WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has identified more than 40 countries and jurisdictions as presenting elevated risks for Chinese goods being rerouted around U.S. tariffs, widening Washington’s scrutiny of China-linked global supply chains.
A White House report released this week alleges that Chinese exporters are increasingly routing goods through third countries where limited assembly, finishing, repackaging, relabeling or documentation changes can make products appear to originate elsewhere before entering the United States.
The countries and jurisdictions identified span the global economy, including Canada, Mexico, India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the European Union, as well as major manufacturing and logistics hubs such as Vietnam, Malaysia and Thailand.
The report does not establish that their governments knowingly facilitate tariff evasion, nor does it suggest that all trade redirected through them is illicit. Instead, it identifies jurisdictions associated with varying levels of what the administration describes as illegal transshipment risk.
That distinction is important. Transshipment is a routine part of international commerce. It becomes tariff evasion when routing, processing or documentation is used to falsely establish a product’s origin and secure tariff treatment for which it does not qualify.
Washington Puts a Price on Tariff Evasion
The White House estimates that illegal transshipment costs the United States approximately $19 billion to $26 billion annually in lost federal revenue, based on a central scenario of $75 billion in illegally transshipped goods.
Those figures are estimates rather than a tally of individually verified transactions. The administration’s Council of Economic Advisers estimates potential illegal transshipment at between $34.2 billion and $89.6 billion, while other estimates examined in the report vary substantially.
The uncertainty reflects a broader challenge: separating deliberate tariff circumvention from legitimate changes in where goods are actually produced.
An IMF working paper examining six Asian “connector” economies found that increased trade between China, third countries and the United States can reflect genuine relocation of production as well as rerouting. Researchers found limited evidence of significant rerouting in most of the economies examined.
Vietnam is particularly notable. Researchers found increasing Vietnamese domestic content in exports to the United States, indicating that at least part of the country’s export growth reflected genuine expansion of local production rather than Chinese goods simply passing through the country.
The findings do not rule out illegal transshipment, but they caution against treating rising Chinese inputs alongside rising exports to the United States as proof of tariff evasion.
The Next Phase of Trump’s Trade Strategy
That distinction is becoming increasingly important as U.S. trade policy evolves.
Washington’s challenge is no longer simply how heavily to tariff Chinese imports, but how to determine the economic origin of products moving through deeply interconnected supply chains.
Since the first Trump administration imposed tariffs on China in 2018, companies have shifted production, sourcing and investment toward Mexico, Southeast Asia, India and other markets. Some have genuinely relocated manufacturing. Others continue to depend heavily on Chinese components, machinery and capital.
McKinsey Global Institute estimates that U.S.-China trade has fallen by approximately 30%, with the United States replacing roughly two-thirds of the lost trade with imports from other suppliers. ASEAN economies have been among the beneficiaries, expanding trade with both China and the United States.
The result is not necessarily deglobalization so much as a rewiring of global trade: finished goods increasingly arrive through different countries even as China remains embedded deeper within their supply chains.
That makes rules of origin increasingly consequential.
The Trump administration has already established substantial penalties for circumvention. Goods that U.S. Customs and Border Protection determines have been transshipped to evade applicable duties can face an additional 40% tariff, alongside other potential penalties.
Anti-circumvention provisions are also appearing in U.S. trade agreements, suggesting that Washington increasingly sees enforcement of origin rules as part of its broader trade strategy rather than a standalone customs issue.
AI Moves to the Border
The administration is also turning to artificial intelligence to enforce those rules across increasingly complex supply chains.
An AI-enabled system called “Detective Border” is being developed to help identify potential illegal transshipment using trade and supply-chain data.
Such technology could expand the government’s ability to compare declared product origins against shipping patterns, production capacity and other indicators across large volumes of trade.
For companies, that raises the stakes around documenting where components are manufactured, how much value is added within each country and where substantial production actually occurs.
Trading Partners Face Competing Pressures
The implications extend well beyond U.S.-China relations.
Many economies benefiting from manufacturing diversification away from China remain deeply integrated with Chinese suppliers and investors while also depending on access to the U.S. market.
That leaves governments with a difficult balancing act. Countries seeking to attract factories and investment as companies diversify beyond China may increasingly need to demonstrate that new manufacturing creates meaningful domestic economic value rather than simply providing an alternative export route for Chinese goods.
The tension is particularly pronounced in Southeast Asia, where Chinese capital and intermediate goods increasingly coexist with expanding exports to Western markets.
What Governments Should Watch
For the more than 40 jurisdictions identified by Washington, the immediate question is how the administration translates its findings into enforcement.
Governments and companies should watch for stricter application of rules of origin, expanded customs investigations, additional documentation requirements and greater scrutiny of supply chains containing significant Chinese inputs.
The central challenge will be determining where circumvention ends and legitimate industrial transformation begins.
A Chinese-owned factory operating in another country and generating substantial local production and value added presents a fundamentally different trade question from Chinese goods simply passing through that country under altered documentation.
The White House report nevertheless signals that economic origin is becoming increasingly important to U.S. trade policy. For countries that have benefited from companies diversifying production beyond China, maintaining favorable access to the U.S. market could increasingly depend on demonstrating how much manufacturing and value creation actually occurs domestically.
The coming enforcement decisions will help determine whether Washington’s transshipment initiative remains primarily an anti-evasion measure or develops into a broader mechanism for reshaping supply chains linked to China.
RELATED STORIES:
Follow SDG News on LinkedIn
