I get that it is a shame for you personally. Despite this I think high processing fees are good. First of all, it addresses the issue of people in the EU importing things we really do not need. Secondly, if it is something you really want then it can be imported at a noticible (but managable) premium. If the set of die are special, then paying 3 (or even 10) euro extra would, in my opinion, be fine
Then why does it not apply to large companies? (if you can maintain stock inside the EU, and due to shipping charges you need like 7 locations, you can avoid to pay most of these fees, so they do not apply to Apple for example)
I think in general, the 3 euro thing is fine. However, it seems like there should be exceptions.
I like to do some electronics as a hobby and learning project. I was gonna try to build a thing to make my old timey doorbell intercom smart with an esp32, an audio codec and a circuit to safely read the signals.
Lots of cheap little parts I would usually get on Aliexpress. A lot of them around 50 cents or so. Now, each of them has a 3 euro fee added to it. The cost of this project would go from like 25 to like 75 euros. That seems super unacceptable to me and like it discourages experimenting with electronics, and with that a type of innovation Europe should try to encourage instead.
So in theory, that would be fine as well. In reality though, the categories aren't coarse like "electronic component", they're more like "resistor, 10K, 1/4W, carbon film".
From this article [1] published by the European Commission:
> The 3 € fee is applied per declared item, where ‘item’ means each unit of a product that is declared on a separate line. Specifically, the Commission defines "item" as one or more goods in a consignment sharing the same tariff classification, description and, where applicable, origin.
Now, the type of declaration matters [2] - if you're filling an H1 (standard customs) then you pay per item but if you're filling an H6 (postal declaration) or an H7 (Courier or low-value consignment declaration) then you pay per category. So anyone saying that it's always one or the other is, at the very least, oversimplifying.
The determining factor seems to be if customers are willing to pay more for it. I can only imagine in time they’ll find rich people need many things, while the poor could have done without all along. Who knew
Well yeah that's classic wealth inequality for you. A fee for import can only fix part of the problem.
Are you arguing for a cap on the amount of stuff a private individual can import instead of a fee? I suppose it would be a bit more invasive, but it could work and be more equal.
Well we (as private consumers) need things such as: food, clothes, entertainment, a place to live, energy.
Things we do not need: kickstarter passion projects, temu trash, a very cool custom built split keyboard that broke after a few days. I'm not against the idea of small scale importing, I bought the super cool split keyboard afterall. But the unnecesary pleasures of life are a sometimes thing and deserves to be treated as such
I think you're just splitting hairs. Are you denying the fact that most of the stuff private indivduals buy from outside the eu is not a necessity?
Are you commenting on me or someone further up the thread?
I am favouring consumer choice which broadly pro-capitalist.
I interpret gammalost as favouring more heavily regulated capitalism. For one thing, the EU is very much pro-capitalist. For another many undoubtedly pro-capitalist governments do tax necessities at lower rates so its an extension of something that happens. The argument is whether it is desirable to extend it
You haven't addressed how it's an issue outside of handwaving at China and landfills. Are European landfills particularly overflowing with items purchased from small businesses and made in China?
Why do you need entertsinment? Make your own. I think commercial entertainment us harmful to society as it competes with community involement for people's time. Passion projects are good for personal fulfilment and innovation.
Basic food and shelter are necessities. Luxuries are not. You can survive in a hut eating gruel. I known nudists who think we would be better off without clothes.
You can feel how you wish. Few dispute one should be free to express themselves in a way that does not impact others. You can do whatever you want in your own head. It is when your views butt against others that issues inevitably arise.
I do not get your point. Is it an issue that I have an opinion on policies that impact other people? Are you against the concept of causing issues?
I think we cause issues all the time. For example, by importing trash that we do not need. It is a part of living. But the we need to address these issues, like a tax on imports. This will inevitable lead to other issues, such as the small scale import of books not being economically viable. But the fact that it causes issues is, in my mind, not a good enough argument against it. Because all things that impact other people cause issues.
I want to reduce the amount of trash being shipped straight from China to our landfills. And yes, that will come at the expense of some things. Is that evil? In my opinion it is a necessary solution to a problem
No right at all, nor do I, and indeed nobody is asserting or exerting that right: market forces will adjust prices accordingly in order to ensure that customers will be able to make purchases at the market rate (through reshipping companies, for example).
This sort of ad hom attack is a bad look. If OP’s stance is so evil, say why.
It’s ironic to see free trade maximalists, who are often associated with anti-woke, anti-DEI positions, be so “triggered” by protectionist stances. You’re not the first person I’ve seen react like this.
As always, an intelligent, measured rebuttal will go miles further than an emotional outburst. And I say this as someone who (mostly) agrees that tariffs are bad.
Not what I'm seeing in my woke, pro-DEI, pro-free-trade circles. But I suppose if you generalize enough, anything will overlap with anything else, much in the same way that humans overlap with mammals.
Ad hominem is "you're evil therefore your statement is wrong", not "that statement is the mark of an evildoer". And they do "say why": "What right do you have to tell me what i do or do not need?"
Either way, it's no lower in quality of argument than the wild assertion that everyone affected is just "importing things we really do not need" (what does that even really argue or justify?)
gammalost · · focus · HN ↗
iamheretoo · · focus · HN ↗
[dead]
spwa4 · · focus · HN ↗
vrganj · · focus · HN ↗
I like to do some electronics as a hobby and learning project. I was gonna try to build a thing to make my old timey doorbell intercom smart with an esp32, an audio codec and a circuit to safely read the signals.
