logo
Trouble for Shein, Temu as Trump taxes small parcels, some retailers give up on US

Trouble for Shein, Temu as Trump taxes small parcels, some retailers give up on US

News2402-05-2025
For more financial news, go to the News24 Business front page.
As the United States ends a tariff exemption for small parcels on Friday, some retailers have stopped selling to US customers while others are seeking temporary workarounds in the hope the tariff rate may be reduced. The removal of "de minimis" - duty-free treatment of ecommerce packages worth less than $800 - for products originating from China and Hong Kong exposes those goods to tariffs of 145% on most Chinese goods following US President Donald Trump's decision last month, a move that upended global trade and triggered retaliation from Beijing.
British beauty products retailer Space NK has paused e-commerce orders and shipping to the US "to avoid incorrect or additional costs being applied to our customers' orders", the company said in a notice on Wednesday.
It is not alone. Understance, a Vancouver-based company that sells bras and underwear manufactured in China, told customers in an Instagram post that it would no longer ship to the United States due to the tariffs, saying it will resume once there is clarity.
"We're going from zero to 145%, which is really untenable for companies and untenable for customers," said Cindy Allen, CEO of Trade Force Multiplier, a global trade consultancy.
"I've seen a lot of small to medium-sized businesses just choose to exit the market altogether," she added. Import charges can vary depending on shipment methods. For goods handled by the US Postal Service, the tariff will be 120% of their value, or $100 per package. The amount is due to increase to $200 in June, according to implementation guidance from US Customs and Border Protection.
Players willing to continue to access the US market are forced to hike their price tags.
Oh Polly, a British clothing retailer, has increased prices in the US by 20% compared to its other markets, and may have to consider further price increases because of the higher tariffs, said managing director Mike Branney. Singapore-based fast-fashion giant Shein sought to reassure customers in a post on its US. Instagram account on Thursday, saying: "Some products may be priced differently than before, but the majority of our collections remain as affordable as ever." Shein sells clothes mostly manufactured in China, and the US is its biggest market.
Temu, the international arm of Chinese ecommerce giant PDD Holdings, prominently featured products already in US warehouses on its website, labelled 'Local', and a pop-up informed customers there would be no import charges for local warehouse items. But items imported before the May 2 change will eventually run out. Both Shein and Temu have slashed their US digital advertising spending in the past weeks as they prepared for the change that is likely to hit their sales.
Shein did not immediately reply to a request for comment. Temu did not immediately reply to a request for comment. De minimis was initially introduced to smooth online shopping and boost international trade, but became the target of bipartisan criticism due to its role in facilitating smuggling of fentanyl ingredients from China and fuelling a surge in imports of cheap clothes, toys, and furniture made in China through online platforms like Temu, Shein, and Amazon Haul.
De minimis has also been a channel for counterfeit goods. In 2024, de minimis shipments accounted for 97% of the intellectual property infringement-related cargo seizures made by Customs and Border Protection.
Without de minimis, sellers of goods made in China have to provide US customs with more detailed information about where each component of their product is made, an increased administrative burden that, along with the huge tariff cost, is dissuading small retailers.
UPS CEO Carol Tome said on Tuesday that many of the delivery firm's small to medium-sized business customers source 100% of their goods from China.
US online marketplace Etsy said in a notice to sellers earlier this month that it was making it easier for them to clarify the country of origin of their products, as tariffs are applied based on where a good is made rather than where it is dispatched from.
While disruptive to ecommerce, the end of de minimis treatment of Chinese goods could give a boost to retailers less reliant on ecommerce or on Chinese manufacturing. British fast-fashion retailer Primark, which sells clothes to US customers only through its stores across the country, not online, said it could benefit from the change.
"With prices going up from this part of the trade, I wonder if some Americans might start going back to shopping centres to find value there," George Weston, CEO of Primark owner Associated British Foods, told Reuters on Tuesday.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Italy fines fast-fashion giant Shein for 'green' claims
Italy fines fast-fashion giant Shein for 'green' claims

Yahoo

time8 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Italy fines fast-fashion giant Shein for 'green' claims

Italy's competition watchdog said Monday it has fined the company responsible for Shein's websites in Europe one million euros ($1.15 million) for false and confusing claims about the e-commerce giant's efforts to be environmentally "green". The AGCM watchdog accuses the China-founded fast-fashion colossal of having "adopted a misleading communication strategy regarding the characteristics and environmental impact of its clothing products". The fine was imposed on Infinite Styles Services Co. Ltd, the company responsible for managing Shein's product trading websites in Europe, the authority said in a statement. The AGCM accused it of "misleading and/or deceptive environmental messages and claims... in the promotion and sale of Shein-branded clothing products". These were "in some instances, vague, generic, and/or overly emphatic, and in others, misleading or omissive". In particular, claims about the recyclability of products "were found to be either false or at least confusing", it said. Consumers could easily be led to believe Shein products were made exclusively from sustainable materials and fully recyclable, "a statement which, given the fibres used and current recycling systems, does not reflect reality". The AGCM also took issue with the retailer's claims it would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent by 2030 and reach zero emissions by 2050. These "vague" pledges by a company which has seen phenomenal growth in recent years were "contradicted by an actual increase in Shein's greenhouse gas emissions in 2023 and 2024", it said. In a statement to AFP, Shein said it had "cooperated fully" with the watchdog's investigation and "took immediate action" to address the concerns, saying all environmental claims on the website were now "clear, specific and compliant with regulations". Environmentalists have long warned of the damage wreaked by the fast-fashion sector's wasteful trend of mass producing low-cost clothes that are quickly thrown away. Fast fashion uses up massive amounts of water, produces hazardous chemicals and clogs up landfills in poor countries with textile waste, while also generating greenhouse gases in production, transport and disposal. ide/ar/lth Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

