White House report accuses more than 40 countries of helping China route goods to sidestep U.S. tariff costs

The Trump administration released a report on Thursday accusing more than 40 countries of helping China avoid U.S. tariffs by routing goods through other jurisdictions, a practice the White House said has cost the United States billions of dollars in lost tariff revenue. The White House described the effort as what it called “transshipment,” where products are moved through third countries before reaching the U.S. market.

The White House report, titled “The Great Transshipment Scam,” said its findings show China-connected supply chains have used intermediary destinations across multiple regions to reduce the likelihood that import shipments would be classified under tariff-bearing categories tied to the 2018 trade actions. The report also said the alleged scheme involves a wide range of countries, with the Hill reporting examples ranging from Mexico to Israel.

In its release summarizing the report, the White House framed the issue as an enforcement and trade compliance problem affecting how customs and import documentation are used to determine tariff liability. The administration argued that the alleged rerouting undermines the purpose of the 2018 tariff measures by diluting the direct China link that would otherwise trigger duties.

The report’s release adds to broader efforts by the Trump administration to tighten trade enforcement in areas tied to China-related commerce. The administration’s allegation centers on the use of shipping, documentation, and intermediary markets to keep goods from being assessed under the intended tariff framework, according to the White House summary and The Hill’s coverage.

The White House did not, in the available reporting and release materials, describe specific legal steps in the form of new executive action. Instead, it released the findings as a detailed account of the alleged pattern and named countries involved, setting the stage for potential follow-on scrutiny by U.S. trade enforcement agencies.

While the administration’s report asserts that the United States has lost billions in tariff revenue, the underlying claims also raise factual questions that are likely to be addressed through trade enforcement processes. Importer-specific determinations, customs classifications, and potential investigations typically depend on evidence such as production records, supplier relationships, and shipping documentation that customs authorities can review shipment by shipment.

The next steps will depend on whether U.S. agencies pursue investigations or heightened scrutiny tied to the jurisdictions and product lanes identified in the report, and whether affected importers face customs reclassifications, additional duties, or other compliance actions. Separate legal processes could also become relevant if parties dispute the classification or origin determinations that underpin tariff liability.