Section 321 in 2026: the de minimis rules that changed everything
The $800 exemption that fueled cross-border e-commerce is now constrained for China-origin goods. What changed in 2024–2025, what 2026 looks like, and what direct-to-consumer sellers should do.
For two decades, the US "Section 321" de minimis exemption let any shipment valued under $800 enter the US duty-free, with minimal customs paperwork. It was the foundational regulatory subsidy of cross-border e-commerce — the reason Shein and Temu could ship parcels directly from Chinese fulfilment centres to US doorsteps without a duty bill or formal entry.
Section 321 is now in flux. This post covers what changed in 2025, where things stand in April 2026, and what e-commerce sellers should do.
What Section 321 actually says
Section 321 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, authorises CBP to admit articles "for personal or household use" valued at no more than $800 retail without formal customs entry, duty, or fee. The threshold was last raised in 2016 (from $200 to $800) under the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act.
In practice, Section 321 evolved beyond its original intent. By 2024, roughly 4 million parcels per day were entering the US under Section 321 — the overwhelming majority direct-to-consumer e-commerce from China. Section 321 was no longer about returning travellers' personal effects; it was the entry mode for an enormous, structurally tariff-free trade flow.
The pre-2025 regime
Before reform, Section 321 had three notable features.
No duty regardless of HS classification — even goods otherwise subject to Section 301 (China tariffs) entered duty-free if under $800.
Minimal data requirements — Type 86 entries required only basic information (consignee, item description, value).
No quota or volume cap per importer — a single buyer could receive any number of $800 shipments per day.
These features made Section 321 an asymmetric advantage for sellers shipping direct from low-cost-fulfilment jurisdictions versus US sellers buying inventory in bulk and paying duty up front.
The 2024–2025 reform pressure
Reform pressure came from three converging streams.
Domestic industry petitions. Apparel, footwear, and homeware industry associations argued that Section 321 effectively voided Section 301 China tariffs for direct-to-consumer goods. A T-shirt bulk-imported by a US retailer carried 16.5% MFN + 7.5% List 4A + 10% IEEPA reciprocal = 34% duty. The same T-shirt drop-shipped to a US consumer entered at 0% duty under Section 321.
Customs enforcement concerns. CBP repeatedly testified that the volume of Section 321 entries had outstripped its inspection capacity. Counterfeit goods, fentanyl precursors, and IP-infringing imports flowed through Section 321 with statistically minimal inspection rates.
Tax and revenue concerns. Estimates of foregone tariff revenue from Section 321 ran from $5B to $20B per year.
What changed — September 2024 NPRM
In September 2024, CBP issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing two structural changes.
Section 321 ineligibility for goods subject to Section 301, 232, or 201 — packages containing such goods would no longer qualify for de minimis treatment regardless of value.
Enhanced data requirements — Type 86 entries would require 10-digit HTS codes, country of origin, and the identity of the actual seller (not just the consolidator).
In late 2024, separate executive action under IEEPA also constrained Section 321 use for products from China specifically. The combined effect: a substantial share of the previously Section 321-eligible flow no longer qualifies.
Where things stand in April 2026
As of this writing:
Goods subject to Section 301 from China are not eligible for Section 321 — covering most apparel, footwear, electronics, homewares, and consumer goods from China.
The $800 threshold remains for goods not subject to Section 301, 232, or 201 — including most goods from non-China origins.
Enhanced Type 86 data is required — HTS code, country of origin, seller identity, transmitted electronically before arrival.
CBP enforcement is materially more active — selective inspection rates for direct e-commerce parcels have risen significantly.
The practical experience for sellers: a shipment that "would have flown" in 2023 now either incurs duty or gets held for additional documentation.
Effective duty rates by scenario
For a US consumer order, the duty picture in 2026.
| Origin | Goods type | Pre-2024 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|
| China, direct B2C, <$800 | Apparel | 0% | MFN + 301 + IEEPA (~30%+) |
| China, direct B2C, <$800 | Electronics | 0% | MFN + 301 + IEEPA (~22%+) |
| Vietnam, direct B2C, <$800 | Apparel | 0% | 0% (still Section 321 eligible) |
| Mexico, direct B2C, <$800 | USMCA-qualifying | 0% | 0% |
| EU, direct B2C, <$800 | All goods | 0% | 0% |
Country of origin in this context
For Section 321 ineligibility purposes, the test is the country of origin under standard CBP rules — where the article was last "substantially transformed." Routing a shipment from China through Hong Kong, Vietnam, or Mexico does not change the country of origin if the article was actually manufactured in China.
CBP has been explicit that simple repackaging, relabelling, or transshipment does not constitute substantial transformation. Genuine manufacturing in a third country may or may not qualify depending on the specifics.
Warning: "Made in Vietnam" labels on parcels with Chinese substantial transformation are a major fraud category CBP currently prioritises. Sellers caught misrepresenting country of origin face penalty equal to the duty owed, plus potential criminal liability for repeat offenders.
Strategic implications
For direct-to-consumer sellers shipping from China: the Section 321 regulatory subsidy is gone for the China-origin majority of your catalogue. The structural options are to pay the layered duty (accept higher landed cost), bulk-import to a US fulfilment centre (duty paid once at entry), move manufacturing or final assembly to a non-China origin, or consolidate shipments above the de minimis threshold.
For sellers shipping from non-China origins: you retain Section 321 advantages over China-origin competitors. This is a structural margin advantage worth quantifying and emphasising in marketing.
For US consumers: the user-visible change is courier surprise charges on parcels they thought would arrive duty-free. Sellers selling DDP absorb this; sellers selling DAP push the bill to the buyer at delivery, which has been reflected in rising rates of refused or returned parcels.
What might change next
Several open variables affect how 2026 unfolds.
A formal $800 threshold reduction has been proposed in Congress but has not passed as of April 2026. The reciprocal tariff structure under IEEPA is itself the subject of ongoing legal challenge — if reciprocal tariffs are vacated, Section 321 mechanics on China-origin goods may also shift. Mutual recognition with USMCA partners is under discussion. CBP enforcement capacity continues to scale up.
What to do now
1. Review your origin mix. If a meaningful share of your direct-to-consumer flow is China-origin, the 2026 cost picture is materially different than it was 18 months ago.
2. Re-evaluate your fulfilment model. Consolidated bulk imports may be more cost-effective than direct ship for high-volume products, even with duty paid up front.
3. Audit country-of-origin documentation. CBP enforcement on transshipment claims is heavy.
4. Build duty into pricing. For DDP merchants, the layered duty calculation is essential. For DAP merchants, customer expectation management is the critical lever.
Classify your products with AI
Get accurate HS codes with confidence scores, GRI rule explanations, and EU / US / UK duty rates — in seconds.