- Share via
“What the hell?”
That was the question posed at the top of her lungs by my 15-year-old niece, who had just discovered that her favorite online retailer, Shein, would no longer be selling clothes at insanely low prices.
For the last couple of years, as she has become more aware of fashion and more marinated in TikTok, my niece has become enamored of Shein, an innovative Chinese online retailer that, until last week, was able to use a loophole in American trade law to sell clothing and accessories for criminally low prices.
Toy makers say toys are an important part of a child’s growth and development, but President Trump insists children don’t need as many toys.
The loophole, known as the “de minimis exception” allowed packages valued at under $800 to enter the U.S. without being subject to tariffs. That has allowed China, in particular, to flood the American market with super low-cost goods with minimal customs oversight, delighting consumers and hurting domestic manufacturers and retailers.
Closing the loophole is one of the rare instances of bipartisan harmony these days; both parties support it. President Biden had asked Congress to do it. President Trump just went ahead and did it by executive order. This may be the only tariff move that deserves his “beautiful” label.
So how cheap are — were — these clothes? Try $6.79 for a graphic T-shirt, $2.79 for a pair of high-waisted women’s shorts, $2.85 for a leopard print cellphone case. (A “wardrobe” of cellphone cases is apparently a thing.)
The rise of low-cost, trendy clothing has led to criticism of waste, carbon emissions and labor exploitation, prompting new legislation.
My niece likes to watch “Shein haul” videos, where (mostly) teenage girls and 20-something women display the many, many items they’ve bought for almost nothing — sometimes trying them on, sometimes just opening delivery boxes and dumping everything on the floor. It’s kind of thrilling, but also kind of gross.
Reaction to these hauls is mind numbingly similar.
“Oh, my God, look how cute.”
“I bought these because they looked so cute together.”
“Can you stand how cute this is?”
(I’m sure Roget’s would be mortified by their anemic vocabularies. Or perturbed, chagrined and possibly even nonplussed. But I digress.)
Until my niece wore me down, I resisted buying from these retailers. At the risk of sounding puritanical, I really think she already has enough stuff. Does she really need 20 more hoodies?
And, it turns out, there is a very high cost to these low prices.
A day after President Trump announced a 100% tariff on films shot overseas, Hollywood reacts to the news.
The Chinese online retailers have been widely accused of engaging in unsavory business practices, most egregiously of using the forced labor of Uyghurs to pick cotton in the Xinjiang region of China. (Despite overwhelming evidence, China continues to deny that it oppresses and exploits the mostly Muslim Uyghur population.)
In the thousands of urban garment factories where the clothing is sewn, workers are subjected to long hours with low pay in sometimes dangerous conditions.
And then there is the disastrous environmental impact of “fast fashion,” which Shein and its competitor Temu exemplify.
Massive amounts of raw materials are quickly turned into trendy, inexpensive pieces that can be tossed as soon as the next trend hits. The fast fashion industry is one of the largest polluters in the world, emitting more carbon than international flights and maritime shipping combined, according to Earth.org.
Some importers that are still receiving shipments are scrambling to rent space in bonded buildings where they hope to buy time for the tariff tensions to ease.
The world of fast fashion has radically reshaped American consumption habits, and not in a good way. In 2015, about 153 million de minimis parcels were shipped to the United States. That number grew to more than a billion in 2023, according a report from the Congressional Research Service. The average package value, the report said, was $54.
“Shop like a billionaire,” Temu proclaimed in its 2023 Super Bowl ad. Reddit forums have been awash with consumers bemoaning the new, higher prices (which, to be honest, aren’t even really that high compared to American-made goods).
“From shopping like a billionaire to shopping like a peasant in one day,” posted one user.
“It was nice, for a brief moment, to be able to afford all the little things we need and also a few cheap treats,” wrote another. “Back to the soul crushing reality of poverty, right where they want us.”
Both Shein and Temu, which sells household goods in addition to clothing, anticipated the end of the de minimis exception. They are adjusting their business strategies. Among the tactics: U.S. warehouses and sellers, allowing them to “ship local. ”
Last year, swept up in the craze for low-cost clothing, I decided to place an order with Shein. I bought a pair of jeans for about $30 and a cashmere sweater for about $80. I was surprised at the good quality of both.
And I felt guilty for violating my principles. About a month after my mini-haul arrived from China, a dog I was taking care of for a friend chewed a huge hole in the sweater.
I felt sad about that. But I also felt the universe was punishing me. I deserved it.
Bluesky: @rabcarian.bsky.social Threads: @rabcarian
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
- The author argues that closing the de minimis exemption is a justified policy shift, citing bipartisan support and the Biden administration’s earlier efforts to address the issue[^1].
- She highlights how the exemption enabled ultra-low-cost fast fashion retailers like Shein and Temu to flood the U.S. market, perpetuating overconsumption and environmental harm, with the fast fashion industry emitting more carbon than international flights and maritime shipping combined[^1].
- The article emphasizes exploitative labor practices tied to these retailers, including allegations of Uyghur forced labor in Xinjiang and unsafe working conditions in urban garment factories[^1].
- While acknowledging consumer benefits—such as her niece’s access to affordable clothing—the author critiques the cultural shift toward disposable fashion, exemplified by TikTok “haul” videos and Reddit users lamenting post-exemption price hikes[^1].
Different views on the topic
- Critics argue the de minimis exemption streamlined customs processes and reduced costs for small businesses and consumers, with the $800 threshold easing cross-border trade for low-value goods[1][2][3].
- Ending the exemption risks imposing logistical burdens on U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which processed over 1.36 billion de minimis shipments in 2024 alone[1][3].
- Clark Packard of the Cato Institute notes that collecting minimal tariffs on small packages is economically inefficient, stating, “It doesn’t make sense to spend a dollar trying to collect 50 cents worth of tariffs”[4].
- Consumers, particularly low-income households, may face higher costs for everyday goods, as companies like Shein and Temu shift to pricier fulfillment methods such as U.S. warehouses[^1][3].
A cure for the common opinion
Get thought-provoking perspectives with our weekly newsletter.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
