7 ms·

They’re air freighting the goods but doing so in bulk, so it ends up being far less than what the customs fees would be. If they were shipping them in bulk to a

They’re air freighting the goods but doing so in bulk, so it ends up being far less than what the customs fees would be. If they were shipping them in bulk to a US warehouse without a designated customer, they’d have to pay customs. But rather, they arrive at a repackager which manages to skirt these regulations - at the expense of the taxpayer and competition who follow the rules. In other words, they’ve found a loophole to avoid customs on goods with otherwise high tariffs, pocketing some of the money for themselves and using the rest of the savings (and arguably difficult to return lower quality merchandise, we are talking about fast fashion) to undercut competition. I’d think that SV would worship this type of “disruption”.

mattas 3y ago
Right. They even print the UPS/FedEx/USPS label in the distribution center in China. They throw the individual boxes in a Gaylord and inject the Gaylords into the domestic distribution network at the destination air terminal.
- gruez 3y ago
  >Gaylord I was going to flag this but did a double take: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gaylord#Noun_2 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gaylord#Noun_2
  - nerdponx 3y ago
    It's also a name.
    - sudosysgen 3y ago
      As well as a city in Michigan and Minnesota, which doesn't seem to have a connection to the corporation.
    - stn8188 3y ago
      As well as a ventilation equipment manufacturer in Oregon [0]. You can imagine how it was driving by every day on the middle school bus. (About as well as Bonar Plastics, which the bus also passed every day). [0] https://www.gaylordventilation.com/ https://www.gaylordventilation.com/
      - asimovfan 3y ago
        Its also a playground equipment company! Thought it was very funny when i was eight.
    - Doctor_Fegg 3y ago
      And a Chicago street gang: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Gaylords https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Gaylords
  - wannacboatmovie 3y ago
    > I was going to flag this Please consider easing up on the itchy trigger finger. Even without knowing the meaning, there is no way any word used in the context above could ever be construed as offensive.
  - Kerb_ 3y ago
    So you're why we're renaming the equipment at my job! ;)
gruez 3y ago
>at the expense of the taxpayer and competition Would taxpayer dollars be better spent collecting $5 worth of duties from a shipment? Or would the customer (who are taxpayers) be better served by having to pay CBP fees for their $20 shipment from china? Would both the customer and the manufacturer (ie. "competition") be better served if the goods had to go through an intermediary in the US to reach the customer?
- polygamous_bat 3y ago
  > Or would the customer (who are taxpayers) be better served by having to pay CBP fees for their $20 shipment from china? Sorry, this libertarian logic falls short because there are taxpayers who are not customers of bottom-of-the-barrel Chinese doodads, and thus are being hurt by this laxness. Why should I subsidize someone else’s “seen on social media” gadget addiction?
  - bobsmooth 3y ago
    Why should I have to pay more so overpriced brands don't have to compete as hard?
    - stefan_ 3y ago
      It’s not about paying more, it’s about paying the same. The local brand can not avoid the duties on products less than $X, just like you are charged sales tax at the supermarket on a $5 purchase. Thankfully computers exist now so it is really not onerous at all to charge the correct duties and massive fees if you want to make the customs people do work (this is basically now the EU approach, and AliExpress had no problem adjusting).
      - charcircuit 3y ago
        Some products are too niche to be sold locally. If no local brands exist for a product I have to buy it from someone oversees and import it myself. Even if it is sold locally it may be overly marked up compared to buying it from the original seller because there is no local competition to keep the price in check.
sudosysgen 3y ago
I doubt that CBP spending 30+ minutes of bureaucracy and agent time to inspect, calculate the true value of, invoice and bill 100$ worth of items for 10$ worth of tariffs would be a net profit.
- mattas 3y ago
  Anecdotally (there's probably the actual figure out there somewhere), less than 1% of all imported goods are flagged for a customs inspection. Duty is calculated and paid electronically by a licensed customs broker prior to the goods entering the country. Type 86 filings are still necessary for di minimis shipments, so there isn't a material bureaucracy savings.
  - sudosysgen 3y ago
    Yes, I agree. However, anecdotally again, I've never bought anything past the de minimis threshold from China that was actually labelled properly at the correct price - the likelihood of it getting flagged is low enough that it's worth just eating the loss in that case. Given that, since it doesn't even make economic to inspect the packages even if you already knew they were mislabelled or misvalued, it's not clear to me that the taxpayer loses by increasing the de minimis threshold at least to a number where it would make sense. I'm thinking of the bureaucracy that the government incurs when they do decide to inspect and fine/confiscate, not the bureaucracy in the happy path, which as you've seen is very streamlined.
    - creer 3y ago
      Which is fine reasoning but rarely enters into the law or regulation. A lot of inspection power has to do with other "concerns" such as mislabelling (per se), trademark protection, counterfeits, forbidden items (for example radio bands), etc etc. "Economic sense" is long lost by then.
hrdwdmrbl 3y ago
Amazon does need the competition though

mattas 3y ago

Right. They even print the UPS/FedEx/USPS label in the distribution center in China. They throw the individual boxes in a Gaylord and inject the Gaylords into the domestic distribution network at the destination air terminal.

gruez 3y ago
>Gaylord I was going to flag this but did a double take: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gaylord#Noun_2 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gaylord#Noun_2
- nerdponx 3y ago
  It's also a name.
  - sudosysgen 3y ago
    As well as a city in Michigan and Minnesota, which doesn't seem to have a connection to the corporation.
  - stn8188 3y ago
    As well as a ventilation equipment manufacturer in Oregon [0]. You can imagine how it was driving by every day on the middle school bus. (About as well as Bonar Plastics, which the bus also passed every day). [0] https://www.gaylordventilation.com/ https://www.gaylordventilation.com/
    - asimovfan 3y ago
      Its also a playground equipment company! Thought it was very funny when i was eight.
  - Doctor_Fegg 3y ago
    And a Chicago street gang: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Gaylords https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Gaylords
- wannacboatmovie 3y ago
  > I was going to flag this Please consider easing up on the itchy trigger finger. Even without knowing the meaning, there is no way any word used in the context above could ever be construed as offensive.
- Kerb_ 3y ago
  So you're why we're renaming the equipment at my job! ;)

gruez 3y ago

>at the expense of the taxpayer and competition Would taxpayer dollars be better spent collecting $5 worth of duties from a shipment? Or would the customer (who are taxpayers) be better served by having to pay CBP fees for their $20 shipment from china? Would both the customer and the manufacturer (ie. "competition") be better served if the goods had to go through an intermediary in the US to reach the customer?

polygamous_bat 3y ago
> Or would the customer (who are taxpayers) be better served by having to pay CBP fees for their $20 shipment from china? Sorry, this libertarian logic falls short because there are taxpayers who are not customers of bottom-of-the-barrel Chinese doodads, and thus are being hurt by this laxness. Why should I subsidize someone else’s “seen on social media” gadget addiction?
- bobsmooth 3y ago
  Why should I have to pay more so overpriced brands don't have to compete as hard?
  - stefan_ 3y ago
    It’s not about paying more, it’s about paying the same. The local brand can not avoid the duties on products less than $X, just like you are charged sales tax at the supermarket on a $5 purchase. Thankfully computers exist now so it is really not onerous at all to charge the correct duties and massive fees if you want to make the customs people do work (this is basically now the EU approach, and AliExpress had no problem adjusting).
    - charcircuit 3y ago
      Some products are too niche to be sold locally. If no local brands exist for a product I have to buy it from someone oversees and import it myself. Even if it is sold locally it may be overly marked up compared to buying it from the original seller because there is no local competition to keep the price in check.

sudosysgen 3y ago

I doubt that CBP spending 30+ minutes of bureaucracy and agent time to inspect, calculate the true value of, invoice and bill 100$ worth of items for 10$ worth of tariffs would be a net profit.

mattas 3y ago
Anecdotally (there's probably the actual figure out there somewhere), less than 1% of all imported goods are flagged for a customs inspection. Duty is calculated and paid electronically by a licensed customs broker prior to the goods entering the country. Type 86 filings are still necessary for di minimis shipments, so there isn't a material bureaucracy savings.
- sudosysgen 3y ago
  Yes, I agree. However, anecdotally again, I've never bought anything past the de minimis threshold from China that was actually labelled properly at the correct price - the likelihood of it getting flagged is low enough that it's worth just eating the loss in that case. Given that, since it doesn't even make economic to inspect the packages even if you already knew they were mislabelled or misvalued, it's not clear to me that the taxpayer loses by increasing the de minimis threshold at least to a number where it would make sense. I'm thinking of the bureaucracy that the government incurs when they do decide to inspect and fine/confiscate, not the bureaucracy in the happy path, which as you've seen is very streamlined.
  - creer 3y ago
    Which is fine reasoning but rarely enters into the law or regulation. A lot of inspection power has to do with other "concerns" such as mislabelling (per se), trademark protection, counterfeits, forbidden items (for example radio bands), etc etc. "Economic sense" is long lost by then.

hrdwdmrbl 3y ago

Amazon does need the competition though