Customs Duty Rates 2026: How to Calculate What You'll Actually Pay at the Port

A pipe distributor in Houston signed a $100,000 PO for Tianjin steel last March. The HTS chapter showed duty-free, the broker confirmed duty-free, and the CFO budgeted accordingly.

Then the entry posted and the duty bill came back at $60,759.

Nothing was wrong with the classification. HTS 7306.30.5028 is genuinely 0% under Column 1, but Section 122, Section 232, Section 301, MPF and HMF all ran on the same entry, and the only one of those that shows up on hts.usitc.gov is the MFN. By the time the broker had finished explaining where the rest came from, the goods were sitting in bond at roughly $400 a day in demurrage and the CFO was on his second espresso of the morning.

This is what nobody tells SMB importers in 2026: the customs duty rate visible on the public schedule is a floor, not a price. April alone produced retroactive corrections under Federal Register notice 2026-08297 that repriced steel-derivative entries already filed two weeks earlier. So skip the theory. Below is how we work out what you'll actually pay before you sign anything.

What 2026 customs duty rates actually stack on a single entry

Up to five rate components hit one entry line in 2026. The MFN duty from the HTS chapter sits at the bottom, the Section 122 global surcharge of 10% layers on top, and from there Section 232 adds 25% to 50% on covered metals along with autos, semiconductors, lumber, pharmaceuticals. Section 301 piles on another 25% to 100% on Chinese-origin goods by chapter, AD/CVD applies wherever Commerce has issued an order, and then MPF (0.3464%, capped at $634.62 per entry FY2026) plus HMF (0.125% on ocean cargo) get treated as separate fees on top of everything else.

CBP runs MFN first, then the program duties, then MPF and HMF. An FTA preference reduces the MFN portion if the goods qualify under rules of origin, but it does not touch Section 232 or 301 — USMCA goods from Mexico still pay Section 232 on steel, and Korean goods under KORUS still pay Section 301 if they're Chinese-origin and the Korean transformation didn't meet the substantial change threshold. People miss this constantly.

Back to the Houston example: steel pipe, China origin, $100,000 declared. MFN 0%. Section 122 added $10,000, Section 232 another $25,000, Section 301 List 3 another $25,000, MPF capped at $634.62, HMF $125, total $60,759.62. The broker wasn't lying when he said duty-free. He read the chapter. He just didn't read what stacked on top.

The reason this catches people is genuinely structural — no single government source shows the full stack on one screen. MFN lives at USITC, Section 122 in CSMS bulletins, Section 301 in USTR Federal Register notices by Annex, AD/CVD orders at the ITC's Trade Remedy database, and nobody is going to assemble them for you. Half the SMB shops we talk to model landed cost on MFN alone, because that's what HTS lookup displays, and they discover the rest at the port.

How to find your HTS code and verify the customs tariff in 2026

The starting point is hts.usitc.gov. The 2026 Revision 4 (effective April) reflects WCO HS 2022 nomenclature with all 10-digit US extensions, so you drill into the chapter that covers your product, narrow through heading and subheading, and read the Column 1 General rate. That number is your MFN, which is the easy part.

The harder part is the three checks the HTS page won't run for you. CBP's CSMS bulletin feed (subscribe at content.govdelivery.com/USDHSCBP) flags every Section 232 and 122 modification within 48 hours of publication, USTR Section 301 Federal Register notices list covered HTS subheadings by Annex, and the ITC's AD/CVD case database at usitc.gov/trade_remedy shows live orders by product and country. Each one lives in a different system on a different schedule, which is why most importers we talk to outsource this to a broker and hope the broker reads everything they don't.

Classification logic itself follows the General Rules of Interpretation, printed at the front of the HTS volume. GRI 1 governs most cases — classify by the most specific heading. GRI 3(b) handles composites by essential character. GRI 3(c) breaks ties via the heading occurring last in numerical order. We watched an importer lose a binding ruling appeal because their classifier reached for GRI 3(c) when GRI 1 had a more specific match available two chapters earlier, which is the kind of mistake that costs real money once it gets compounded across a year of entries.

Where it falls apart for SMB importers is supplier-supplied codes. A Vietnamese factory will email you a 6-digit HS that minimizes their export documentation burden, not a code that survives US CBP scrutiny, and under 19 U.S.C. §1484 the importer of record carries reasonable care liability regardless of who supplied the classification. CBP's question on day one isn't who told you the code — it's whether you exercised reasonable care.

