Latest news with #U.S.BureauofTransportationStatistics
Miami Herald
20-05-2025
- Automotive
- Miami Herald
How much can renters save by switching from a car commute to using public transit?
How much can renters save by switching from a car commute to using public transit? Historically, driving has been Americans' preferred way to get to work. According to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, the share of workers who drive to work alone never dipped below 75%. Only the increase in remote work following the pandemic put a dent in these numbers: The share of workers driving to and from the office daily declined slightly, but hovers around a fairly high 69% to this day. And that's no wonder. Navigating the city by car shaves hours off of a commuter's weekly traffic time. It's also much more comfortable than getting up earlier to walk to the metro or bus station and then walk some more to the office. However, to save that time and keep a certain level of comfort, the typical American commuter spends thousands of dollars just to cover the commute costs. Alternatively, the annual costs associated with commuting by public transportation are significantly lower. On average, whereas a car commute might equate to a little more than $8,000, taking the bus costs just $972 per year. This means that a commuter willing to ditch the car in favor of the bus could potentially save around $7,000. Of course, that's a substantial amount for anyone, but it's renters who would benefit the most: With a monthly income of around $4,000, the average U.S. renter household would save the equivalent of nearly two months' salary by choosing public transit. Homeowners who commute would get the same discounts should they choose public transportation. But, given that the median monthly income for owner households is around $8,000, those savings represent a far smaller share: For owners, the costs related to car commute represent 8% of their average annual income, whereas driving to work bites more than 15% out of a renter's salary. So, Point2Homes asks how much money can commuters, and especially renters, save by switching from a car commute to using public transportation in the 30 largest U.S. cities? And conversely, how much time could they save if they went for the car, instead of the bus? Commute savings: In the 30 largest US cities, commuters can save either time or money Commuting by car instead of public transit saves up to 218 hours (or nine days) per year in Las Vegas, while ditching the car in favor of the bus saves up to $10,000 per year in San versus owners in the 30 largest U.S. cities: Saving thousands of dollars is great for anyone's budget, but renters would benefit from ditching the car more so than owners. Average savings represent approximately 8% of owners' income, but a massive 15% of renters' median cities for budget-conscious renters: In 27 of the 30 cities in the analysis, renters would save more than the equivalent of a month's salary if they ditched the car in favor of public fact, in three cities (Philadelphia, Detroit and Baltimore), yearly savings would exceed the equivalent of two months' cities for commuters pressed for time: When it comes to how much time they can save, both renters and owners who drive to work would spot the biggest difference in Las Vegas (where the car commute takes 52 minutes less compared to a public transit commute) and San Jose, California, (51 minutes less), adding up to nine days per year. Time is money: US car commuters save time, but driving to work costs $7,165 more per year, on average For owners, yearly car costs may mean just 8% of their average annual income, but driving to work consumes more than 15% of a renter's salary. From parking and fuel costs to insurance and maintenance, commuting by car is thousands of dollars more expensive than commuting via public transportation. To be more precise, it's a hefty $7,165 more. With a monthly income of a little more than $4,000, the typical renter household has to set aside the equivalent of nearly two months' worth of income every year just to be able to cover the costs of getting to work by car. The median income of a renter household is around half that of the typical owner household. According to the latest Census numbers, while the former is $51,393 per year, the latter hovers around a much more comfortable $97,352. Right off the bat, this means that renters need to develop budgeting skills that owners can, in theory, do without. And one glaring budget drain is car costs. Adding up the average annual insurance ($2,670) and maintenance ($1,500) costs, as well as annual fuel ($1,699) and parking ($2,268) costs reveals that car commuters spend around $8,000 just to get to and back from work. While this represents less than 8% of owners' income, it's more than 15% of renters' annual income. It is, however, faster. How much faster? The average American car commuter shaves off almost 33 minutes from their round-trip commute each day simply by choosing the car instead of the bus. This adds up to nearly six days per year. Plus, while paper math might make it seem easy to choose between saving money and saving time, commuters who are juggling taking the children to school, getting to work in time and possibly running multiple errands each day have a lot more to take into consideration than just money. Also, switching to mass transit to save money sounds great, but some cities are simply too steeped in car culture. While New York City, for example, distinguishes itself from other U.S. cities for its low personal car ownership and its significant use of public transportation, cities like Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; Jacksonville, Florida; and Memphis, Tennessee, are car-dependent, having very low transit scores. According to Walkscore, these cities have minimal public transportation, not many bike lanes, and some of the lowest