Lots of cheap little parts I would usually get on Aliexpress. A lot of them around 50 cents or so. Now, each of them has a 3 euro fee added to it. The cost of this project would go from like 25 to like 75 euros. That seems super unacceptable to me and like it discourages experimenting with electronics, and with that a type of innovation Europe should try to encourage instead.
probably_wrong · · focus · HN ↗
vrganj · · focus · HN ↗
cr1895 · · focus · HN ↗
In theory it should be based on the HS code, no?
account42 · · focus · HN ↗
probably_wrong · · focus · HN ↗
> The 3 € fee is applied per declared item, where ‘item’ means each unit of a product that is declared on a separate line. Specifically, the Commission defines "item" as one or more goods in a consignment sharing the same tariff classification, description and, where applicable, origin.
Now, the type of declaration matters [2] - if you're filling an H1 (standard customs) then you pay per item but if you're filling an H6 (postal declaration) or an H7 (Courier or low-value consignment declaration) then you pay per category. So anyone saying that it's always one or the other is, at the very least, oversimplifying.
[1] <a href="https://trade.ec.europa.eu/access-to-markets/en/news/eu-applies-eu3-customs-duty-item-low-value-e-commerce-consignments" rel="nofollow">https://trade.ec.europa.eu/access-to-markets/en/news/eu-appl...
[2] <a href="https://www.avalara.com/blog/en/europe/2026/07/eu-customs-h1-h6-h7-declarations.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.avalara.com/blog/en/europe/2026/07/eu-customs-h1...
xnx · · focus · HN ↗
How do you determine what someone does not really need?
iamnothere · · focus · HN ↗
guywithahat · · focus · HN ↗
gammalost · · focus · HN ↗
Are you arguing for a cap on the amount of stuff a private individual can import instead of a fee? I suppose it would be a bit more invasive, but it could work and be more equal.
gammalost · · focus · HN ↗
Things we do not need: kickstarter passion projects, temu trash, a very cool custom built split keyboard that broke after a few days. I'm not against the idea of small scale importing, I bought the super cool split keyboard afterall. But the unnecesary pleasures of life are a sometimes thing and deserves to be treated as such
xnx · · focus · HN ↗
gammalost · · focus · HN ↗
It is an issue and it needs to be addressed.
graemep · · focus · HN ↗
pixl97 · · focus · HN ↗
graemep · · focus · HN ↗
I am favouring consumer choice which broadly pro-capitalist.
I interpret gammalost as favouring more heavily regulated capitalism. For one thing, the EU is very much pro-capitalist. For another many undoubtedly pro-capitalist governments do tax necessities at lower rates so its an extension of something that happens. The argument is whether it is desirable to extend it
nozzlegear · · focus · HN ↗
You haven't addressed how it's an issue outside of handwaving at China and landfills. Are European landfills particularly overflowing with items purchased from small businesses and made in China?
ndkdkdkdmdkd · · focus · HN ↗
[dead]
graemep · · focus · HN ↗
Basic food and shelter are necessities. Luxuries are not. You can survive in a hut eating gruel. I known nudists who think we would be better off without clothes.
nozzlegear · · focus · HN ↗
account42 · · focus · HN ↗
Pragmata · · focus · HN ↗
What right do you have to tell me what i do or do not need?
What an absolutely evil stance to have.
ragall · · focus · HN ↗
tygon · · focus · HN ↗
gammalost · · focus · HN ↗
I think we cause issues all the time. For example, by importing trash that we do not need. It is a part of living. But the we need to address these issues, like a tax on imports. This will inevitable lead to other issues, such as the small scale import of books not being economically viable. But the fact that it causes issues is, in my mind, not a good enough argument against it. Because all things that impact other people cause issues.
gammalost · · focus · HN ↗
bromuro · · focus · HN ↗
gammalost · · focus · HN ↗
But there can be more problems than one. I'm discussing the one that the article mentioned.
account42 · · focus · HN ↗
Pragmata · · focus · HN ↗
There is no problem here other than your eco-neuroticism. Stop doing evil things.
qubex · · focus · HN ↗
all_factz · · focus · HN ↗
It’s ironic to see free trade maximalists, who are often associated with anti-woke, anti-DEI positions, be so “triggered” by protectionist stances. You’re not the first person I’ve seen react like this.
As always, an intelligent, measured rebuttal will go miles further than an emotional outburst. And I say this as someone who (mostly) agrees that tariffs are bad.
nozzlegear · · focus · HN ↗
Goomba fallacy, these are not the same people
all_factz · · focus · HN ↗
nozzlegear · · focus · HN ↗
blargey · · focus · HN ↗
Either way, it's no lower in quality of argument than the wild assertion that everyone affected is just "importing things we really do not need" (what does that even really argue or justify?)
all_factz · · focus · HN ↗
Pragmata · · focus · HN ↗
Pragmata · · focus · HN ↗
He doesnt, and so forcing me to obey him is evil.
keoneflick · · focus · HN ↗
I just don't understand this point at all.
So it's easier for big companies to import rather than individuals.
So niche products are more difficult and mass consumer products are easy to import.
Why would that mean that "things we don't need" are less likely to be imported. It doesn't follow at all.