EU targets cheap parcel imports

The small parcel has become one of the more awkward facts of European trade policy. A phone case, a T-shirt, a set of sunglasses: each can arrive from China for less than the price of a sandwich, often with no obvious sign at checkout of who paid for inspection, customs handling, waste or product safety.

Since 1 July, the EU has tried to change that bargain. It removed the rule that allowed e-commerce parcels worth under €150 to enter without customs duty. In its place is a charge of about €3 per product category in each shipment (European Commission, Corriere della Sera). The names in Brussels’ sights are familiar to anyone who has scrolled late at night: Shein, Temu and AliExpress. The question is whether ultra-cheap shopping is efficient, or merely cheap because the real costs are carried somewhere else.

France has moved harder and faster. Days before the EU change, its parliament adopted a law adding an environmental surcharge on ultra-fast-fashion items, rising to as much as €20 per piece by 2030, capped at half the pre-tax price (Fibre2Fashion, Le Dauphine). Paris is trying to put a price on costs that never appear in the basket: waste collection, pollution and clothes discarded within weeks. The EU measure and the French law are aimed at the same hidden subsidy, but they reach it through different levers.

The Fee Hits Mixed Baskets Harder

The EU’s €3 charge is not a simple fee on every parcel. It applies per product category. A package containing a T-shirt and sunglasses triggers two charges, while five identical T-shirts may count as one (Dziennik, MacGeneration). That detail matters. A €3 charge can destroy the appeal of a €2 phone case; it barely changes the calculation on a €40 basket.

On paper, platforms and sellers owe the fee. In practice, it is already showing up in checkout prices and delivery charges (Euronews, BR). That is the old tax lesson: the legal payer and the person who carries the cost are often different people. If Temu lifts the listed price by €3, the consumer pays, whatever the customs paperwork says.

France is going after the model rather than the parcel. Its law targets thousands of new items a day, low durability and little incentive to repair. The charge applies per item sold in France (Innovation Forum). French and Italian reporting has pointed to a political choice in the design: the criteria seem shaped to catch Shein and Temu while leaving European fast-fashion brands such as Zara largely outside the frame (Politique France).

Nearly Six Billion Parcels, Most Unchecked

The scale explains why this has moved beyond fashion. Around 5.9 billion low-value items entered the EU duty-free in 2025, most of them from China (Journal du Geek, European Commission). More than 60% of checked products in sensitive categories failed EU safety standards (Fibre2Fashion). Belgium and the Netherlands, the main entry hubs for platform parcels, carry a disproportionate share of the processing burden (Info.fr).

The Commission’s wider answer is to shift responsibility up the chain. Under the customs reform, marketplaces would be treated as the importer of record. That would allow customs authorities to demand compliance data and payment from the platform, instead of trying to chase millions of individual sellers scattered across the world (European Commission).

Who Gains, Who Loses

European retailers and textile producers are the obvious winners. The charges narrow the price gap enjoyed by direct imports that avoid compliance costs already borne by sellers inside the EU. Germany’s retail association has welcomed the move towards fairer conditions, while warning that fees cannot substitute for proper enforcement against unsafe or mislabelled goods (Zeit).

The losers are consumers who buy at the very cheapest end of the market. Polish reporting put it plainly: a €3 charge on a product costing only a few euro is a large increase, and people shopping in that range are not usually the well-off (Forsal). In Italy, the consumer group Codacons and MEP Pasquale Tridico have called the fee regressive because it takes a bigger share from poorer shoppers’ spending (Giustizia News24). Spanish economist Santiago Niño Becerra was blunter again: the fee may raise money, but it will not change habits if the underlying price gap remains wide (Moncloa.com).

The policy makes sense on competition and safety grounds. It is also a flat charge that lands hardest on the smallest baskets. Unless enforcement can keep pace with nearly six billion parcels a year, Europe has not remade the model. It has mainly made the cheapest checkout a little less cheap.