walkability scores out of all of the cities in the analysis. There are many reasons why America is so car-dependent, but ultimately what's more important to address is the financial burden that the costs of owning a car place on American households. According to the Institute for Transportation & Development Policy: In terms of total national household spending, transportation accounted for a total of $1.6 trillion, making it the fourth highest category of household expenditure in the country. After a decline in 2019-2020 due to the restrictions of the COVID-19 pandemic, between 2020-2021 the total national household spending on transportation continued to increase by nearly 30%. […] many U.S. cities lacking reliable, well-funded, and inclusive public transport options, people are forced to travel by personal vehicles to access essential destinations, like school or work. The lack of affordable, sustainable public transport options thus creates a noticeable financial burden on average American households-with fewer mobility options, many are forced to make difficult financial decisions that can impact quality of life. Best cities for budget-conscious renters: Ditching the car saves most money in San Francisco, New York City and San Diego Translating savings into monthly income, it's Philadelphia, Detroit and Baltimore that shine on the podium with yearly savings equal to at least two months' worth of income. The renters in America's 30 largest cities could benefit the most from switching to public transit commutes. With renter household incomes hovering around half that of homeowners', it's no wonder commute savings would have a bigger impact on renters' wallets. However, that financial impact also depends on the city they commute in. Commuters in large, busy and densely populated coastal hubs would benefit the most from taking the metro. Costs associated with car commutes in San Francisco and New York City surpass $11,000, and they're nearly $10,000 in cities like San Diego, Los Angeles, Boston, and Philadelphia. Yearly mass transit, however, costs around $1,000 to $1,500. Commuters who switch from car to metro could easily pocket the thousands of dollars difference. Click here for the full data on all 30 large U.S. cities With savings of around $10,000, San Francisco commuters who ditch the car for a year would see the most significant financial improvement. As the second-most densely populated major U.S. city, commuting by car in San Francisco might take a toll on commuters' wallets, and their lifestyle, as well. Next comes the most densely populated U.S. urban area: In New York City, commuters know the drill as 51% already use public transit to get to and from work. But, the 20% who use a car stand to save $9,538 if they decide to join the majority. These savings are sizable, but there are cities where commuting renters who ditch the car stand to gain even more. That's because both San Francisco and New York City renters would only save the equivalent of one month's salary if they crossed to the public transit side. However, in Philadelphia, Detroit, and Baltimore, giving up a car commute and taking the bus to work for a year would translate to more than two months' average salary. The share of car commuters are indeed below 50% in extremely busy cities like New York City (31%); Washington, D.C. (46%); San Francisco (48%); and Boston (49%). However, commuting by car is the absolute norm in the other 26 large cities in the study, with commuters who drive to work in Fort Worth, Texas; Oklahoma City; and Memphis, representing the crushing majority at 96%. In fact, in 17 of these 26 car-centric cities, car commuters represent more than 90% of all commuters. This means that a significant number of renters could save the equivalent of at least a month's salary if they had the option to leave the car at home. But, do they? Public transit infrastructure is complex and extremely well-developed in many cities, especially in densely populated coastal urban hubs, but it's often less efficient in more sprawling, lower-density cities where people need to cover long distances to get to work. The least-lucky commuters are car commuters from San Jose; Charlotte, North Carolina; and Seattle: Although they come very close, the total yearly savings that renters would see if they switched from a car commute to public transit don't add up to a month's salary. Best cities for commuters in a hurry: At 45 minutes, the shortest car commutes are in Memphis, and Columbus, Ohio Ditching the car would take a toll on Las Vegas and San Jose commuters as it would add almost an hour to their daily round-trip. Money is important, but many commuters choose to drive to work because it's faster and more comfortable. What's more, quite a few of them jump in the car in the morning because they have a lot more ground to cover than just the route to and back from the office. Dropping the kids to school and taking them back; going to another part of town to run an errand; or maybe going to the gym at lunch are all tasks that would be nearly impossible, or, at the very least much harder to get to without a car. Click here for the full data on all 30 large U.S. cities For commuters looking to save time, there are two possible scenarios: Either they live in a city where car commutes are short compared to other large cities or the difference between taking the car and taking the bus is so big that they have no choice but drive to work to make it work. In the first scenario, commuters in five of the 30 largest cities are the luckiest, with average daily commutes just under 50 minutes. Despite living in big urban hubs, car commuters in Memphis; Columbus, Ohio; Louisville, Kentucky; El Paso; and Oklahoma City spend half the time behind the wheel compared to NYC commuters. What's more, taking the bus would add at least 30 minutes to the time they spend in traffic every day. Granted, they