Comment Submitted by Sandra Holliday

Re: Docket USCBP-2026-0760 Federal Register Document 2026-12670 I oppose the indefinite suspension of the de minimis exemption for merchandise valued at $800 or less. I recognize CBP’s responsibility to stop illegal drugs, counterfeit products, unsafe merchandise, undervaluation and customs fraud. However, the rule applies the most burdensome response to every low-value shipment, including lawful purchases made by ordinary consumers and supplies purchased by very small businesses. CBP should not assume that eliminating duty-free treatment for all low-value shipments is the only effective solution. The agency should evaluate narrower alternatives, including enhanced electronic data requirements, stronger enforcement against repeat violators, risk-based screening, product- and country-specific restrictions, carrier accountability and a lower exemption threshold instead of complete suspension. The rule could cause consumers to pay customs duties, brokerage charges, carrier-processing fees and other costs that are disproportionate to the value of the merchandise. These additional expenses are likely to affect lower-income consumers and microbusinesses more severely than large companies that can import merchandise in bulk and maintain customs-compliance departments. I am also concerned that CBP characterizes the rule as producing no new costs because the exemption had already been suspended under an executive order. That baseline does not adequately address the actual economic effects of the policy on consumers, small importers, carriers and businesses. CBP should publish a complete analysis of those costs, including processing fees, delivery delays and the effect on small entities. The rule is described as an indefinite suspension, but it contains no expiration date or mandatory review period. Any suspension should be time-limited, supported by measurable results and reconsidered through a transparent process. CBP should explain what evidence would justify restoring some form of low-value exemption. As a consumer, I have purchased low-value goods through Alibaba because comparable products can be more expensive through other sources. I have also experienced shipments being lost before delivery, leaving me to bear the inconvenience and potential financial loss. Adding customs-entry requirements, duties and carrier-processing fees would increase the cost of these purchases without necessarily addressing delivery failures. For inexpensive orders, the administrative fees could be disproportionate to both the value of the merchandise and the duty collected. I request that CBP withdraw or revise the rule. At minimum, CBP should establish a reasonable low-value threshold, create simplified entry procedures with limited fees, adopt targeted enforcement measures, complete a meaningful small-entity and consumer-impact analysis, and require periodic public review. Protecting the public and enforcing customs laws are legitimate objectives, but those goals should be pursued through a proportionate system that does not unnecessarily increase the cost of lawful, inexpensive goods.