away and shipping it.
Americans are rich and will buy wastefully made expensive item if cheaper alternative is not available.
cosmicgadget · 18h ago
If they are paying more maybe they'll just buy the "efficiently-made" imported product that has been bulk shipped and tariffed?
scotty79 · 12h ago
Then imports is just an excuse to tax the people more.
cosmicgadget · 8h ago
I thought we were talking about carbon footprint.
matthewaveryusa · 21h ago
Good. Deminimis is what allows low effort arbitrage of sales straight from foreign countries to the detriment of any local business engaged in anything beyond drop shipping with maybe a few extra steps. We really don't need subsidized trinkets going from ali express to landfills faster than greased lightning.
Cheer2171 · 20h ago
Sure, tell me more how it is awesome that I can't order $100 of dollars of small bulk electronic components for my hobby work direct from Huaqiangbei and get them here in a week. There is no US manufacturer replacement. Instead I have to turn to an import/export middleman also sourcing from Huaqiangbei but at 4x cost. In the eloquent words of our dear leader: SAD!
matthewaveryusa · 13h ago
The 100 you payed was subsidized which distorted the market to the point where all US manufacturing of your components is not only gone, but the expertise is as well. The first step to re-establishing normal market dynamics is to remove the distortions. It started in 2019 with the removal of ridiculous UPU international postage rates and this is the next step. Slap on a small tariff less than the VAT in europe to give a little competitive incentive for all the harm done and just maybe the US can start making stuff here again.
Look, I'm all about the race to the bottom but the market needs to be fair
multjoy · 12h ago
In the usual course of things, punitive tariffs are one side of the equation.
The other side sees the tariffing government making capital available along with other assistance in order to grow the local industry of the thing being tariffed.
What you have done is engaged in a trade war for no readily apparent reason other than the fact that the shit businessman in the White House doesn't understand that a deal doesn't have to have winners and losers in order for it to be a good deal.
igor47 · 10h ago
What are the subsidies?
ants_everywhere · 21h ago
It's not clear that adding bureaucracy to help local businesses at the expense of the consumer is a net win
evidencetamper · 20h ago
It's also not clear that allowing factories that underpay exploited workers to ship stuff over is a net win
ants_everywhere · 20h ago
I think with all economic policy it's good to weigh the pros and cons and have a serious discussion of them.
What I object to is that in practice people just side with their politics "team" like in sports and create post-hoc justifications for policy created for unrelated reasons.
I'm in favor of evidence-based trade policy, but this isn't that unfortunately. The closest thing we have to evidence-based policy is the economic consensus, and the current administration is making a big show of disagreeing with the consensus for non-evidence-based reasons.
evidencetamper · 19h ago
It is impossible to establish causality in complex economic systems to be able to have evidence based decisions.
The current economic direction is not a consensus. The Western democracies are increasingly politically polarized and economically volatile.
Between the many different crises (unaffordable real estate, populational collapse, unsustainable environmental practices and global warming, increasing inequality, hollowing out of small and medium sized cities, and the list goes on), it is very difficult to justify the status quo.
maxerickson · 18h ago
There's also not really an objective outcome for a given policy, because you don't have a single grouping with aligned preferences.
You can estimate the impact objectively, but not whether that impact is good or bad.
ants_everywhere · 18h ago
If you don't like democracies or science then what is your proposed solution?
evidencetamper · 17h ago
That's an unfortunate and charged statement that misrepresents what I said.
A fundamental aspect of science is rigor. And a fundamental aspect of democracy is opposition.
ants_everywhere · 6h ago
But your position is that you're opposed to evidence based policy. Which means you can't realistically hope to be in favor of an informed populace or democracy.
And you don't understand what the economic consensus is so you don't know what you don't know and aren't in a position to assess the level of rigor.
Plus your other comments, e.g. calling drug users zombies and criminals, make it clear that the anti-democratic impulses shown in this thread aren't just a one-off accident.
mmcwilliams · 20h ago
The alternative here is the exploited worker will no longer have any job. Doesn't seem like that is a legitimate concern for their well-being.