would save a lot of money, but saving time is also a big plus. In the second scenario, it's commuters from two cities who would feel the biggest difference. Public transit commuters in Las Vegas and San Jose would spend almost one hour more in traffic, every day, if they gave up their cars. In El Paso, Fort Worth, San Antonio, Phoenix, and Detroit, they would be forced to endure the mind-numbing traffic conditions for an extra 40 to 50 minutes. This adds up quite fast. At the other end of the spectrum, there are a few large cities where taking the car would greatly increase commute costs without offering a huge time advantage in exchange: In Washington, D.C. and Boston, commuters would have to spend around $8,000 more to commute by car, but would only save around 20 minutes per day. With daily savings of around 25 minutes, commuters in Charlotte, New York City, Philadelphia, and San Francisco wouldn't be much better off. Commuting in NYC: The Bronx renters would save $8,700 by choosing public transit, the equivalent of 2+ months' salary Manhattan commuters can't catch a break: Whether by car or metro, getting to and from work takes forever. So they might as well choose the money. Although car culture dominates in the U.S., New York City, quite unsurprisingly, deviates from the norm: Mass transit, and especially the subway, are much more representative for the Big Apple. And that makes sense in America's most populous city, and its most densely populated one, as well. Space is a most valuable commodity in the City That Never Sleeps and that includes parking spaces and garages: Finding a spot to park your car is a challenge in itself. Add this to all the other usual costs and it becomes obvious that owning a car and driving around in America's largest city comes at a premium, more so than in any other city in the U.S. Most households in NYC (54%) don't own a car and people here rely on public transit to commute and move around. More precisely, according to the most recent Census data, of all of the residents who commute to work in the city, 32% use the subway, 12% take the bus, 10% walk to work, 4% travel by commuter rail, 5.6% carpool, 3.1% use a taxi, 1.7% ride their bicycle to work, and the smallest share (0.4%) travel by ferry. However, 30% of all commuters drive to work alone. Car ownership is significant in a few boroughs, and it's those commuters who would benefit the most from switching sides. In Staten Island, 68% of commuters drive to work, followed at a distance by Queens, where 43% rely on their car to move around. In The Bronx, 30% drive to work, while Brooklyn commuters who use a car are fewer, representing 26% of all commuters. Manhattan, the city's main employment center, has the lowest share of car commuters: Less than 10% of all employees here drive to work. Yet, Manhattanites would see the biggest savings: Given that car commuting costs in this borough are nearly $15,000 and mass transit costs are almost 10 times lower at $1,584, drivers who give up driving would save $13,294 per year. The average Manhattan renter household makes around $7,000 and the typical owner household earns a little more than $16,000, which means the math is mathing in NYC's poshest borough. Savings would be quite impressive in Brooklyn, as well. At $9,634, commute savings represent much more than a renter household's monthly income ($5,363) and are almost equal to an owner household's income (around $10,000). Not to be outdone, Queens and The Bronx are almost neck and neck, with annual savings of $8,902 and $8,698, respectively. And, although The Bronx seems to trail behind these other boroughs, it's actually way ahead of the pack: Renters who rely on the subway instead of a car could save more than the equivalent of two months' median salary, which is more than renters in any other borough. At $7,186 per year, Staten Island mass transit commuters would see the smallest savings, but that amount would still represent more than the local renter's median monthly income. How about saving time? Most NYC commuters use public transportation, but even the few ones who insist on driving should give it up and never look back: A car commute shaves so little time from the daily commute and is so much more expensive that it's almost not worth it. Driving to work only saves around eight minutes in Manhattan, and around 20 minutes in Brooklyn and The Bronx. Deciding between the car and the subway in Queens and Staten Island is a tougher choice, though: Giving up the car adds more than half an hour to an employee's daily commute in Queens and, in Staten Island, a mass transit commute takes 50 minutes more than a car commute. Compare commute times and commute savings in the 30 largest U.S. cities plus the five NYC boroughs: Methodology is a real estate listing portal for rental homes across the United States. Part of Yardi Systems, Point2Homes covers housing trends and news through comprehensive studies that draw from internal data, public records, governmental sources, and online research. For this study, we took into consideration the 30 most populous U.S. cities, per the U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS 2023).Data about means of transportation to get to work, tenure by vehicles and commute time for the 30 largest U.S. cities were also sourced from the U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS 2023).Data on fuel and maintenance costs was sourced from AAA, car insurance costs from Bankrate, and parking rates from on the financial cost of public transit commuting in each city was sourced from APTA and local transit authority median income for the renter and owner households at the national level and also for the 30 cities used in the analysis were sourced from the U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS 2023). This story was produced by Point2Homes and reviewed and distributed by Stacker. © Stacker Media, LLC.
