Kenya vs South Africa: Import Tariff Comparison 2026
Importing fresh produce from Kenya costs 5% in total tariffs compared to 17.5% from South Africa under the current 2026 tariff regime. Kenya offers the lower effective tariff rate at 5%, while South Africa comes in at 17.5%. The Section 122 global surcharge enacted in February 2026 lapsed on July 24, 2026 when its 150-day statutory limit expired; depending on forced-labor Section 301 coverage, goods from Kenya and South Africa may now face a backfilled duty in its place rather than the surcharge itself. The rate differential of 12.5% translates directly into landed cost differences for importers choosing between these two sourcing origins. Understanding the complete tariff stack — MFN base plus special tariffs — is essential for accurate landed cost forecasting when comparing Kenya and South Africa as sourcing options.
Tariff Rate Comparison
Fresh Produce| Rate Type | KenyaSave 12.5pp vs highest | South Africa |
|---|---|---|
| MFN Base RateMost Favored Nation tariff | 5.00% | 5.00% |
| 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 | N/A | 12.50% |
| Bilateral DealNegotiated country rate, compared against the other special layers | N/A | N/A |
| Total Effective Rate | 5.00% | 17.50% |
Rate Comparison by Product Category
| Product | Kenya | South Africa | Savings ($10K) |
|---|---|---|---|
| fresh produce | 5.0% | 17.5% | $1,325 |
| mining equipment | 2.0% | 14.5% | $1,325 |
| textiles fabrics | 8.0% | 20.5% | $1,325 |
| auto parts components | 28.0% | 28.0% | $0 |
| chemicals industrial compounds | 3.5% | 16.0% | $1,325 |
Trade Agreement Status
Kenya 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, while Kenya is absent from the forced-labor Section 301 covered list, so no replacement surcharge applies. South Africa 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 Africa 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
Kenya 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 Africa 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
Fresh ProduceKenyaFull Landed Cost Breakdown
Based on a $10,000 ocean shipment (FOB value)
South AfricaFull Landed Cost Breakdown
Based on a $10,000 ocean shipment (FOB value)
Savings Analysis
On a $10,000 shipment of fresh produce, importing from Kenya saves $1,325 in duties compared to South Africa — a 71.4% reduction in total import costs. Kenya incurs $530 in duties on the $10,000 shipment, while South Africa incurs $1,855. This difference compounds across larger order volumes and is a key factor in supplier selection decisions for importers sourcing fresh produce.
Frequently Asked Questions
The total effective tariff rate on fresh produce is 5% from Kenya and 17.5% from South Africa 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.
Kenya does not have a formal trade agreement with the United States. Section 122 lapsed to 0% on July 24, 2026, so imports from Kenya now face either a forced-labor Section 301 duty (if Kenya is on the roughly 60-economy covered list) or the base MFN rate alone with no special-tariff layer.
South Africa does not have a bilateral trade agreement with the US. Section 122 lapsed to 0% on July 24, 2026, so imports from South Africa now face either a forced-labor Section 301 duty (if South Africa is on the roughly 60-economy covered list) or the base MFN rate alone with no special-tariff layer.
Kenya is cheaper for mining equipment with a 2% total tariff rate, compared to 14.5% from South Africa. On a $10,000 shipment, this 12.5% rate difference saves $1,250 in duties when sourcing from Kenya.
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 lapsed sitewide on July 24, 2026, and Kenya is absent from the forced-labor Section 301 covered list, so no replacement surcharge applies. Section 122 no longer applies to South Africa — it lapsed on July 24, 2026 — but South Africa 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 .