RobotToaster · 16h ago
Your right, it's obviously much better to give money to bezos' warehouses that underpay exploited workers instead.
gruez · 20h ago
But it's not like as if ending de minimis would mean those goods will stop coming over. It still will, just through brick and mortar retailers and amazon FBA.
kevinmchugh · 13h ago
De minimis also impacts all goods, including those made by well-paid laborers and from countries that meet our exceed American labor standards.
rcpt · 13h ago
I'm sure those workers that you genuinely care about can't wait to put down their soldering irons and get back to sustenance farming.
RobotToaster · 20h ago
This is just a subsidy for American warehouses like amazon, who just act as middle men, making cheap crap slightly less cheap crap.
gruez · 20h ago
As opposed to the status quo of "this is just a subsidy for aliexpress/temu merchants, making cheap crap slightly cheaper"?
yibg · 13h ago
Why is it a subsidy? It’s just a lack of an artificial barrier.
PaulRobinson · 13h ago
That's not the whole picture. Everything on eBay, Shopify, Etsy, that weird online shop that sells that weird thing you're into from London or Prague, whatever, all of it is now going to cost more money for everyone in America if it originates outside of the US.
Yes, the majority by volume is from China, and from large trash sites that rightly aren't sustainable...
... but the second order effects on small businesses and consumers who enjoy buying from them.
LeafItAlone · 13h ago
Yes! This administration, once again, adds more government control into the lives of every day Americans by restricting free trade. A win for the United Socialist States of America! I do hope it continues to take an equity stake in local companies too. We really are becoming Great!
perihelions · 20h ago
What's the moral valence differentiating a "local business" from a local drop-shipper? What really *is* a business selling imported goods—if not a drop-shipper with a storefront?
Bold to hold contempt for free-market capitalism, when it's made your society so staggeringly wealthy, your concern of the day is literally worrying about landfills filling up with surplus wealth. Find some perspective.
bluGill · 20h ago
a local business needs to select what to sell. This is a valuable service.
falcor84 · 20h ago
Paying someone to reduce my own ability to choose? How does this work? Do they provide the most value if they offer just a single drop-shipped item that they believe I would want?
Wouldn't I just get better value from an independent review mechanism?
bluGill · 15h ago
How many near identical choices do you need? How muc time do you want to spend evaluating all those options. Someone else to narrow it down saves you a lot of effort.
when the differences don't matter or are things you areenot aware of this is more important.
LeafItAlone · 13h ago
What a weird argument. Their decision making likely does not match mine. Where does the limitation end?
bluGill · 11h ago
They should find 2 or 3 options that are good enough.
Nothing stops you from evaluating all possible options - but in most cases you have too many other things to do and a simple set of options lets you get on with life.
LeafItAlone · 10h ago
>but in most cases you have too many other things to do and a simple set of options lets you get on with life.
What a weird thing to say to someone else.
bluGill · 10h ago
If it isn't true get a life. Well I suppose someone reading this is confined to a hospital bed or prison cell and thus has plenty of time with nothing better to do.
LeafItAlone · 10h ago
It is certainly odd that you have to resort to “get a life” statements in your argument here. Why do you feel the need to control what other people do? Should we all spend our time trying to accumulate 22k Karma on some forum?
bluGill · 7h ago
If you personally want to look at all options for any one widget in your life that is fine, I won't judge you for it. Whoever realize that for whatever that widget most people don't. Also realize that for all the different things you need in life there are more options that you have time to examine while also doing those other things in life you must do.
LeafItAlone · 6h ago
>If it isn't true get a life.
Seems pretty judgey to me.
Because I’m a rational person, I know when I need to examine different options specifically matching what I need and when I just choose a random one.
You are free to visit shops that offer you just one option for a given category of it is too much cognitive load to make decisions like that. Just don’t force that on me and tell me that it is good for me.
You might also want to get a number for the one therapist they offer there too, because having trouble making simple decisions is something that should get attention.