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Yahoo
2 Florida airports made list of top 50 most stressful airports in US. Will they surprise you?
There's nothing like the anticipation of a trip ... until things start to go wrong. Brown's CBD UK came up with a list of the 50 most stressful airports in the United States, based on data from the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Two Florida airports made the "most-stressful" list. The highest causes of stress for those flying: high cancellation rates lengthy delays for both arrivals and departures Here's what to know, whether you're flying for Memorial Day, planning a summer vacation or just doing some wishful thinking. Research compiled by UK BROWN'S CBD said travelers face significant delays and high cancellation rates, which was used to set a stress score. Here are the top 10 most stressful airports: Can't see the table? Open in a new browser. Two Florida airports made the top 50 of most stressful airports in the U.S.: Key West and Miami International, coming in at No. 30 and No. 40, respectively. Can't see the table? Open in a new browser. "Our study shows that airport stress isn't necessarily connected to passenger volume," said Laurence Brown, director of BROWN'S CBD "Some of the smallest airports in America rank among the most stressful due to high cancellation rates and significant delays. "The data also reveals that regional airports often struggle with reliability issues that can increase traveler anxiety. These smaller facilities typically have fewer flight options, so when flights are canceled or delayed, passengers have limited alternatives." Brown's CBD's research gathered data from a variety of sources to give each airport a stress score based on the following factors: Number of enplanements, sourced from the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Weight: 20% Average departure delay, sourced from the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Weight: 20% % of departures canceled, sourced from the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Weight: 20% Average arrival delay, sourced from the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Weight: 20% Rating on Google, sourced from Weight: 20% This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: Stressful airports in US list: Key West, Miami International Florida
Yahoo
29-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Amtrak ridership in Minnesota up 176% since 2021, up 89% in North Dakota
Mar. 29—GRAND FORKS — For a town like Rugby, North Dakota, where the population is about 2,400 and the nearest commercial airports are roughly an hour away, the local passenger train is a point of pride and a part of daily life. "We're very proud of our Amtrak station, the fact it's still a stop here and the train does stop here," said Laurie Odden, the director of the city's Chamber of Commerce and visitors bureau. "I think as family members, friends, we love to be able to drop someone off at the train station, or pick them up, or what have you, or entertain them between the times it picks up and drops off." Later this year, Amtrak will cut the ribbon on interior and exterior improvements to the town's historic train depot, including a new heated outdoor platform. It will also unveil similar upgrades at the Devils Lake station. The Grand Forks station has been upgraded in recent years as well, and renovations at the Fargo station are expected to wrap up later in 2025. Amtrak and some city officials hope the multimillion-dollar updates will attract even more passengers to its Upper Midwest lines, which have seen ridership grow every year since 2021. Although Amtrak ridership in North Dakota still hasn't returned to pre-pandemic levels, ridership in the state has roughly doubled in the past four years. Ridership in Minnesota has nearly tripled, surpassing pre-pandemic numbers. Nationwide, Amtrak spokesperson Marc Magliari painted an even rosier picture. "Our ridership is above and beyond what it was before COVID," he said. "And that's pretty much the picture across the country." In 2019, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, North Dakota and Minnesota saw annual passenger rail ridership numbers of 101,119 and 131,973, respectively, according to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. In 2021, those numbers hit their lowest point at 44,950 and 65,827. In 2024, the most recent data available, 85,199 riders took the train in North Dakota, an 89.5% increase since 2021. In Minnesota, that number was 181,716, a 176% increase. Minnesota ridership was boosted last year by the introduction of Amtrak's new Borealis route between St. Paul and Chicago. It exceeded ridership expectations — Amtrak and MnDOT initially projected annual ridership on that route would be around 125,000. Instead, Borealis saw 100,000 riders in just its first 22 weeks. The uptick can be attributed to several things, like population growth, pent-up desire for travel left over from the pandemic, and even milder winters the past few years, which frequently translates to higher ridership in the winter months, Magliari said. But in the numbers, he also sees a demand for "other options that are more comfortable, safer, more reliable than driving." "People are looking for options besides, you know, an 18-wheeler in their rearview mirror, and someone next to them yacking on the phone that they're holding, or people in the car on the other side shaving or putting on lipstick," he said. "I mean, driving is not as wonderful an experience as maybe it once was, and I think you'll hear the same thing about flying." Dale Niewoehner, a former Rugby mayor who has lobbied to Amtrak for more than 35 years, said the value of regular passenger service to a small, rural community like Rugby can't be overstated. "A lot of people want to bring up the fact that it's nostalgic or history," he said. "Well, that's fine, but it's still a method of transportation here in rural America. "You know, Grandma wants to go to Seattle, she can come up here, get on this train, and nobody's going to frisk her or anything," he continued. "She can sit herself down in a chair or in a sleeper and safely get to Seattle without any hassle. And she can leave her car at the depot, and when she gets home, she can jump in her car and go home. And I think that's really important." And where the train stops, economic and tourism benefits follow, Odden added. Current Rugby Mayor Frank LaRocque said that judging by the license plates that frequent the depot parking lot, many Manitobans travel to Rugby to catch the train. So do people from across neighboring counties. Last year, 3,361 people got on or off the train in Rugby, according to Amtrak data. "They use the hotels if they have an early morning train. ... They eat in the restaurants," he said. Magliari heard similar feedback in a recent visit to Red Wing, Minnesota, one of the stops on the new Borealis line. "Folks in that community were very, very clear about what a great improvement that's been for business in Red Wing, to make it easier for people to go back and forth between Red Wing and Chicago and St. Paul, for new business and for tourism," he said. "So there's certainly a great Midwestern example." In North Dakota, for decades, the only passenger rail line has been the Empire Builder, which travels from Fargo to Grand Forks and west through Williston on its way between Chicago and Seattle and Portland. There are hopes for that to change in the coming years. On Dec. 20, the federal government published the Long Distance Service Study, which included aspirations for more long-distance routes across the country, including the North Coast Hiawatha line. That line was decommissioned in North Dakota in the 1970s, and today is operated in Montana by the Big Sky Rail Authority. The hoped-for expansion would connect Chicago and Seattle through Fargo, servicing the bottom half of the state. There has also long been interest in extending service to St. Cloud and Fargo, Magliari added. Amtrak is a federally chartered corporation, meaning it operates like a private business but is government-owned. In Niewoehner's experience, the federal government can be fickle at times — investments and projects can come through one day and be discontinued the next. He still remembers a time decades ago when there were discussions of ending daily Amtrak service in Rugby. Still, he has high hopes that Amtrak's multimillion-dollar investment in the state in recent years means passenger rail service is here to stay. "I hate to think of the time that this train is not going to stop here, if it just goes whizzing by," he said. As for LaRocque, he hasn't taken the train in many years. When it comes to travel, for LaRocque — a state trooper of 20 years — it's tough to beat his love of driving. Recently, though, he's been thinking it might be time for a trip. "I was just thinking about it yesterday. I should go for another train ride. It's been a while," he said, adding that he would like to go out west, perhaps to see the famous Pike Place fish market in Seattle. "And I'd like to go through the mountains — just ride out there, spend a couple days, and jump back on and ride back to Rugby." Following are year-over-year numbers for stations along Amtrak's Empire Builder in North Dakota and Minnesota, comparing 2024 numbers to 2023: * Devils Lake: 3,092 (2023), 3,922 (2024) * Fargo: 17,545 (2023), 19,986 (2024) * Grand Forks: 9,863 (2023), 13,018 (2024) * Minot: 19,962 (2023), 22,680 (2024) * Rugby: 2,718 (2023), 3,361 (2024) * Stanley: 2,440 (2023), 2,960 (2024) * Williston: 17,213 (2023), 19,192 (2024) * Detroit Lakes: 4,182 (2023), 5,580 (2024) * Red Wing: 5,609 (2023), 11,031 (2024) * St. Cloud: 8,169 (2023), 9,358 (2024) * St. Paul-Minneapolis: 77,597 (2023), 130,328 (2024) * Staples: 5,931 (2023), 7,977 (2024) * Winona: 10,847 (2023), 17,442 (2024)
CBC
05-02-2025
- Business
- CBC
Trump's tariffs could make sending a package or crossing the border costlier — and more complicated