We Must Protect American Courtrooms From Foreign Interference
We Must Protect American Courtrooms From Foreign Interference

Newsweek

time8 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

We Must Protect American Courtrooms From Foreign Interference

In most American courtrooms today, a party in court could be financed by foreign interests (and other unrelated third parties) without the other party ever knowing it. This alternate funder may be an investor hoping for uncorrelated returns, a wealthy donor with personal or business interests in the case, or an affiliate of an adversarial nation seeking to undermine U.S. competitiveness. The third-party litigation funding industry operates in the Wild West. Any outside group can pay the bills for a party in a legal dispute. They do this often in exchange for a percentage of an eventual settlement. Absent a handful of states that have passed disclosure laws affecting their own state court systems, the vast majority of state and federal courts do not require parties to disclose who's paying their legal costs—not to other parties and not even to the presiding judge. A stone sign for the United States Court House in downtown Los Angeles, Calif. is pictured. A stone sign for the United States Court House in downtown Los Angeles, Calif. is pictured. Getty Images But disclosure is critical and not just for transparency's sake. Incentives matter in the courtroom. The American civil litigation system is premised on fairness, impartiality, and the pursuit of justice. If a party's funders have hidden motives that stray from the desire to fairly resolve a dispute, trust in the system is put at risk. Foreign sources of litigation funding introduce a whole new set of perverse incentives. A foreign funder may finance a case in order to gain access to sensitive intellectual property or even to evade sanctions that prohibit transactions or investments in U.S. capital markets. Also, since litigation funders have their own monetary and non-monetary goals, the funder may push its client to demand steeper settlement terms than the client would otherwise consider. These are not hypothetical situations. In 2024, Bloomberg Law reported that a group of sanctioned Russian billionaires created an investment fund to back bankruptcy lawsuits in New York and London thus allowing the oligarchs to steer (launder) tens of millions into western financial institutions. In another instance, China-based technology firm PurpleVine financed several intellectual property lawsuits against Samsung. This was discovered by a lone overseeing judge in Delaware who luckily requires litigation financing disclosure in his courtroom. Had the case not crossed his desk, the defendants may never have known that their case was hardly a mere legal challenge but, in actuality, a case with national security importance. Foreign donors may also fund lawsuits that advance their personal agendas. Last year, Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) filings revealed that an Australian mining billionaire was paying the legal bills for a coalition of environmental nonprofits in their lawsuit against ExxonMobil. The billionaire, Andrew Forrest, runs a mining empire that he aims to convert into a clean-energy provider—demonstrating both ideological and anticompetitive reasons to target an American oil major that he would not otherwise have standing to sue. This backdoor litigation is getting foreign companies and even foreign governments into American courtrooms they otherwise wouldn't be able to access. Since the third-party litigation funding industry is entirely unregulated, each of these examples only came to light by accident: strong investigative reporting; a lone judge's standing transparency order; and a buried FARA filing. But in each instance, the discovery of foreign funding changed both public perception and legal strategy. Routine civil suits became vehicles for money laundering, corporate espionage, and personal grievance. Unregulated third-party litigation financing is a crucial vulnerability for American competitiveness and national security. In order to secure a just and fair civil justice system, it's only common sense that parties should know who they're up against. We must act quickly as this "hidden party" industry is growing at a pace stressing the non-existent regulatory regime. One estimate values the global market at $17.5 billion in 2025, and it is forecasted to grow to $67.2 billion by 2037. Naturally, it's also becoming more complex. Opportunistic actors are developing secondary markets—a "stock exchange for lawsuits"—which, if left unregulated as well, will only create new avenues for foreign actors to distort the civil justice system and surreptitiously move capital. Regulators can be certain that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and other adversarial nations have taken notice of this influx of cash into the industry. The CCP may be responsible for a significant part of this cash flow, but we cannot be sure. Under the current system, neither national security officials nor legal professionals have any way to discern the source of billions of dollars propping up civil suits from behind the curtain. A number of bills in state legislatures and in Congress have been introduced to require disclosure of any third-party litigation financing—of foreign funding in particular. This is a welcome development. Lawmakers in Washington and in statehouses across the country should move with alacrity and act on this issue before American companies, our justice system, and our capital markets are subjected to further foreign meddling. Former Representative Michael Patrick Flanagan (R-Ill.) previously represented the 5th District of Illinois in the U.S. House of Representatives and sat on the Committee on the Judiciary. An attorney, he previously served in the U.S. Army and retired at the rank of captain. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.

Musk-linked PAC spends big to promote newly enacted megabill
Musk-linked PAC spends big to promote newly enacted megabill

Politico

time8 minutes ago

  • Politico

Musk-linked PAC spends big to promote newly enacted megabill

President Donald Trump pounds a gavel presented to him by House Speaker Mike Johnson after he signed his signature bill at the White House on July 4, 2025. | Evan Vucci/AP By Gregory Svirnovskiy 08/04/2025 05:55 AM EDT Building America's Future, a PAC that has been supported by Elon Musk, is shelling out more than a million dollars to promote recent White House wins, including a GOP domestic policy package the Tesla CEO and former Trump administration employee once called 'a disgusting abomination.' The 30-second ad, titled 'Independence,' is set to run nationally on Fox News and will congratulate President Donald Trump on the passage of Republicans' 'One Big, Beautiful Bill,' which extends his 2017 tax cuts alongside other GOP wins at the expense of nearly $1 trillion in coming Medicaid cuts. 'This Independence Day, President Trump and Congress made the working family tax cuts law,' the spot, which is to debut Monday, will say. 'Freeing Americans from taxes on their tips and overtime, doubling the child tax credit, and cutting taxes for seniors. Republicans know that our country is better off when working families keep more of what they earn. Now, they will.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store