Marsymars · 13h ago
Probably my most-loved retailers are those with strong product curation.
braincat31415 · 13h ago
What happens to a profitable local business when the its cost of a cheap foreign raw material goes up? Sourcing locally might not be the answer, especially if the cost of a local acquisition goes up to be just below china+tariff.
marxism · 13h ago
I want to weigh in here because I see comments focusing on how these products are useless trash. I think that's missing the point.
This wealthy engineer mindset is too literal. The AI-generated photos and fake reviews aren't bugs. They're features. They let the poor American with $100 of disposable income pretend they found a way to get an Apple Watch for $11. Just for a few days, they get to believe it might be real. When it arrives and it's crap, they knew it would be. But they got to play the fantasy.
TEMU's tagline is "Shop like a billionaire." I want you to really think about that. Marketers test hundreds of combinations to find what resonates. TEMU probably has thousands of marketers. They've tested millions of possible hooks. Millions. And this is what won.
"Shop like a billionaire" is the message that brought new people in the door above all others. Now what about churn? That's not the tagline's job. Don't let your knowledge of what exactly TEMU does and how it functions conceal from you this signal of what many (not all!!) people want.
However I believe they're not scamming people. They're delivering exactly what they're selling, which is the experience of feeling like you could have nice things.
Twenty years ago you could go to a matinee movie for a dollar. Two hours of escapism for a dollar. That product doesn't exist anymore. Theaters decided to serve a different customer base. They went upmarket. But people still want cheap escapism. Now it's $1-3 on TEMU to get that same escape. You browse, you dream, you wait for the package. It's entertainment.
TEMU is making things people want.
Marsymars · 13h ago
> TEMU's tagline is "Shop like a billionaire." I want you to really think about that. Marketers test hundreds of combinations to find what resonates. TEMU probably has thousands of marketers. They've tested millions of possible hooks. Millions. And this is what won. "Shop like a billionaire" is the message that resonated above all others.
Not saying you’re wrong, but I find “Shop like a billionaire” to be a deeply weird slogan.
jhbadger · 13h ago
Yeah. Do billionaires shop? Don't they have people who take care of that for them?
close04 · 13h ago
I asked a friend who is probably right in the target audience (very low to no disposable income) how he reads that slogan. He said “never worry about the price”. It’s in line with the people it might try to attract, the ones for whom the price is of utmost importance, above all else.
whatshisface · 13h ago
Wire $1,000 to my bank account and I will wire $1,000,000 (or equivalent in financial experience product) back in just a few days. Only one condition - you have to explain what happened to you afterwards.
To put it in perspective, used to pay about $85-$90 for 10 completed boards —- shipped —- now it is $316ish for 10 boards shipped.
https://www.circuithub.com/
Their CEO Andrew Seddon was recently on the AmpHour podcast:
https://theamphour.com/699-circuithub-12-years-later-with-an...
My project uses gerbers and they do not accept them. Will see what I can do
I'd be very surprised if any of these companies they list are willing to give project files for manufacture. I assume they do this because smaller companies and hobbyist see it as more convienient, and to CircuitHub it means less mistakes / time dealing with the customer when they generate their own outputs.
I speculate this is going to slow down the small hardware hobbyist small business space, by maybe 50%.
To expand, in too many words:
Personally I have a penchant for music synthesizers and many of them are from a one-person shop. I imagine these 3x price increases are going to slow people down. Determined and cost agnostic people will power through this. People who just have an idea and are actually motivated by the past inexpensive PCB prototyping universe, will a lot more about cost and prototyping and a lot less about the problem that they're solving. And I just can't imagine it being anything less than a 50% slowdown for those folks.
That's always been my problem with buying American. I'd be willing to pay 2x as much to support manufacturers in my own country. Maybe 3x. But 10x-15x as much? EABOD, I'll stick with China. While infuriating, the Trump tariffs are nowhere near enough to alter the outcome of that calculation.
Meanwhile our Chinese suppliers were honest with us.
The one benefit the American places are supposed to have, they managed to squander through either sheer greed or incompetence.
Plus these are going on high altitude balloons aka throwaway so a lot of people have a hard time spending that
There is no good here. I don't when it became popular or acceptable to restrict free trade and ignore reality.
