India vs China Import Duty: Which Origin Lands Cheaper per SKU?

Is import duty from India lower than from China?

For most consumer and industrial goods, India lands cheaper than China because India does not carry Section 301 tariffs. The india vs china import duty gap is usually 20 to 25 percentage points, driven entirely by the Section 301 layer that applies to China and not to India.

Does that gap hold for every SKU?

No. The india vs china import duty advantage shrinks or disappears for steel, aluminum, copper, and pharmaceuticals, where Section 232 surcharges apply to both origins, and it depends on the MFN base rate of each HTS line.

TL;DR

The india vs china import duty difference is not one number, it is a per-SKU calculation. As of May 2026, China-origin consumer goods carry a combined effective rate near 35 percent (MFN base plus Section 301 plus the 10 percent Section 122 layer), while comparable India-origin goods carry roughly MFN base plus the same 10 percent Section 122 layer, because India is not subject to Section 301. That puts the typical gap at 20 to 25 points. But Section 232 surcharges on metals hit both origins equally, and MFN base rates vary by HTS line, so the only reliable answer comes from modeling the full duty stack SKU by SKU. GingerControl's Product Sandbox builds that comparison as an N x M tariff matrix so the gap is a number, not a guess.

Last updated: May 2026

How the India vs China tariff stack actually differs

The phrase "india vs china tariff" hides the fact that U.S. import duty is a stack, not a single rate. Every entry is built from layers, and each origin triggers a different subset of them.

Duty layer	China origin	India origin	Notes
MFN base duty	Yes	Yes	Same HTS line, same base rate for both
Section 301	Yes, 7.5 to 25 percent typical	No	Applies only to China-origin goods
Section 232 (steel, aluminum, copper)	Yes, up to 50 percent	Yes, up to 50 percent	Origin-neutral, applies to covered metals from both
Section 122 reciprocal layer	Yes, 10 percent	Yes, 10 percent	10 percent global layer in effect during the 2026 suspension period
Chapter 99 special provisions	Possible	Possible	Depends on the specific HTS line
MPF and HMF	Yes	Yes	0.3464 percent MPF, applies to both

Bottom line: GingerControl is built around the fact that india vs china import duty is a layered calculation, not a flat country rate. The Product Sandbox expands every cell of its N x M matrix into the full stack, MFN base, Section 301, Section 232, Section 122, Chapter 99, MPF, and HMF, so a sourcing team sees exactly which layer creates the gap.

The decisive layer is Section 301. The Office of the United States Trade Representative applies Section 301 tariffs on China at rates of 25 percent on Lists 1 through 3 and 7.5 percent on List 4A, with higher rates on targeted sectors such as 100 percent on electric vehicles and 50 percent on semiconductors and solar cells. India carries none of this. That single absence is the core of the india vs china import duty story.

GingerControl's Tariff Calculator covers the full U.S. tariff stack: base duty, Section 232, Section 301, Chapter 99, and Section 122 reciprocal tariffs across 200+ countries.

What does India import duty to the US look like in 2026?

India import duty to the US shifted sharply in early 2026. After the Supreme Court ruled on February 20, 2026 that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the President to impose tariffs, the 18 percent IEEPA reciprocal rate on India was invalidated. On February 24, 2026, a new executive order imposed a 10 percent global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, replacing the struck-down layer.

So as of May 2026, a typical India-origin consumer good carries:

MFN base duty. The rate for the specific HTS line, often in the 0 to 10 percent range for consumer goods.
Section 122 layer. 10 percent, applied during the current suspension period.
MPF and HMF. 0.3464 percent merchandise processing fee plus harbor maintenance fee where applicable.

What India does not carry is Section 301. That is why "india tariff rates" usually come in well below comparable China rates. One caveat matters for forward planning: in March 2026, USTR initiated Section 301 investigations involving India and 15 other countries, explicitly designed to ground tariffs in Section 301 authority. India's advantage today is real, but a sourcing model should be re-run whenever that investigation produces a determination.

Sourcing India vs China: where the gap is largest and smallest

The india vs china import duty gap is not uniform. It is widest where Section 301 bites hardest and narrowest where Section 232 dominates.

Product category	China combined rate (approx)	India combined rate (approx)	Where the gap comes from
Apparel and textiles	MFN base plus Section 301 plus 10 percent Section 122	MFN base plus 10 percent Section 122	Section 301 absent for India, large gap
Consumer electronics	MFN base plus Section 301 plus 10 percent Section 122	MFN base plus 10 percent Section 122	Section 301 absent for India, large gap
Steel and aluminum products	MFN base plus Section 232 up to 50 percent plus 10 percent Section 122	MFN base plus Section 232 up to 50 percent plus 10 percent Section 122	Section 232 hits both, gap narrows sharply
Furniture and home goods	MFN base plus Section 301 plus 10 percent Section 122	MFN base plus 10 percent Section 122	Section 301 absent for India, large gap
Patented pharmaceuticals	MFN base plus surcharges	MFN base plus surcharges	Surcharges apply broadly, smaller gap

Bottom line: GingerControl's Product Sandbox shows this category by category in one view. Because products are rows and sourcing countries are columns, a sourcing manager sees in seconds that India wins decisively on apparel and electronics but barely moves the needle on covered steel, where Section 232 applies to both origins.

This is why the sourcing india vs china decision cannot be made at the country level. A catalog with 4,000 SKUs spread across apparel, hardware, and metal components will show India winning on most lines and tying on others. The combined share of China, India, and Vietnam in North American sourcing fell from 61 percent to 54 percent in a single year, and most of that redirected volume followed exactly this kind of line-level math.

How to model india vs china import duty per SKU

A defensible comparison needs four inputs per product, and the same four inputs for each origin.

