Connect with us

Business

How Trump Scrapping the De Minimis Rule Could Affect Consumers and Retailers

Published

on

How Trump Scrapping the De Minimis Rule Could Affect Consumers and Retailers

President Trump’s executive orders on Saturday imposing broad tariffs on the country’s three largest trading partners also scrapped a shipping workaround for low-cost products, a move that is poised to alter how many online purchases are taxed.

The provision, known as the de minimis exception, has been used by many e-commerce companies to send goods to the United States from China without having to pay taxes on them. Mr. Trump’s decision to revoke the loophole set off confusion and chaos within the U.S. Postal Service, which initially said it would no longer accept packages from China and Hong Kong, before reversing its decision some 12 hours later.

Mr. Trump’s order on Saturday required that all goods leaving China must follow the same rules for higher-value shipments. His ban on duty-free handling of shipments worth up to $800 could shift the landscape for online sales from fast-fashion retailers like Shein and Temu, which rely on Chinese vendors. Both companies have been able to expand their market share largely by exporting goods into the United States without being subject to duties.

On Monday, leaders of Canada and Mexico reached deals with Mr. Trump to delay the tariff rollouts by 30 days. The broad 10 percent tariffs on Chinese goods went into effect on Tuesday.

Here’s what to know about the de minimis rule:

Advertisement

The de minimis rule, or Section 321 of the Tariff Act of 1930, was originally aimed at allowing American tourists to send goods bought overseas to the United States without facing taxes. But more recently, companies have used the provision to ship products from other countries that have a retail value below a certain threshold without being subjected to taxes — a huge tax advantage.

In 2016, Congress raised the entry threshold to $800, from $200. Since then, the number of duty-free parcels has risen tenfold. Under the rule, packages can be shipped from other countries without paying tariffs, as long as the shipments do not exceed $800 per recipient per day.

Retailers have increased their reliance on the workaround in recent years, especially since Mr. Trump imposed tariffs on Chinese products in his first term. It underpins major business models, as Shein, Temu and many sellers on Amazon have used the de minimis exemption to bypass taxes.

A report released last week by the Congressional Research Service found that Chinese exports that are exempted by the de minimis rule soared to $66 billion in 2023 from $5.3 billion in 2018.

The Trump administration has said it is focused on eliminating the de minimis loophole because of its apparent ties to the fentanyl trade. A White House official said in a call with a reporter on Saturday that the provision was causing the United States to lose tariff revenue — and that the large flow of low-cost goods from China has made it challenging for customs officials to identify fentanyl shipments sent through the mail.

Advertisement

Traditional retailers have expressed frustration with the workaround for different reasons. These retailers typically send big bulk shipments to their warehouses that are subjected to duties. Under pressure from the rising popularity of Chinese e-commerce sites like Temu and Shein, retailers like Walmart and Amazon had explored shifting more toward shipping directly to consumers from China. In late 2024, Amazon started Haul, which was intended to help it compete with Temu and other low-cost online retailers.

Express delivery companies like FedEx and UPS, which fly many of the packages across the Pacific Ocean from China, have spoken out in favor of preserving the de minimis exception. Supporters of de minimis have also long said that eliminating the provision would increase the burden on U.S. customs officials. Customs and Border Protection is also the primary agency responsible for carrying out much of Mr. Trump’s enforcement actions at the border.

Shein and Temu, which rely on Chinese vendors, have been able to expand their market share largely by sending cheap goods into the United States. The two companies together have about 17 percent of the discount e-commerce market in the United States for fast fashion, toys and other consumer goods, according to the Congressional Research Service. The unraveling of the de minimis loophole threatens their operations.

While a majority of Shein and Temu products are shipped directly from China, both companies have diversified by working with more U.S.-based sellers and opening warehouses in the United States, which could limit some of the impact.

But other retailers might stand to gain.

Advertisement

“Amazon, as a whole, as well as other online retailers that fulfill from U.S. warehouses, will benefit as their competitors will be negatively affected,” said Yannis Bakos, an associate professor at the Stern School of Business at New York University who studies e-commerce.

Small and medium-size online retailers that source from China are likely to be affected, too. About a quarter of the biggest sellers on the e-commerce platform Shopify — sellers that are much smaller than Shein and Temu — also use the de minimis loophole to cheaply ship many of their products from China, said Aaron Rubin, the chief executive of ShipHero, a warehouse management software firm.

The loophole is “pretty widely used,” Mr. Rubin said. Beyond direct sales to customers, many small brands have also opted to ship products worth less than $800 at a time to Amazon to avoid paying taxes, Mr. Rubin added.

“In general, any of these sellers that were shipping directly from China are definitely going to be disrupted,” said Santiago Gallino, an associate professor at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania who researches retail supply chains. Some retailers, including smaller companies, might eventually shift toward bulk orders and set up distribution centers in the United States, if the changes last, he added.

