Keep up to date with Peterson Institute publications, events, and interviews via email, podcast, or RSS. More information on subscription options.
Use filters to narrow your search through our publications and events.
by Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Peterson Institute for International Economics
and Yee Wong, Government Accountability Office
June 2011
Sharp reductions in tariffs and quotas have propelled dramatic growth in global trade over the past several decades. Often overlooked, however, are the costs associated with trade logistics. In many countries logistics costs are greater deterrents to trade than remaining tariffs. Studies show that trade facilitation—i.e., the reduction of logistics costs—could increase annual global manufactured exports by as much as $400 billion. Hufbauer and Wong focus on two barriers that specifically hamper low-value shipments: (1) an unduly restrictive de minimis exemption from customs duty for low-value imports and (2) an unduly low "informal entry" threshold, the dividing line that determines whether the shipment requires just a little paperwork or a lot of paperwork to clear the entry process. The authors' estimates for the United States reveal that the payoff associated with raising thresholds and reducing "exceptions" could be significant. An increase in the de minimis threshold to $800 would generate net gains of around $17 million annually, taking into account the cost savings at each stage of the delivery chain and the revenue not collected by the customs authority. The saving of paperwork costs alone on de minimis entries might be $33 million a year. Raising the informal entry threshold to $2,500, and slashing the number of "exceptions," could generate net gains of $81 million per year. For emerging-market economies, potential gains from higher de minimis and informal entry thresholds are very likely more substantial relative to the size of their economies. Improving logistics and raising thresholds for low-value shipments are a powerful and relatively inexpensive means of enhancing the trading system.
See also the release event for this policy brief.
View full document [pdf]
RELATED LINKS
Policy Brief 12-21: How Can Trade Policy Help America Compete? October 2012
Policy Brief 11-20: The United States Should Establish Permanent Normal Trade Relations with Russia November 2011
Policy Brief 11-8: What Should the United States Do about Doha? June 2011
Book: The Long-Term International Economic Position of the United States April 2009
Op-ed: Trade: An Opportunity About to Be Lost? May 20, 2011
Op-ed: New Imbalances Will Threaten Global Recovery June 10, 2010
Op-ed: How Best to Boost US Exports February 3, 2010
Op-ed: Cooling the Planet Without Chilling Trade November 13, 2009
Paper: Submission to the USTR in Support of a Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement January 25, 2010
Working Paper 09-2: Policy Liberalization and US Merchandise Trade Growth, 1980–2006 May 2009
Policy Brief 09-2: Buy American: Bad for Jobs, Worse for Reputation February 2009
Paper: Report to the President-Elect and the 111th Congress on A New Trade Policy for the United States December 17, 2008
Book: American Trade Politics, 4th edition June 2005
Op-ed: The Payoff from Globalization June 7, 2005
Policy Brief 08-5: World Trade at Risk May 2008