For high-exposure SKUs where two competing classifications would change duty by more than $5,000 per shipment, the answer is to file an eRuling under 19 CFR Part 177. About 30 days for a binding decision, enforceable at every port, and the only piece of paper that insulates you from a later reclassification.

Why every import duty calculator gets Section 232 wrong (and how to test yours)

Every import duty calculator on the market depends on the same four data feeds — USITC for HTS rates, CBP CSMS for Section 122 and 232, USTR Federal Register notices for Section 301, and Commerce/ITC for AD/CVD — and the output is only as fresh as the last sync. USITC published HTS Revision 4 in April 2026 after Revision 3 in February, and the calculators that didn't refresh between revisions were returning stale rates for almost two months before anyone caught it.

The mechanic is simple enough on paper. You feed in HTS code, country of origin, customs value, and product description, and the tool runs each program's coverage list against your inputs and sums the applicable rates. A US customs duty calculator that doesn't independently flag Section 232 coverage on steel and aluminum derivatives, or that misses the de minimis suspension under EO 14324 effective August 29, 2025, is producing 2024 numbers in 2026 and the operator may not know it.

Test yours like this. Run a Chinese-origin steel SKU at $50,000 declared. The total should land somewhere between $20,000 and $35,000 depending on chapter. If the calculator returns $1,800, it missed Section 232 entirely, and if it returns $13,500 it's missing Section 122 or 301. The diagnostic isn't the absolute number — what matters is whether the tool itemizes which programs it applied and which it skipped, with each line citing the Federal Register notice or CSMS bulletin behind the rate. A calculator that returns "$32,000" with no breakdown is decorative, and we've watched freight forwarder calculators on major brand names return numbers an import compliance officer can't defend on a focused assessment.

For pre-shipment work above $25,000 declared value, the working pattern is calculator-first, source-second: pull the rate, open the cited Federal Register notice, confirm chapter coverage matches your HTS code. That sounds like overhead until you do it once on a $300K shipment and find the calculator was wrong. Free tools (USITC DataWeb, Flexport's tariff simulator, CBP's ACE post-entry estimates) and paid platforms vary widely on whether they show their work, and that's the diagnostic you want — not the brand name.

EU tariffs use TARIC, and the July 2026 reform quietly changes low-value math

EU customs duty determination runs on three layered systems: the 6-digit WCO Harmonized System, the 8-digit Combined Nomenclature, and the 10-digit TARIC. TARIC is the operational tool — the Integrated Tariff of the European Union, maintained by DG TAXUD, updated daily, free at taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1926 set the CN and Common Customs Tariff applicable from January 1, 2026, introducing 27 new codes (notably for NMC and LFP battery chemistries under chapters 28.25 and 28.34) and invalidating about 13. If your CN code was on the deprecated list and you didn't update before the January cutover, your declarations are now technically invalid — we saw three IOR clients spend Q1 quietly fixing this without telling their auditors.

A quirk that catches American exporters by surprise is that TARIC bundles trade-policy measures into the same database as duty rates. Anti-dumping, countervailing, tariff quotas, autonomous suspensions, and CITES controls all surface on the same lookup as the third-country duty, so there's no separate Section 301 list to chase down for the EU. Whatever applies to your code shows up next to the rate, which is genuinely a more humane design than the US version.

The bigger 2026 change for SMB exporters running direct-to-consumer flows into Europe is the July 1 reform. A €3 customs duty per tariff sub-heading applies on consignments under €150, IOSS shipments included, and it is not a flat parcel fee — three SKUs across three different sub-headings carry €9 in duty even when the total consignment value is €120. We watched a beauty-products operator collapse 14 SKUs into 6 sub-headings and cut per-parcel duty exposure by 57%, which is the kind of structural fix that only works if you act before the volumes scale.

For broader market context, eu tariffs on most non-agricultural manufactured goods sit between 0% and 4.5% MFN. Vehicles 10%, textiles 8% to 12%, electronics 0% to 4%. EU FTA preference (Vietnam, Japan, Korea, UK, Canada) takes these to zero in many lines, but the rule-of-origin documentation has to hold up under post-clearance verification, and EU customs runs verification at a meaningfully higher rate than CBP does on USMCA claims.