The ban on de minimis will also come at a cost for American consumers. A $15 dress from Shein, for example, could jump to $17, said Izzy Rosenzweig, the chief executive of Portless, a third party logistics company. Research has found that eliminating the provision entirely would result in costs of $11 billion to $13 billion for American consumers and disproportionately hurt poorer and minority households.

Advertisement

Jordyn Holman contributed reporting.

Business

Landmark downtown apartment tower faces foreclosure

Published

on

Landmark downtown apartment tower faces foreclosure

A landmarked downtown Los Angeles apartment building designed by famed Los Angeles architect John Parkinson is on the market as its owners face foreclosure.

Residences in the Metropolitan, a 10-story tower built in 1913, are nearly filled with tenants but its ground floor retail spaces on Broadway and 5th Street are unoccupied, as are other street-level stores in downtown’s Historic Core.

The historic building was once considered one of the best in the city and is owned by the Fallas family, which operated a chain of value-priced clothing stores based in Gardena including one called Fallas Paredes in the Metropolitan.

Fallas-Paredes at 449 S. Broadway, Los Angeles, CA 90013.

(Google Maps)

Advertisement

Around 2011, Michael Fallas, who once worked in family’s downtown store as a stock boy, converted the upstairs floors from offices to apartments while continuing to operate Fallas Paredes. The store closed more than five years ago in the wake of a 2018 filing by its parent company for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Earlier this month in state Superior Court, a special servicer representing Fallas’ lender asked for a judicial foreclosure of the property, alleging that Fallas had stopped making payments on a $32 million loan dating to 2017. After leasing the property for years, Fallas bought the building in the 1990s.

Fallas didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The location of the Metropolitan where the buildings stands was hailed in a Times story in 1912, saying “it is regarded by many realty men as the most valuable piece of real estate in Los Angeles.”

Advertisement

The building today is recognized as a city historic-cultural monument because “Broadway became the commercial center of the Southland, a title it retained until well after World War II,” with its development, the city said. One of the architects who designed the Metropolitan in the Beaux-Arts style was John Parkinson, who is credited with designing such well-known local structures as City Hall, the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum and Union Station.

Notable tenants in the Metropolitan have included the Los Angeles Public Library, Owl Drug Co., variety store J.J. Newberry and real estate company Janns Investment Co., which sold the land where UCLA is built and developed Westwood Village, among other Los Angeles neighborhoods.

In recent years, the buildings around the Metropolitan have struggled to keep retail tenants after a spurt of residential conversions of historic buildings starting in the early 2000s brought commerce to the neighborhood. Many downtown businesses have struggled since the pandemic reduced occupancy in offices downtown and reduced the flow of visitors.

“The lack of bodies on the street is generally hurting downtown, and that’s one of the reasons that has building has problems,” said downtown real estate broker Hal Bastian, who lives in the Historic Core.

There are close to 1,000 residential units in historic buildings at the intersection of Broadway and 5th Street, Bastian said, but all the ground floor stores are closed. Drug stores there suffered substantial losses from shoplifting he said, and now, “our challenge on Broadway is leasing.”

Advertisement

The 88 apartments in the Metropolitan are 91% rented, according to a listing for the property by the Zacuto Group, which also touts its roof deck with pool, fitness center and barbecue grills. No sale price is set.

Continue Reading

Business

January 2025 wildfire victims seek tougher penalties against State Farm over claims handling

Published

on

January 2025 wildfire victims seek tougher penalties against State Farm over claims handling

A fire survivors’ group announced Thursday it was seeking tougher penalties against State Farm over its handling of January 2025 wildfire claims.

The Every Fire Survivor’s Network said it was petitioning to join a state enforcement action announced this year against the company to make sure the case results in meaningful changes at California’s largest home insurer.

“We’re seeking a systematic review of all their claims and penalties calibrated to the actual scale of the harm — and we’re seeking the payouts that families are owed,” said Joy Chen, executive director of the group, at a Pacific Palisades news conference joined by victims of the fires.

The Department of Insurance in May filed an administrative action against State Farm General — the subsidiary of the giant Bloomington, Ill., insurer that handles California home insurance — after completing a “market conduct” exam.

Advertisement

The Jan. 7, 2025, fire damaged or destroyed more than 18,000 structures and killed 31 people.

State Farm has received more January 2025 claims than any other insurer — more than 13,700 auto and homeowners claims as of May 4, with payouts totaling $5.7 billion, according to the company.

The market conduct exam looked at 220 sample claims filed by the victims and found 398 violations of state law in about half of them.

