White House to end US tariff exemption for all low-value overseas packages
Under an executive order signed by Donald Trump on Wednesday, packages valued at or under $800 sent to the US outside of the international postal network will now face 'all applicable duties' starting on 29 August, the White House said.
The US president earlier targeted packages from China and Hong Kong, and the White House said the recently signed tax and spending bill repealed the legal basis for the de minimis exemption worldwide starting on 1 July 2027.
'Trump is acting more quickly to suspend the de minimis exemption than the OBBBA requires, to deal with national emergencies and save American lives and businesses now,' the White House said in a fact sheet, referring to the bill known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
Goods shipped through the postal system will face one of two tariffs: either an 'ad valorem duty' equal to the effective tariff rate of the package's country of origin or, for six months, a specific tariff of $80 to $200 depending on the country of origin's tariff rate.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
13 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Brutal new poll reveals whether Americans want Trump to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell amid Epstein accusations
President Donald Trump should not pardon Ghislaine Maxwell if he wants to earn favor with Americans furious over the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files. Nearly two-thirds of Americans do not want the convicted child sex trafficker pardoned, according to a Times-YouGov survey published on Thursday. A remaining 32 percent aren't sure how they feel about it, and only 4 percent of the 1,470 American adults polled think Maxwell's 20-year prison sentence should be commuted. The poll has damning results for the president, whose administration continues to face widespread anger over its review of the Epstein files. Forty-one percent of Americans think that most, if not all of what the Trump administration has said about Epstein is false. Even Trump's own party has doubts, with 46 percent of Republican respondents in Thursday's poll saying they aren't sure whether what the administration is saying about Epstein is true or false. The Justice Department and FBI put out a memo earlier this month detailing its findings after reviewing all evidence in the case against the disgraced financier. Epstein died in prison on August 10, 2019 while awaiting trial for charges of running a sex trafficking operation that included multiple underage victims. Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel confirmed Epstein's suicide after a controversial internal review. They found no 'client list' and said they won't charge others in the trafficking ring. The DOJ and FBI released 11-hours of footage showing the outside of Epstein's cell the night he died. And just a few weeks later on Tuesday it was reported the agencies are in possession of a 'missing minute' excluded from the original the footage. This angered both Trump critics and supporters who believe Epstein was murdered. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche interviewed Maxwell for nine hours in Tallahassee last week as she seeks a pardon from the presodent. But most Americans do not want to see the British socialite let off the hook. Democrats, Republicans and Independents all far favor Maxwell staying in jail and serving the remainder of her 20-year sentence. Seventy-five percent of Democrats don't want a pardon and 59 percent of Republicans feel the same in one of the few instances where an issue transcends party lines. Trump has recognized his authority to pardon Maxwell but has not committed to doing so. He told reporters outside the White House on July 25: 'I haven't thought about it. I'm allowed to do it, but it's something I have not thought about.' Trump has pleaded with his base to let go of their obsession with what he now calls the 'Epstein hoax.' He claims it's being exacerbated by Democrats who want to cause a divide in Republican circles. But many are adamant that a 'cover-up' is afoot, and some within the online MAGAverse are calling for Bondi's ouster. This month, Trump directed Bondi to file with courts in Florida and New York to unseal grand jury testimony in the Epstein cases. The Southern District of Florida denied the request, and the Southern District of New York demanded more information from the government giving expanded reasoning for unsealing the highly-sensitive documents. Filings on Tuesday found that there were only two witnesses in SDNY, an FBI agent and a NYPD officer.
Reuters
14 minutes ago
- Reuters
Exclusive: China polysilicon firms plan $7 bln fund to shut a third of industry capacity
BEIJING, July 31 (Reuters) - Chinese producers of polysilicon, a building block for solar panels, are in talks to create a 50 billion yuan ($7 billion) fund to acquire and shut down roughly a third of production capacity and restructure part of the loss-making sector, GCL Technology Holdings ( opens new tab said. The top polysilicon producer told Reuters on Thursday plans were being discussed to acquire and shut at least 1 million metric tons of lower-quality polysilicon capacity. "It is sort of like the OPEC of the polysilicon industry, wherein total supply for a specified timeframe has to be agreed by the central committee and production quotas to be allocated to producers," GCL's investor relations director Jun Zhu said. The plan is one of the strongest signals yet that the heightened rhetoric against overcapacity rolled out by the Chinese government this month is translating into action. Chinese industries, from solar to electric vehicles, are grappling with massive overcapacity and vicious price wars that are wiping out profits. Beijing restructured industries including polysilicon, steel and cement in previous waves of reforms more than a decade ago. However, this latest round is expected to be more difficult given many of the problem sectors are now filled with private firms and there are fewer growth sectors to pick up the slack. The polysilicon acquisition vehicle would be launched late in the third quarter of this year and would start making purchases in the fourth quarter, both of excess capacity and of market inventories, Zhu said. The proposed closures would leave approximately 2 million tons of capacity remaining in the market, he added. China's production capacity was 3.25 million tons at the end of 2024, according to Bernreuter, an industry research group. GCL Chairman Zhu Gongshan said at an industry conference in June that major firms were working to restructure the