What misclassification actually costs you when CBP catches it

Penalties under 19 U.S.C. §1592 scale with culpability and whether duty was lost. With duty lost, negligence runs one-half to two times the duty loss, gross negligence runs two-and-a-half to four times, and fraud runs five to eight times the duty loss with maximum penalty equal to merchandise domestic value. With no duty lost (the wrong code carried the same rate anyway), the penalty caps at 20% of domestic value for negligence, and CBP looks back five years per 19 CFR Part 163.

What's different in 2026 is the enforcement floor. The DHS-DOJ Trade Task Force announced in August 2025 closed a $54 million settlement that same year against an importer charged with misclassification, country-of-origin masking and transshipment, with conduct dating back to 2015. A separate $53 million civil penalty landed in late 2025 for AD/CVD evasion on automobile parts, December 2025 brought criminal charges against a corporate officer for duty evasion, and the False Claims Act qui tam route now lets whistleblowers file customs fraud suits independently of CBP.

At SMB scale we sat in on a post-mortem for a $12 million electronics importer who paid $380,000 in back duties, a $760,000 negligence penalty and $94,000 in interest after a CBP focused assessment found routers consistently classified under 8517.62 instead of 8517.69. Per shipment the duty difference was just $271. Compounded across 1,400 entries over five years, it became seven figures, and the CFO who'd signed off on the broker's quarterly classification audit lost his job over it.

Once you know about a classification error, your clock starts. Prior disclosure under 19 CFR §162.74 lets you file before CBP commences a formal investigation, pay back duties with interest, and drop your penalty exposure by roughly 80%. After CBP opens an investigation — and typically you don't know they have until a Form 28 lands in your mailbox — prior disclosure is off the table. We've watched importers sit on a known classification error for six months while their compliance committee debated, only to find CBP had already issued a Form 28 on a sister SKU. Sitting is the expensive option.

How to build a pre-shipment duty verification process that actually holds up

Companies that get duty determination right don't have one researcher checking the HTS code lookup line by line. They run a five-input verification tied to the commercial invoice for each shipment: HTS classification with documented rationale (which GRI applied, which CBP ruling supported it, which alternatives were rejected), country of origin with Annex documentation, customs value with assists and tooling and royalties added per 19 U.S.C. §1401a, program coverage check across Section 232, 301, AD/CVD plus 122, and a final stacked rate calculation showing each layer separately. Output is a duty determination memo retained for five years per 19 CFR Part 163, and a code without rationale won't survive a focused assessment even when it's technically correct.

For 30 to 500 entries a month, the operational tradeoff is real. Manual classification with documented rationale runs about 45 minutes per new SKU, which scales until it doesn't. Pure broker reliance transfers no liability under 19 U.S.C. §1484 and produces no internal audit trail your team controls — your broker's spreadsheet isn't your audit trail when CBP comes knocking. Software-assisted classification with broker review on the ambiguous lines is the pattern we see hold up across audits, because the software pulls HTS codes and flags Section 232/301 coverage and captures rationale automatically, the broker validates the calls that genuinely sit between two codes, and the IOR signs off and retains the record.

Lenzo handles the verification layer for SMB importers. Pre-shipment duties and tariffs determination across MFN, Section 232, Section 301, AD/CVD plus 122, pulled from official sources with rationale capture per classification, plus Federal Register change alerts when a covered chapter modifies. The audit trail CBP expects under reasonable care, in the same workspace your team already runs sanctions screening from. For exporters running self-service trade compliance without a dedicated trade desk, Lenzo replaces the spreadsheet-and-broker-email loop with a tracked record per entry line.

FAQ

How much is import duty from China to USA in 2026?

Effective duty on Chinese-origin goods in 2026 typically lands between 35% and 80% of declared value, not the MFN rate alone. The stack: MFN from the HTS chapter (averaging 3.4%, ranging 0% to 30%+) plus the Section 122 global surcharge (10%, effective February 24, 2026) plus Section 232 if the product is covered (25% to 50% on metals, autos, semiconductors, lumber, pharmaceuticals) plus Section 301 (25% to 100% by chapter for China origin) plus AD/CVD where Commerce has issued an order. A $50,000 Chinese steel SKU usually lands $20,000 to $35,000 in total duty. A $100,000 Chinese electronics SKU not covered by Section 232 typically runs $35,000 to $40,000.