Among other alleged violations, it found that the company failed in numerous cases to pursue a “thorough, fair and objective investigation” into claims, failed to come to “prompt, fair, and equitable settlements” and made settlement offers that were “unreasonably low.”

In announcing the action, Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara called the company’s claims handling “unacceptable” and said his department was taking “decisive action to hold them accountable.”

Advertisement

The state is seeking a “cease and desist” order to stop the insurer from engaging in unfair or deceptive practices.

It also has threatened to suspend State Farm’s license over the alleged violations, which each carry a penalty of up to $5,000 — or twice that figure if found to be willful. That could amount to a penalty of $2 million or more.

The threat to actually suspend State Farm’s license and its authority to write policies has been viewed skeptically by some, given its roughly 20% market share of the state’s home insurance market.

The company, which had an opportunity to include its responses in the exam report, denied fault in some cases and admitted fault in others. It often blamed problems on individual adjusters and denied systemic issues with its claims handling.

The petition filed by the wildfire survivor’s group criticizes the sample size of the market conduct exam as too small to capture all the alleged deficiencies in State Farm’s claims handling, which it claims are a “general business practice” of the company.

Advertisement

The group is seeking to conduct discovery, cross examine witnesses, present testimony from fire victims and bring more that 1,600 firsthand policyholder statements regarding State Farm’s practices into evidence, according to the petition.

It also wants State Farm to reopen cases in which claimants were paid too little, and it is seeking to participate in settlement discussions in order to increase any penalty State Farm would pay.

It calculated that a $2-million penalty would amount to a minute fraction of the assets of the State Farm Group.

“I submit to you that doesn’t defer bad conduct, it just allows you to continue to do it,” said Michelle Meyers, an attorney for Every Fire Survivor’s Network, at the news conference.

Consumer Watchdog, which has been a harsh critic of State Farm, also is providing legal support for victims’ effort.

Advertisement

Sevag Sarkissian, a spokesperson for State Farm, said the company was aware of the petition.

“We recognize that many wildfire survivors, including those that are State Farm General policyholders, continue to face difficult recovery challenges,” he said. “Our focus remains on helping customers recover.”

Michael Soller, a spokesperson for Lara, said the department is “acting with urgency to assist wildfire survivors in their ongoing recovery by investigating formal complaints filed by survivors and conducting the expedited market conduct exam that led to this enforcement action.”

He added that the department’s position is the state’s Administrative Procedure Act does not contemplate the commissioner or department staff authorizing intervention requests in the case.

He said that would be a hearing officer’s or administrative law judge’s decision when one is assigned to the case.

Advertisement

Meyers acknowledged the request was novel but said her reading of the law is that Lara can make the decision because no judge is yet assigned.

In response to the criticism, State Farm pledged earlier this year to improve its claims handling, including by providing single points of contact and improved communication so there are “fewer handoffs, fewer repeated explanations, and seamless support.”

It also named a new vice president of customer relations for State Farm General.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Uber, California lawyers say deal reached to avert dueling ballot initiative showdown

Published

on

Uber, California lawyers say deal reached to avert dueling ballot initiative showdown

The state’s trial attorneys and Uber say they have reached a last-minute deal to scrap their dueling ballot measures and avert what was gearing up to be one of most expensive battles of the November election.

The deal, which comes a day after both measures qualified for the November ballot, has Uber agreeing to bulk up safety measures, while the trial attorneys will limit how much they can claim for lien-based medical treatment of victims who get in Uber or Lyft accidents, according to spokespeople for both sides of the campaign.

“Both sides agree: Californians deserve a system that’s safe, fair, and accountable,” read a joint statement from Uber and the Consumer Attorneys of California, a powerful attorney trade group. “This agreement protects patients from unnecessary treatment or getting overcharged, ensures access to medical care and legal representation, and strengthens safety measures.”

The agreement, finalized Thursday, means the ride-share giant will kill its ballot measure to cap how much attorneys can earn in vehicle collision cases and limit medical damages to rates based on insurance. Uber has argued that the costs for medical treatment done on a lien, which allows doctors to get paid from a cut of the plaintiff’s payout, far exceed what it would cost if the victim had used their own insurance.

In return, the Consumer Attorneys of California will cancel its competing ballot measure that sought to increase legal liability for ride-share companies if a passenger is sexually assaulted by a driver. The measure followed an investigation by the New York Times into sexual assault by drivers.

Advertisement

Both sides had poured tens of millions into the campaigns, plastering billboards across Los Angeles.

Lawyers claimed the fight had turned existential with the measure threatening to decimate the profit margin of many personal injury cases and leave drivers with small or thorny cases unable to find an attorney willing to take their case.

Spokespeople say the deal is predicated on their agreement being codified into a bill within the next week. Otherwise, they said, each side will move forward with its ballot measure.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending