Tariff Comparison Tool

Why Comparing Tariff Rates Actually Matters

I built this tool after watching a friend lose thousands of dollars sourcing textiles. He had a reliable supplier in one country, never thought to check what the duty would be from a neighboring country with nearly identical quality. Turns out the rate difference was over 30 percentage points. That kind of gap can make or break your margins, especially on high-volume imports where every fraction of a percent counts.

The tricky part about US tariffs right now is that the headline rate only tells part of the story. Two countries might both sit at a 10% Section 122 base, but one of them gets hit with Section 301 surcharges that push the real cost dramatically higher. Or one might have a free trade agreement that wipes out the MFN base duty entirely on qualifying goods, even though the Section 122 tariff still applies on top. You really have to compare apples to apples, and that means looking at the full stack of duties for your specific product category.

What to Look for in a Comparison

When you run a comparison above, pay attention to more than just the total rate number. Here are some things experienced importers check:

• Section 301 exposure: If you are comparing China against Vietnam or India, the 301 tariffs on Chinese goods (ranging from 7.5% to 100% depending on the product) are often the single biggest cost driver — the China tariff rate guide has the 35% effective math on most electronics. Switching sourcing countries to avoid these can save more than any other optimization.
• Section 232 metals surcharges: Steel and aluminum face 50% tariffs from most countries. But the UK has a special 25% rate under their Economic Prosperity Deal. The same 50% layer hits copper imports from Chile, Canada, Mexico, and Peru — FTA preferences don't reach the Section 232 line. If you import metals, this matters.
• Trade agreement benefits: USMCA (Mexico, Canada) — which keeps imported foods from Mexico at 0% on avocados, tomatoes, beer, and tequila — KORUS (South Korea), and AUSFTA (Australia) can eliminate the base MFN duty for qualifying goods. That does not remove the Section 122 tariff, but it still shaves significant cost on products with high MFN rates like textiles and footwear. EU member states have no such deal yet.
• Shipping and logistics: A lower tariff rate from a distant country can get eaten up by higher freight costs. Always calculate your full landed cost before making sourcing decisions.
• Product-specific tariff cliffs: Country comparisons miss product-specific layers. Furniture tariffs put Chinese sofas at 35% and Vietnamese sofas at 10% — a 25-point delta inside one HTS chapter, which is the central reason importing from Vietnam to the US now beats China across apparel, footwear, and case goods. The threatened Trump pharma tariffs would put patented branded drugs at 100% while generics stay at 10%, splitting Ireland and India onto opposite sides of the math. Tire tariffs are another product-specific cliff — Chinese passenger tires sit at 35% before AD/CVD that pushes worst-case producers past 120%, while Thailand stays at 14%.
• Asia-Pacific origin choices: The 25-point delta between China and the rest of the region is the single biggest sourcing variable. Taiwan sourcing now lands a $40,000 PCB container at 10.5% effective ($4,189) versus 35.5% from China ($14,189), and Korea's KORUS preference plus the steel quota gives it a different cost structure than Taiwan or Japan. For sanctioned origins, import duty from Russia is a separate compliance question entirely — Column 2 rates plus 122-277% AD on urea plus OFAC screening, with most consumer-goods categories banned outright.

The Section 122 Baseline

Since February 24, 2026, every country faces the same flat 10% Section 122 tariff — see tariffs today for the full current rate stack across Section 122, 232, and 301. This replaced the wildly variable IEEPA rates that ranged from 10% (most countries) to 145% (China) before the Supreme Court struck them down. The playing field got a lot more level, which actually makes country-to-country comparisons more meaningful now than they were before the ruling. The differences come down to product-specific surcharges, trade agreements, and the MFN base rate for your particular HTS classification.

One thing worth noting: the Section 122 tariff has a built-in expiration around July 24, 2026. If Congress does not act to extend or replace it, the tariff landscape could shift again. Importers making long-term sourcing decisions should factor in that uncertainty. Our scenario simulator can help you model what happens under different rate assumptions.