.png)
Table of contents
The Changing Customs Landscape
Electronics procurement teams are facing unprecedented challenges in today's dynamic global trade environment. For years, engineering and development teams have benefited from the $800 de minimis threshold, allowing them to order components with minimal customs oversight. This frictionless approach has become standard practice, especially during new product introduction (NPI) and prototyping phases.
However, significant policy changes are on the horizon. In a recent discussion between Ed Dodd of Cofactr and Grant Sernick of 3rd Wave, these industry experts highlighted how the likely reduction—or complete elimination—of the de minimis threshold will transform component sourcing practices.
"Where once these shipments moved through quietly, they'll now face increased scrutiny. And if the documentation isn't perfect, expect delays," warned Sernick.
Add to this the continued use of tariffs as a core policy instrument, unpredictable changes to Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) codes, and targeted industry duties, and it's clear that electronics manufacturers need to reassess their compliance strategies.
Production vs. NPI: A Critical Distinction
A key insight from the discussion was the stark difference between production procurement and NPI sourcing approaches:
- Production lines typically operate with well-defined bills of materials, structured supplier data, and formalized customs processes.
- NPI teams often prioritize speed over structure, making real-time sourcing decisions without involving compliance professionals.
While this approach has accelerated development cycles, it creates significant vulnerabilities. When an NPI shipment gets held up in customs due to documentation gaps or regulatory flags, it's more than an inconvenience—it can derail entire product timelines.
Most prototyping cycles involve multiple iterations before release. Any sourcing delay caused by customs issues can have cascading effects across manufacturing slots, qualification testing, and market launch schedules.
Embedding Compliance Upstream
The message is clear: trade compliance can no longer be treated as an afterthought. For electronics manufacturers, compliance must be embedded upstream in the product development process—starting from the engineering phase.
Sernick draws a compelling parallel between customs entries and tax filings: "It's not unlike doing your taxes. The more structured and complete your documentation, the smoother the process. But if something's missing, the delays compound."
This doesn't mean engineers need to become customs experts overnight. Rather, they must begin collaborating more closely with compliance professionals who understand the regulatory frameworks. The key is involving these specialists early and providing them with complete, structured data.
Structured Data: The Foundation of Modern Compliance
This is where platforms like Cofactr and Third Wave demonstrate their value. By aggregating fragmented purchasing and receiving data—from email threads, supplier portals, and shipping documents—and structuring it for ERP and compliance systems, these solutions create a digital bridge between engineering and customs requirements.
The result is a significant increase in supply chain velocity. Customs entries can be processed faster, detention risks are reduced, and engineering teams can focus on innovation rather than bureaucratic problem-solving.
Why This Matters Now
The upcoming shift in de minimis policy represents just the beginning. Industry experts expect customs scrutiny, tariff shifts, and enforcement actions to intensify in the coming months.
"We've gotten used to thinking that we can order four parts and they'll show up in an envelope the next day," noted Dodd. "That assumption may no longer hold. If you don't know where your parts are coming from or what they're made of, you're going to be stuck."
Organizations that fail to adapt risk not only higher costs but also significant delays in product launch timelines. These delays can have far-reaching consequences—missing contract manufacturer build slots, postponing reliability testing, or compromising market windows.
Five Action Steps for Electronics Procurement Teams
- Bring Compliance In Early
Involve trade compliance specialists during component selection, especially for NPI builds. - Map Your Parts' Origin and Classification
Treat sourcing data as strategic intelligence. Know your suppliers, countries of origin, and applicable HTS codes. - Structure Your Data
Move beyond manual entry and disjointed spreadsheets. Implement automation tools that unify purchasing, shipping, and compliance documentation. - Track Every Shipment
Use structured monitoring tools for shipment status. Don't wait until a part is late to discover it's stuck in customs. - Train Engineering Teams on Trade Basics
Provide engineers with simple guidelines and compliance contact points. Help them understand how customs issues directly impact their workflow.
Future-Proofing Your Supply Chain
The compliance environment continues to evolve, and electronics manufacturers must evolve with it. Delays, disruptions, and cost overruns related to insufficient trade documentation are no longer isolated incidents—they represent systemic risks.
By investing in structured procurement data, automated compliance tools, and cross-functional collaboration, electronics companies can protect their product timelines and reduce exposure to trade-related disruptions. Perhaps most importantly, they can maintain the engineering velocity that drives competitive advantage in today's fast-paced markets.
This article is based on insights from industry experts Ed Dodd (Cofactr) and Grant Sernick (3rd Wave) on navigating the changing landscape of global trade compliance in electronics manufacturing.