USA tariffs that apply to import of ethnographic items.

A. G. Maisey · 28th September 2025, 02:52 AM

Several collectors of ethnographic items, including collectors of ethnographic weaponry have contacted me and enquired if I had any knowledge or understanding of how the recent alterations to tariffs on goods entering the USA might affect the importation of ethnographic items into the USA.

It seems that there is a belief that these items could be subject to the imposition of tariffs. This belief has caused some collectors to cease the purchase of ethnographic items from countries other than the USA itself.

I have put together some information on this matter and I believe that this belief, ie, that ethnographic items imported into the USA are to be subjected to tariffs, is incorrect.

My findings are as below.

1) The tariff applied to all goods imported into the USA is determined in accordance with the classification of the goods under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS):-

https://www.help.cbp.gov/s/article/A...language=en_US

2) The HTS Code that applies to ethnographic items is HTS Code 9705.10.00.20:-

https://hts.usitc.gov/search?query=9705.10.00.20

3) The current version of the United States Harmonized Tariff Schedule is subject to 2025 Revision 24 (as at 28 Sept. 2025):-

https://hts.usitc.gov/

4) Under the provisions of Revision 24 (- 3) above, ethnographic items that have been correctly classified are not subject to the imposition of any tax, duty nor tariff:-

https://hts.usitc.gov/search?query=9705

5) See also Statistical note 1:-

https://hts.usitc.gov/search?query=9705.10.00.20

6) The ruling that applies to 9705.10.00.20 is in the form of a letter that relates to the importation of an African wooden statue, and is set forth here:-

https://rulings.cbp.gov/ruling/N346428

My conclusion is that based upon the information provided by the United States International Trade Commission there is not currently (28 Sept. 2025) any tax, duty nor tariff payable on correctly classified ethnographic items, including weaponry, that are imported into the USA.

The above summary has not been subjected to independent checking and as such should be reviewed and verified prior to acceptance. It would be appreciated if any errors and/or inadequacies in my conclusion were to be advised.

A.Maisey

Lee · Yesterday, 01:10 PM

There is an ongoing discussion over at the Nihonto Message Board that illustrates some of the confusion surrounding international shipping these days: https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topi...d-tariff-info/

From personal experience, earlier this year I received a package via UPS. There was no duty payable, but I had to pay about $40 for customs clearance services. The postal services were not making charges on values under $800 per de minimus. With the postal route currently suspended, these charges become a consideration. As you will see from the NMB thread, there remains a lot of confusion.

Ian · Today, 08:32 AM

I have suspended all commerce with the USA until the tariffs get worked out. I've stopped buying and selling until I know what to expect.

A. G. Maisey · Today, 01:41 PM

I think Australia Post has suspended it for us Ian.

I plan to do a bit of system testing after carriage of non-business parcels is resumed. The American side seems to be pretty clear cut, & the Australia Post system requires that a parcel must be accepted by destination country before it can be accepted. Hopefully I'm not going to have another bureaucratic fumjumble to sort out. I used to be a bureaucrat you know. Terrible people to have to deal with.

Ian · Today, 05:46 PM

Hi Alan,

I had considered using one of the private carriers (Fedex, UPS, DHL), but the cost of sending even a small package to or from the US with any of them is prohibitive for the purchaser, and the Customs issues with those carriers is a mess. While I can understand why AUSPOST is taking its time working through the problems with the US tariffs, the delay does not help us.

We may just have to wait it out, Alan, until sanity returns to US trade policies.

Regards, Ian.

A. G. Maisey · Today, 10:02 PM

Yes Ian, that's what it could come down to, just sit things out until the wind blows another way.

But as can be seen in Lee's post & the Nihonto Message Board discussion, there is certainly a degree of confusion about the present situation. However, if we take a strictly rational position which is in accord with the provisions of the legal framework that dictates what the tariff, if any, should be, it might be possible to dispel some of this confusion.

The item that began the Nihonto discussion is a Japanese sword, it is able to be classified by application of the HTS provisions as either a collectable item of ethnographic interest or as an antique. To determine the correct classification this must be determined in accordance with its primary interest, so it is required to be able to present an argument that supports either a primary interest as an antique, or a primary interest as an ethnographic collectable.

The pivotal question is this:- is this item collectable because it is an antique, or is it collectable because it is of ethnographic interest?

In my opinion, a good barrister could frame a convincing argument for either case. But we cannot have both classifications, the tariff must be decided under only one classification. In this situation we opt for the most favourable classification and comply strictly with all government required actions. I doubt that we would want a lawyer involved.

The value of the item is not relevant in determining the applicable tariff, most especially is it not relevant now, since the $800 threshold has been removed. It may well be that the value of an imported item could generate some impact on the cost of importation, but as far as determination of a classification under the HTS Schedule, that value is not something to be considered.

The only thing that is relevant is how the item should be classified, and there is a framework within which that can be achieved.

In my initial post to this thread I included a link to the Customs & Border Protection ruling that clarifies the way in which the responsible authorities consider matters such as this. Here is that link again:-

https://rulings.cbp.gov/ruling/N346428

This official ruling could be used as a model for preparation of a supporting document for the HTS classification used.

In the case of an item of high value, it might be advisable to use a professional service to deal with a matter such as this, but I believe that where the value of an item is of a comparatively low value, then the required documentation could easily be provided by the seller. We are considering this matter as it presently applies to import into the USA, but in fact, a similar situation has applied in Europe for many years, and can be satisfied by provision of an invoice or warrant statement.

I would welcome any information that can demonstrate that what I have written above is incorrect or inaccurate.