0: https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/07/fact-sheet-pr...
1: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/rein...
see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45074362
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/de-minimis-u-s-canada-endin...
It is still a policy from someone threatening economic annexation of Canada. He's dropped the rhetoric, but I doubt he's given up on the concept. "Targeting China" is a very kind, possibly even forgetful, way of phrasing it.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5071665-trump-ec...
Trump hates China. His boss told him to.
Mexico has also been disproportionately impacted by these protectionist policies. And that’s just the immediate neighbours with which the US has pursued trade agreements for decades.
the U.S. launched the trade war against Canada, “their closest partner and ally, their closest friend. At the same time, they’re talking about working positively with Russia, appeasing Vladimir Putin, a lying, murderous dictator. Make that make sense.”
I think the thing some Americans mess themselves up with is thinking that the world perceives their domestic politics the same way they do. From our level of abstraction, America voted and Americans decided the country is going to be an anti-science, protectionist menace.
Protect yourself. If and when we have enough good governance to be friends again, we'll need your friendship.
The petty child-like name calling from the American president was mostly just an evocation of “I’m embarrassed for you.”
Trump's policies are big on tough talk while actually having the opposite effects of the marketing. High import taxes hurt the pre-imported selection available from domestic retailers, as sellers have to pay the tax ahead of the sale and navigate the uncertainty that the rates might change in the future. Whereas direct-from-China goods already have cash in hand to pay the tariffs, and the only uncertainty is in the few days between purchase and arrival at customs. I expect to be buying many more things direct from Aliexpress, as the tariffs set in, domestic inventory is exhausted, and domestic-seller prices creep upwards.
Furthermore, the high tariffs on China do encourage investments in factories. Specifically, Chinese investment in factories outside of China, for final assembly of products. Investing in the United States would not be prudent, with the environment of political instability. So these policies are effectively strengthening China's relationships with other countries.
Never mind that many of the companies still known for manufacturing quality goods do so in other western countries. If the goal was really to oppose China, then it should have been time to pull together with our allies - not to levy import taxes to keep them (price-) uncompetitive with Chinese products, while alienating them with hostile rhetoric. Ultimately, our adversaries couldn't have dreamed of more favorable policies.
> what's your carbon footprint?! You fly around in jets 3 times a year?!
> let's buy 30c disposable crap from across the world while essentially subsidizing advanced industrialization of societies completely disconnected from our own
Obviously the main problem is that tariffs do not lead to positive future outcomes for the country levying them.
> “Key questions remain unresolved, particularly regarding how and by whom customs duties will be collected in the future, what additional data will be required, and how the data transmission to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection will be carried out,” DHL, the largest shipping provider in Europe, said in a statement.
https://apnews.com/article/us-tariffs-goods-services-suspens...
> They cite ambiguity about what kind of goods are covered by the new rules, and the lack of time to process their implications.
I now have to pay an extra £1.50 "administration charge" for every gift I send to a friend in the USA, despite gifts under $100 still being exempt.
No comments yet
How will it work for small, one off purchases? Well, I don't see how the tax payers are under any obligation to streamline that for people. The net effect will be to buy from US suppliers/importers, not directly from overseas.
This simply expires the exception for the remaining 25%.
The US Deminimis seemed quite generous. No wonder it is removed.
I know that you obviously know this, so it's a weird thing to mention in context of (additional) taxing of foreign goods.
The issue of course is that it's fraudulent. It remains to be seen how closely the US is going to be enforcing it. I have a feeling Chinese shippers will be under the most scrutiny.
Why not just end De Minimis to China and leave it for the rest of the world that doesn't take advantage of it and reciprocates with their own De Minimis for US Imports?
Same with illegal immigration: Trump & others could hire only legal locals at their hotels/resorts/farms - but don’t. So we go in circles about how to “solve” it.
Unpopular, but same with drugs: dealers/cartels aren’t forcing anyone to snort cocaine or do heroin. They do horrific things otherwise, but users share blame for the actual drug use.