industry, while local media Caixin reported producers were in talks to create an acquisition fund. Reuters is reporting the size, scope and timing of the plan for the first time. China's state planner, the National Development and Reform Commission, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. China has a near-monopoly over solar-grade polysilicon, producing 95% of the world's total in 2024, according to Bernreuter. China's share of the rest of the solar supply chain, including cells, modules and wafers has also reached over 80% in recent years. Polysilicon prices are up nearly 70% this month, alongside a range of other industrial commodities as Beijing's rhetoric, plus smaller initiatives from various ministries and provincial governments led markets to bet supply side reform was on the way. It is unclear where the money to finance the vehicle would come from given major players GCL and Tongwei ( opens new tab are losing money. "No one knows how the capacity acquisition will be implemented, because there's no past experience to refer to," said UBS analyst Yishu Yan, adding that most of the companies in the sector are indebted. Also unclear is how active a role the provincial and central governments will play in the vehicle and the factory closures it plans to make. Jun Zhu said the vehicle's central committee would be made up of producers, lenders and potentially regulators, without specifying who they would be. Yan at UBS said any plan to shut capacity may face opposition from local governments, where officials are scored on jobs and economic growth. Many of these governments also have stakes in local private solar firms. "If the solar companies are facing bankruptcy or to be acquired, there could be some pushback by the local governments," she said. ($1=7.15 yuan)
Reuters
16 minutes ago
- Reuters
Judges question whether Trump tariffs are authorized by emergency powers
July 31 (Reuters) - U.S. appeals court judges sharply questioned on Thursday whether President Donald Trump's tariffs were justified by the president's emergency powers, after a lower court said he exceeded his authority with sweeping levies on imported goods. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., is considering the legality of "reciprocal" tariffs that Trump imposed on a broad range of U.S. trading partners in April, as well as tariffs imposed in February against China, Canada and Mexico. In hearing arguments in two cases brought by five small U.S. businesses and 12 Democratic-led U.S. states, judges pressed government lawyer Brett Shumate to explain how the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law historically used for sanctioning enemies or freezing their assets, gave Trump the power to impose tariffs. Trump is the first president to use IEEPA to impose tariffs. "IEEPA doesn't even say tariffs, doesn't even mention them," one of the judges said. Shumate said that the law allows for "extraordinary" authority in an emergency, including the ability to stop imports completely. He said IEEPA authorizes tariffs because it allows a president to "regulate" imports in a crisis. The arguments - one day before Trump plans to increase tariff rates on imported goods from nearly all U.S. trading partners - mark the first test before a U.S. appeals court of the scope of his tariff authority. The president has made tariffs a central instrument of his foreign policy, wielding them aggressively in his second term as leverage in trade negotiations and to push back against what he has called unfair practices. Trump has said the April tariffs were a response to persistent U.S. trade imbalances and declining U.S. manufacturing power. He said the tariffs against China, Canada and Mexico were appropriate because those countries were not doing enough to stop illegal fentanyl from crossing U.S. borders. The countries have denied that claim. "Tariffs are making America GREAT & RICH Again," Trump wrote in a social media post on Thursday. "To all of my great lawyers who have fought so hard to save our Country, good luck in America's big case today." The states and businesses challenging the tariffs argued that they are not permissible under IEEPA and that the U.S. Constitution grants Congress, and not the president, authority over tariffs and other taxes. The case is being heard by a panel of all of the court's active judges, eight appointed by Democratic presidents and three appointed by former Republican presidents. The timing of the court's decision is uncertain, and the losing side will likely appeal quickly to the U.S. Supreme Court. Tariffs are starting to build into a significant revenue source for the federal government, with customs duties in June quadrupling to about $27 billion, a record, and through June have topped $100 billion for the current fiscal year. That income could be crucial to offset lost revenue from Trump's tax bill passed into law earlier this month. But economists say the duties threaten to raise prices for U.S. consumers and reduce corporate profits. Trump's on-again, off-again tariff threats have roiled financial markets and disrupted U.S. companies' ability to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. Dan Rayfield, the attorney general of Oregon, one of the states challenging the levies, said that the tariffs were a "regressive tax" that is making household items more expensive. On May 28, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade sided with the Democratic states and small businesses that challenged Trump. It said that the IEEPA did not authorize tariffs related to longstanding trade deficits. The Federal Circuit has allowed the tariffs to remain in place while it considers the administration's appeal. The case will have no impact on tariffs levied under more traditional legal authority, such as duties on steel and aluminum imports. The president recently announced trade deals that set tariff rates on goods from the European Union and Japan, following smaller trade agreements with Britain, Indonesia and Vietnam. Trump's Department of Justice has argued that limiting the president's tariff authority could undermine ongoing trade negotiations, while other Trump officials have said that negotiations have continued with little change after the initial setback in court. Trump has set an August 1 date for higher tariffs on countries that don't negotiate new trade deals. There are at least seven other lawsuits challenging Trump's invocation of IEEPA, including cases brought by other small businesses and California. A federal judge in Washington, D.C., ruled against Trump in one of those cases, and no judge has yet backed Trump's claim of unlimited emergency tariff authority.