28th September 2025, 02:52 AM	#1
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,066	USA tariffs that apply to import of ethnographic items. Several collectors of ethnographic items, including collectors of ethnographic weaponry have contacted me and enquired if I had any knowledge or understanding of how the recent alterations to tariffs on goods entering the USA might affect the importation of ethnographic items into the USA. It seems that there is a belief that these items could be subject to the imposition of tariffs. This belief has caused some collectors to cease the purchase of ethnographic items from countries other than the USA itself. I have put together some information on this matter and I believe that this belief, ie, that ethnographic items imported into the USA are to be subjected to tariffs, is incorrect. My findings are as below. 1) The tariff applied to all goods imported into the USA is determined in accordance with the classification of the goods under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS):- https://www.help.cbp.gov/s/article/A...language=en_US 2) The HTS Code that applies to ethnographic items is HTS Code 9705.10.00.20:- https://hts.usitc.gov/search?query=9705.10.00.20 3) The current version of the United States Harmonized Tariff Schedule is subject to 2025 Revision 24 (as at 28 Sept. 2025):- https://hts.usitc.gov/ 4) Under the provisions of Revision 24 (- 3) above, ethnographic items that have been correctly classified are not subject to the imposition of any tax, duty nor tariff:- https://hts.usitc.gov/search?query=9705 5) See also Statistical note 1:- https://hts.usitc.gov/search?query=9705.10.00.20 6) The ruling that applies to 9705.10.00.20 is in the form of a letter that relates to the importation of an African wooden statue, and is set forth here:- https://rulings.cbp.gov/ruling/N346428 My conclusion is that based upon the information provided by the United States International Trade Commission there is not currently (28 Sept. 2025) any tax, duty nor tariff payable on correctly classified ethnographic items, including weaponry, that are imported into the USA. The above summary has not been subjected to independent checking and as such should be reviewed and verified prior to acceptance. It would be appreciated if any errors and/or inadequacies in my conclusion were to be advised. A.Maisey Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 28th September 2025 at 04:29 AM.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Yesterday, 01:10 PM	#2
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 953	There is an ongoing discussion over at the Nihonto Message Board that illustrates some of the confusion surrounding international shipping these days: https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topi...d-tariff-info/ From personal experience, earlier this year I received a package via UPS. There was no duty payable, but I had to pay about $40 for customs clearance services. The postal services were not making charges on values under $800 per de minimus. With the postal route currently suspended, these charges become a consideration. As you will see from the NMB thread, there remains a lot of confusion.

Today, 08:32 AM	#3
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,481	I have suspended all commerce with the USA until the tariffs get worked out. I've stopped buying and selling until I know what to expect.

Today, 01:41 PM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,066	I think Australia Post has suspended it for us Ian. I plan to do a bit of system testing after carriage of non-business parcels is resumed. The American side seems to be pretty clear cut, & the Australia Post system requires that a parcel must be accepted by destination country before it can be accepted. Hopefully I'm not going to have another bureaucratic fumjumble to sort out. I used to be a bureaucrat you know. Terrible people to have to deal with.

Today, 05:46 PM	#5
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,481	Hi Alan, I had considered using one of the private carriers (Fedex, UPS, DHL), but the cost of sending even a small package to or from the US with any of them is prohibitive for the purchaser, and the Customs issues with those carriers is a mess. While I can understand why AUSPOST is taking its time working through the problems with the US tariffs, the delay does not help us. We may just have to wait it out, Alan, until sanity returns to US trade policies. Regards, Ian.

Today, 10:02 PM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,066	Yes Ian, that's what it could come down to, just sit things out until the wind blows another way. But as can be seen in Lee's post & the Nihonto Message Board discussion, there is certainly a degree of confusion about the present situation. However, if we take a strictly rational position which is in accord with the provisions of the legal framework that dictates what the tariff, if any, should be, it might be possible to dispel some of this confusion. The item that began the Nihonto discussion is a Japanese sword, it is able to be classified by application of the HTS provisions as either a collectable item of ethnographic interest or as an antique. To determine the correct classification this must be determined in accordance with its primary interest, so it is required to be able to present an argument that supports either a primary interest as an antique, or a primary interest as an ethnographic collectable. The pivotal question is this:- is this item collectable because it is an antique, or is it collectable because it is of ethnographic interest? In my opinion, a good barrister could frame a convincing argument for either case. But we cannot have both classifications, the tariff must be decided under only one classification. In this situation we opt for the most favourable classification and comply strictly with all government required actions. I doubt that we would want a lawyer involved. The value of the item is not relevant in determining the applicable tariff, most especially is it not relevant now, since the $800 threshold has been removed. It may well be that the value of an imported item could generate some impact on the cost of importation, but as far as determination of a classification under the HTS Schedule, that value is not something to be considered. The only thing that is relevant is how the item should be classified, and there is a framework within which that can be achieved. In my initial post to this thread I included a link to the Customs & Border Protection ruling that clarifies the way in which the responsible authorities consider matters such as this. Here is that link again:- https://rulings.cbp.gov/ruling/N346428 This official ruling could be used as a model for preparation of a supporting document for the HTS classification used. In the case of an item of high value, it might be advisable to use a professional service to deal with a matter such as this, but I believe that where the value of an item is of a comparatively low value, then the required documentation could easily be provided by the seller. We are considering this matter as it presently applies to import into the USA, but in fact, a similar situation has applied in Europe for many years, and can be satisfied by provision of an invoice or warrant statement. I would welcome any information that can demonstrate that what I have written above is incorrect or inaccurate.