It could get more complicated — and potentially more expensive — for Canadians to cross the border or send packages to the United States, if President Donald Trump's executive order on tariffs goes into effect. Businesses that export products to the U.S. have warned that Trump's plan for 25 per cent tariffs on most Canadian goods could lead to losses and layoffs. But it is the small print in the order and the way the U.S. government is instructed to implement it that could hit individual Canadians. The executive order that Trump signed on Saturday didn't just levy tariffs on Canadian goods. He also removed what is called the de minimis customs exemption. That little-known exemption allows people to bring or ship up to $800 US worth of goods per recipient per day into the U.S. without having to pay duty on those goods. The U.S.'s de minimis provision has been invaluable to many people and companies around the world, easing travel and trade. U.S. Customs and Border Protection estimates that $54.5 billion worth of goods entered the U.S. in 2023 using the exemption. It has also made it a bit easier to cross the border since Canadians and Americans returning to the U.S. don't have to make a formal declaration or pay duty unless they are bringing in goods worth more than $800 US. And its removal for imports from China could also impact Canadian businesses. According to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 20.6 million personal vehicles entered the United States in 2023, plus nearly 216,000 pedestrians. Added to that would be those who entered by air or sea. Andrea Bjorklund, a McGill University professor and an expert in international commercial law, said eliminating the de minimis exemption could hit a lot of Canadians, particularly those who live near the border and go back and forth a lot. "I think it is very likely to make trips much more cumbersome because if the order is implemented, literally it seems that anyone crossing the border has to make a declaration about what they're carrying and potentially to pay duty on it without any de minimis exception," said Bjorklund. "At the very least, it is going to slow things down a great deal." A last-minute deal Monday paused the implementation of Trump's executive order until March 4. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) said it issued guidance based on that order to its officers on Monday, but that guidance was retracted on Tuesday. Details of how the order would be implemented was also removed from the public inspection portion of the U.S. government's Federal Register on Tuesday. Those documents shed light on just what could change for Canadians should Trump go ahead with his order. For those crossing the border into the U.S., the $800 de minimis exemption would be gone but the Federal Register notice provided an exception for "products for personal use" packed in the traveller's baggage. "It means that you really are, I think, subject to the discretion of the individual officer about what they think personal use is," said Bjorklund, pointing out that a Canadian-made gift for a family member in the U.S. might not be considered something for your own personal use. There would also be changes for Canadians and Canadian businesses shipping parcels to the U.S. Beyond the elimination of the de minimis exemption, the notice in the Federal Register says all mail shipments from Canada would be subject to "formal entry" provisions. "Without regard to their value, no mail shipments from Canada will be cleared or released by CBP unless and until formal entry is properly filed," reads the notice. U.S. agency says narcotics being shipped under exemption In 2024, the CBP warned that bad actors were using the de minimis exemption to ship narcotics and things like precursor chemicals to make fentanyl by international mail and courier services. Jesse Mitchell, director of business development for customs broker Strader-Ferris International, says requiring all mail shipments from Canada to go through formal entry would mean cumbersome customs declarations would be required for shipments of Canadian goods to the U.S. in addition to the proposed 25 per cent tariff. Mitchell said that would be a "massive" administrative burden. "How is U.S. customs going to manage all this?" he said. Mitchell said the problems are already starting — while Trump has paused his executive orders on Canada and Mexico, the executive order imposing tariffs on China went into effect Tuesday. Like the Canadian order, Trump's order on China eliminates the de minimis exemption — used by popular discount "direct from China" discount retailers, among others. A Canadian or a Canadian business shipping something made in China to the U.S. could have to pay duty on the value of those goods — even if they are worth less than $800 US and the order targeting Canadian goods is not yet in effect. "Canadian companies that are distributors or that ship parts to the United States or things to the U.S., and they're often shipping FedEx or UPS across the border, those items that are Chinese will now be fully dutiable and will have tariffs on them," said Mitchell. While a de minimis customs clearance is relatively simple and includes few questions, a formal customs clearance requires a lot more work, he added. That will add to the cost, he said. For example, Mitchell said a Chinese-made shirt worth $100 when it crosses the border will now face a 25 per cent tariff plus a 10 per cent new tariff — plus the original customs duty on the shirt of about 17 per cent. "If that order had shipped five days ago, or even two days ago from Canada and it was a $100 shirt, it would have had zero duty," he said.
