Japan vs South Korea: Import Tariff Comparison 2026
Neither Japan nor South Korea carries a negotiated bilateral tariff rate that the United States charges today. The country-specific rates reported through 2025 as bilateral deals were lines inside the reciprocal tariff imposed by Executive Order 14257, and Executive Order 14389 terminated that tariff on February 20, 2026; they are no longer collected. On consumer electronics, Japan pays its MFN base rate plus a forced-labor Section 301 duty of 11%, while South Korea pays its MFN base rate plus a forced-labor Section 301 duty of 11%. That puts the total effective rate at 12.5% from Japan and 12.5% from South Korea. Section 122 lapsed to 0% on July 24, 2026 and contributes nothing to either figure, and on this product category the two origins land at the same total — so the choice between them turns on freight, lead time and supplier fit rather than on tariffs.
Tariff Rate Comparison
Consumer Electronics| Rate Type | Japanbilateral | South Koreabilateral |
|---|---|---|
| MFN Base RateMost Favored Nation tariff | 1.50% | 1.50% |
| Section 232Steel & aluminum tariff | N/A | N/A |
| Section 301Unfair-trade action under 19 U.S.C. 2411 | N/A | N/A |
| Section 301 (forced labor)Forced-labor duty applied to covered economies | 11.00% | 11.00% |
| Bilateral DealNegotiated country rate, compared against the other special layers | N/A | N/A |
| Total Effective Rate | 12.50% | 12.50% |
Rate Comparison by Product Category
| Product | Japan | South Korea | Savings ($10K) |
|---|---|---|---|
| consumer electronics | 12.5% | 12.5% | $0 |
| auto parts components | 28.0% | 28.0% | $0 |
| steel iron products | 53.0% | 53.0% | $0 |
| semiconductors chips | 25.0% | 25.0% | $0 |
| industrial machinery | 12.5% | 12.5% | $0 |
Trade Agreement Status
Japan has no negotiated bilateral rate charged on its goods — any country-specific reciprocal rate it once carried was terminated on February 20, 2026 — and Section 122 lapsed to 0% on July 24, 2026, but Japan is on the forced-labor Section 301 covered list at the 12.5% tier, with Section 232 goods carved out and the charge on any given product depending on its MFN rate. South Korea has no negotiated bilateral rate charged on its goods — any country-specific reciprocal rate it once carried was terminated on February 20, 2026 — and Section 122 lapsed to 0% on July 24, 2026, but South Korea is on the forced-labor Section 301 covered list at the 12.5% tier, with Section 232 goods carved out and the charge on any given product depending on its MFN rate. For products under Section 232 national security tariffs, S232 rates govern: a bilateral deal rate does not displace them, and Section 122 never applied to S232-covered goods while it was in force, before it lapsed to zero on July 24, 2026. China-origin goods additionally face Section 301 tariffs that stack on top of all other duties, making trade agreement status a defining factor in the total tariff burden.
When to Source from Each Country
Japan offers lower tariff rates across all focus product categories in this comparison, making it the more cost-effective sourcing origin from a tariff perspective. Source from South Korea when its supplier relationships, product specialization, or geographic advantages outweigh the tariff cost differential. Always model total landed cost — including freight, insurance, MPF, and HMF fees — before finalizing sourcing decisions.
Full Landed Cost — $10,000 Shipment
Consumer ElectronicsJapanFull Landed Cost Breakdown
Based on a $10,000 ocean shipment (FOB value)
South KoreaFull Landed Cost Breakdown
Based on a $10,000 ocean shipment (FOB value)
Savings Analysis
On a $10,000 shipment of consumer electronics, importing from Japan saves $0 in duties compared to South Korea — a 0% reduction in total import costs. Japan incurs $1,325 in duties on the $10,000 shipment, while South Korea incurs $1,325. This difference compounds across larger order volumes and is a key factor in supplier selection decisions for importers sourcing consumer electronics.
Frequently Asked Questions
The total effective tariff rate on consumer electronics is 12.5% from Japan and 12.5% from South Korea under current 2026 tariff policy. These rates include the MFN base rate, any persisting bilateral deal rate, Section 232 duties for covered products, Section 301 tariffs for Chinese goods, and the forced-labor Section 301 duty that backfills the lapsed Section 122 surcharge for roughly 60 covered economies (Section 122 itself lapsed to 0% on July 24, 2026 and no longer applies). Use the CalcMyTariff.com calculator above to enter your specific invoice value and shipping details for a precise landed cost breakdown.
Japan does not have a formal trade agreement with the United States. Section 122 lapsed to 0% on July 24, 2026, so imports from Japan now face either a forced-labor Section 301 duty (if Japan is on the roughly 60-economy covered list) or the base MFN rate alone with no special-tariff layer.
South Korea does not have a bilateral trade agreement with the US. Section 122 lapsed to 0% on July 24, 2026, so imports from South Korea now face either a forced-labor Section 301 duty (if South Korea is on the roughly 60-economy covered list) or the base MFN rate alone with no special-tariff layer.
Japan is cheaper for auto parts components with a 28% total tariff rate, compared to 28% from South Korea. On a $10,000 shipment, this 0% rate difference saves $0 in duties when sourcing from Japan.
Section 122, enacted in February 2026 for up to 150 days, imposed a global surcharge on most US imports until it lapsed on July 24, 2026. Section 122 no longer applies to Japan — it lapsed on July 24, 2026 — but Japan is on the forced-labor Section 301 covered list at the 12.5% tier, which backfilled the lapsed surcharge. Section 122 no longer applies to South Korea — it lapsed on July 24, 2026 — but South Korea is on the forced-labor Section 301 covered list at the 12.5% tier, which backfilled the lapsed surcharge. Since the lapse, a forced-labor Section 301 duty (10%/12.5% on ~60 economies) has backfilled the surcharge for most importers — model the realized post-July-24 structure, forced-labor duty included, when planning shipments.
Tariff rates from Tax Foundation, USITC, and Penn Wharton Budget Model; retaliatory and industry data from the ITA Foreign Retaliations Database and U.S. Census Bureau (NAICS). Last verified .