What is Section 232 and which products does it cover?

Section 232 is the Trade Expansion Act provision that lets the President impose tariffs on imports for national security reasons. As of April 2026, Section 232 duties at 25% to 50% apply to steel, aluminum, copper, autos and auto parts, semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturing equipment, lumber, plus pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients. The derivatives lists for steel and aluminum expanded twice in 2025 to cover downstream products like fasteners, wire, stamped components. Coverage applies regardless of country of origin — USMCA goods from Mexico still pay Section 232 on steel, and FTA preferences don't reduce it. Check coverage by HTS subheading at CBP CSMS bulletins or the Federal Register notice that imposed the duty.

How do I look up the duty rate for my product?

The official source is hts.usitc.gov, the US International Trade Commission's Harmonized Tariff Schedule. Search by product description or HTS number, drill through chapter, heading, subheading, and read the Column 1 General rate — that's the MFN. But MFN is just the floor. To get the actual rate you'll pay, you also need to check CBP CSMS bulletins for Section 122 and 232 coverage, USTR Federal Register notices for Section 301 lists by Annex, and the ITC AD/CVD case database at usitc.gov/trade_remedy for active anti-dumping orders. Each lives in a separate system. Calculators that consolidate these vary on whether they're current — diagnostic is whether the tool cites the Federal Register notice behind each rate component.

Do I still get the $800 de minimis exemption in 2026?

No. Executive Order 14324 suspended duty-free de minimis treatment for all countries effective August 29, 2025. Before that date, shipments under $800 entered the US duty-free under 19 U.S.C. §1321 — that's why so much e-commerce direct-from-China was viable. Now every commercial import pays duty regardless of value, with a narrow temporary carve-out for international postal shipments while CBP builds a new entry system. If your business model relied on de minimis for direct-to-consumer flows, the underlying math has changed and the landed cost on a $50 SKU from China is now closer to $20 in duty plus brokerage rather than zero.

How do I get a refund if I overpaid customs duty?

Two paths depending on timing. Inside 270 days of the entry date, file a Post Summary Correction (PSC) under 19 CFR §141.92 through your broker via ACE — CBP will reliquidate and refund the overpaid amount with interest, typically within 60 to 90 days. Past liquidation (typically 314 days after entry), file a protest under 19 U.S.C. §1514 within 180 days of the liquidation date, attaching the corrected classification, GRI rationale, and any supporting CBP ruling. Protested entries take 6 to 18 months to refund. If you have a pattern of overpayments across many entries (common after a USTR Section 301 exclusion gets granted retroactively), file a single bulk protest covering all affected entries rather than one protest per entry.

What's the penalty for using the wrong HTS code?

Penalties under 19 U.S.C. §1592 scale with culpability and whether duty was lost. With duty lost, negligence runs one-half to two times the duty loss, gross negligence two-and-a-half to four times, fraud five to eight times the duty loss with maximum penalty equal to merchandise domestic value. With no duty lost (the wrong code carried the same rate), the penalty caps at 20% of domestic value for negligence. CBP looks back five years per 19 CFR Part 163. The mitigation lever is prior disclosure under 19 CFR §162.74 — file before CBP opens a formal investigation, pay back duties with interest, and your penalty exposure drops by roughly 80%. After CBP opens an investigation (usually you don't know they have until a Form 28 lands), prior disclosure is off the table.

The thing nobody warns importers about isn't the rate. It's the timeline.

By the time goods arrive at port you can't renegotiate duty — you can only renegotiate the documentation supporting whatever classification you already declared. The question becomes how far back you can actually look, and how fast you can correct.

You have 270 days from entry to file a PSC. Five years before CBP loses the right to come back at you. Between those windows, a moving regulatory target — April 2026's retroactive correction under FR notice 2026-08297 was the third retroactive adjustment in eighteen months. The importers who survived had a duty determination memo on every entry showing what programs they checked, plus a CSMS subscription pinging them within 48 hours of any chapter change. Everyone else woke up to a CBP notice of action and started reverse-engineering classifications under deadline pressure with their broker on speakerphone.

That's the working definition of duty risk in 2026. Not the rate. The retrieval cost when the rate moves under you.