It’s not China but businesses. Mostly Chinese businesses but it’s still a lot of individual companies that utilize it.
There is the law of unintended consequences. Other countries will now make American small business products much more expensive to export. Why would they give a De Minimis to these small businesses when the USA doesn't reciprocate?
You're only thinking about China and not the rest of the World. US small businesses buy things (under $800) from countries like Canada and the EU, and were able to do so because of De Minimus. Canadians could buy things from US small businesses without worrying about duties as long as it was under $500.
Now even the smallest item, even a gift from abroad worth $20, will incur a duty of $50-$250 plus administrative fees from the carrier.
I understand your point that removing it for all is a blunt instrument and causes different problems and harms. Hopefully some policy adjustments are made with some trade offs.
> Other countries will now make American small business products much more expensive to export.
They already are/were. From EU it never made sense to buy anything from small US business - with the absurd shipping costs and VAT.
If the sending country doesn't collect customs duties for the US, then the US will place a flat fee of $250 on the item regardless of its value.
>From EU it never made sense to buy anything from small US business, with the absurd shipping costs and VAT.
Perhaps in your case, but some products are specialized or of much higher quality than can be found in the USA.
The environment cost is higher with the middleman "small business" because they need their own logistics (likely Amazon). So instead of a carrier driving from the boat to USPS/OnTrac, it goes into the warehouses at Amazon. Wow! Thanks! World saved! In the eloquent words of our dear leader: SAD!
In any event, volumewise I presume Ali does more environmental damage than hobby electronics being shipped through Amazon.
No comments yet
It's easy to be snobbish about "low quality crap" from Shein etc if you have the money and preference to buy better, but for many people cheap stuff from China, whether bought in Walmart or online, is a godsend.
In terms of jobs and American manufacturers, there is zero demand for clothing sweatshop jobs in America, just as you don't see Americans lining up to replace illegals for low wage crop picking jobs.
All this is doing is making things more expensive for consumers. It's a consumer tax paid for by those who can least afford it.
[1] https://copenhageneconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/S...
[2] https://www.postnord.dk/siteassets/pdf/forretningsbetingelse...
If you import goods into this country at below the threshold, you are very likely to pay more than the original price of the good itself. That's the truth. There is de minimis in name only.
This is completely false. I buy tons of cheap things from outside of EU, including China, and they're insanely cheap (often for the price of quality of course). Maybe it's a Denmark problem?
There is a reason shipping stopped.
US consumers have long enjoyed the privilege of actual de minimis, that is straight to their door, no fuss, no additional fees goods below the threshold.
Let me introduce you to VAT.
If they dont, the package will be inspected in the destination country and taxed there. Making the shipment take longer and more expensive for the customer, as shipment companies levy additional fees.
I'm happy if there's an environmental improvement from this (never bought from the stores you mentioned), but a counterpoint may be in how all this impacts those trying to operate repair shops, labs, and teach science. Bunnie Huang had some arguments on tariffs back in 2018: https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/2018/new-us-tariffs-are-a...
There were some arguments from repair youtuber Louis Rossmann also from a few months ago: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xR2_eqNL604&pp=ygUWbG91aXMgcm9...
I don't think this will give big advantage to US shops, it will mostly be extra expenses for consumers.
Surely you must realize that's a very atypical use case and is dwarfed by people buying cheap clothes and trinkets? Just go to aliexpress or temu right now and see what the items on the front page are. It's not niche components that you can only order from china, it's the same cheap shit you can order off amazon or buy at a local discount retailer.
People think that this just means that their nieces will stop buying junky fast fashion or whatever but that their own clean aescetic lifestyle will be unimpacted. But, no, that avocado toast is bankrolled by your employer and IRA and investment accounts or whatever, none of which are prepared for a 10% GDP contraction (or whatever) because the rubes can't buy their skorts anymore.
Economies are boats. We all sink or swim together.
That comment was not an attempt to evaluate the policy, bit an attempt to make it sound better due to made up environmental concern.
We are overall already treating too many clearly bad faith arguments as if we all were naive polaynnas. There is no reason to insist on that as mandatory strategy.
For the actual shipping, even if we pretend this rule removes the trip across the ocean, that trip across the ocean would have let out a very small amount of pollution per pound. Worrying about cargo ships is iffy to begin with. But GP was talking about the concern being made up, not the underlying issue they're pretending to be concerned about. Fake motivations in a bad faith argument.
Americans are rich and will buy wastefully made expensive item if cheaper alternative is not available.
Look, I'm all about the race to the bottom but the market needs to be fair
The other side sees the tariffing government making capital available along with other assistance in order to grow the local industry of the thing being tariffed.
What you have done is engaged in a trade war for no readily apparent reason other than the fact that the shit businessman in the White House doesn't understand that a deal doesn't have to have winners and losers in order for it to be a good deal.
What I object to is that in practice people just side with their politics "team" like in sports and create post-hoc justifications for policy created for unrelated reasons.
I'm in favor of evidence-based trade policy, but this isn't that unfortunately. The closest thing we have to evidence-based policy is the economic consensus, and the current administration is making a big show of disagreeing with the consensus for non-evidence-based reasons.
The current economic direction is not a consensus. The Western democracies are increasingly politically polarized and economically volatile.
Between the many different crises (unaffordable real estate, populational collapse, unsustainable environmental practices and global warming, increasing inequality, hollowing out of small and medium sized cities, and the list goes on), it is very difficult to justify the status quo.
You can estimate the impact objectively, but not whether that impact is good or bad.
A fundamental aspect of science is rigor. And a fundamental aspect of democracy is opposition.
And you don't understand what the economic consensus is so you don't know what you don't know and aren't in a position to assess the level of rigor.
Plus your other comments, e.g. calling drug users zombies and criminals, make it clear that the anti-democratic impulses shown in this thread aren't just a one-off accident.
Yes, the majority by volume is from China, and from large trash sites that rightly aren't sustainable...
... but the second order effects on small businesses and consumers who enjoy buying from them.
Bold to hold contempt for free-market capitalism, when it's made your society so staggeringly wealthy, your concern of the day is literally worrying about landfills filling up with surplus wealth. Find some perspective.
Wouldn't I just get better value from an independent review mechanism?
when the differences don't matter or are things you areenot aware of this is more important.
Nothing stops you from evaluating all possible options - but in most cases you have too many other things to do and a simple set of options lets you get on with life.
What a weird thing to say to someone else.
Seems pretty judgey to me.
Because I’m a rational person, I know when I need to examine different options specifically matching what I need and when I just choose a random one.
You are free to visit shops that offer you just one option for a given category of it is too much cognitive load to make decisions like that. Just don’t force that on me and tell me that it is good for me. You might also want to get a number for the one therapist they offer there too, because having trouble making simple decisions is something that should get attention.
This wealthy engineer mindset is too literal. The AI-generated photos and fake reviews aren't bugs. They're features. They let the poor American with $100 of disposable income pretend they found a way to get an Apple Watch for $11. Just for a few days, they get to believe it might be real. When it arrives and it's crap, they knew it would be. But they got to play the fantasy.
TEMU's tagline is "Shop like a billionaire." I want you to really think about that. Marketers test hundreds of combinations to find what resonates. TEMU probably has thousands of marketers. They've tested millions of possible hooks. Millions. And this is what won.
"Shop like a billionaire" is the message that brought new people in the door above all others. Now what about churn? That's not the tagline's job. Don't let your knowledge of what exactly TEMU does and how it functions conceal from you this signal of what many (not all!!) people want.
However I believe they're not scamming people. They're delivering exactly what they're selling, which is the experience of feeling like you could have nice things.
Twenty years ago you could go to a matinee movie for a dollar. Two hours of escapism for a dollar. That product doesn't exist anymore. Theaters decided to serve a different customer base. They went upmarket. But people still want cheap escapism. Now it's $1-3 on TEMU to get that same escape. You browse, you dream, you wait for the package. It's entertainment.
TEMU is making things people want.
Not saying you’re wrong, but I find “Shop like a billionaire” to be a deeply weird slogan.