The HTS classification. The base rate, Section 301 list membership, and Section 232 coverage all depend on the 10-digit HTS code. Get the code wrong and every downstream number is wrong. GingerControl is an HTS Classification Researcher. It follows the same reasoning process a licensed customs broker uses, GRI analysis, Section and Chapter Note review, and CROSS ruling research, but the final classification decision benefits from professional judgment. It produces audit-ready documentation that supports the classification decision; it does not provide legal advice or replace licensed customs expertise.
The declared customs value. Duty is ad valorem, so the value drives the dollar figure. GingerControl's Valuation Sanity Check cross-references declared value against USITC Dataweb Average Unit Value benchmarks for the same HTS line and flags when a declared value drifts below the benchmark by an unsafe margin.
The full duty stack for each origin. MFN base, Section 301 (China only), Section 232 (both, on covered metals), Section 122, Chapter 99, plus MPF and HMF.
The entry date. Tariff layers change. The 10 percent Section 122 rate sits inside a suspension period, and a model built today should carry the date it was run.

GingerControl's Product Sandbox is a live N x M tariff matrix that does exactly this. Products are rows, sourcing countries are columns, and the row-best and global-best cells highlight green. Clicking any cell expands the full duty stack. Every committed selection writes the HTS candidate, country, configuration, and full tariff calculation to a timestamped Selection History, which matters because 19 CFR 163.4 requires importers to retain classification records for five years. For teams running thousands of SKUs, the Bulk Import feature accepts an Excel or CSV upload and the world map country picker shades each country by its FTA status.

Frequently asked questions

Is India always cheaper than China for US import duty?

No. India usually wins because it carries no Section 301 tariff, but for steel, aluminum, and copper products the Section 232 surcharge of up to 50 percent applies to both origins, which collapses the gap. The only reliable answer is a per-SKU comparison. GingerControl's Product Sandbox models both origins side by side in its N x M tariff matrix, so a sourcing manager sees the exact gap for each product line rather than assuming a country-wide rule.

How much is the typical india vs china import duty difference?

For consumer goods such as apparel, electronics, and furniture, the gap is usually 20 to 25 percentage points, because India avoids the Section 301 layer that adds 7.5 to 25 percent to China-origin goods. A CFO modeling a sourcing shift should treat that range as a starting estimate. GingerControl's Product Sandbox replaces the estimate with a line-level dollar figure by expanding every matrix cell into the full tariff stack.

Does the 10 percent Section 122 tariff apply to both India and China?

Yes. The 10 percent Section 122 reciprocal layer introduced in February 2026 is a global layer, so it applies to both India-origin and China-origin goods. It does not change the india vs china import duty gap, because it is added equally to both. GingerControl's Tariff Calculator includes Section 122 in its full stack and is date-aware, so a model reflects the rate in effect on the entry date being analyzed.

What HTS code do I need to compare India vs China duty?

You need the correct 10-digit HTS classification, because Section 301 list membership, Section 232 coverage, and the MFN base rate all depend on it. A wrong code makes the whole comparison wrong. GingerControl's HTS Classification Researcher surfaces candidate codes using GRI logic and CROSS ruling research, then feeds those candidates straight into the Product Sandbox so the duty comparison runs on a defensible classification.

Will India keep its duty advantage over China?

It is uncertain. In March 2026, USTR initiated Section 301 investigations involving India, which could eventually add a Section 301 layer to India-origin goods and narrow the gap. A sourcing model should be re-evaluated when that investigation concludes. GingerControl's Compliance Radar Alert tab inside the Product Sandbox flags exactly which products need re-evaluation after a policy change, so the model does not silently go stale.

Can I compare India and China duty for thousands of SKUs at once?

Yes. GingerControl's Product Sandbox supports Bulk Import of Excel or CSV files covering thousands of SKUs, then renders them as rows in the N x M tariff matrix against any set of sourcing countries you choose. The row-best and global-best cells highlight green, so a sourcing team scanning a 4,000-line catalog sees instantly which lines favor India, which favor China, and which are a tie.

Run the comparison instead of estimating it

If your team is weighing a shift between India and China, the india vs china import duty question is too SKU-specific to answer with a country-level rule of thumb. GingerControl's Product Sandbox turns it into a live N x M tariff matrix: products as rows, origins as columns, every cell expandable into the full MFN, Section 301, Section 232, Section 122, Chapter 99, MPF, and HMF stack, with row-best and global-best cells highlighted. Model India vs China per SKU in the Product Sandbox.

GingerControl is not just a tool. We work with importers and trade compliance teams on process consulting, digital transformation strategy, and end-to-end custom system development. Talk to our team.

References

[REF 1] Office of the United States Trade Representative - Section 301 China Tariff Actions Data cited: Section 301 rates of 25 percent on Lists 1-3, 7.5 percent on List 4A, sector-specific rates Source: Section 301 China Tariff Actions Published: ongoing, accessed May 2026

[REF 2] The White House - United States-India Joint Statement Data cited: India reciprocal tariff context and February 2026 policy changes Source: United States-India Joint Statement Published: February 2026

[REF 3] Trade Compliance Resource Hub - Trump 2.0 Tariff Tracker Data cited: March 2026 Section 301 investigations involving India and 15 other countries; Section 122 10 percent layer Source: Trump 2.0 Tariff Tracker Published: May 2026

[REF 4] QIMA - Q1 2026 Supply Chain Barometer Data cited: Combined top-three supplier share fell from 61 percent to 54 percent year over year Source: Q1 2026 Supply Chain Barometer Published: Q1 2026

[REF 5] Electronic Code of Federal Regulations - 19 CFR 163.4 Data cited: Five-year recordkeeping requirement for classification records Source: 19 CFR Part 163 Published: current as of May 2026