U.S. Commerce Department Keeps Tariffs on Chinese Mattresses

Estimated reading time: 2–4 minutes

The United States Department of Commerce has decided not to cancel the countervailing duty on mattresses from China. This decision is important for American companies that make mattresses because they believe it would be bad for their business if the duty was revoked.

Background

The duty, or tax, on Chinese mattresses started on May 24, 2021. This was called an “Order.” Its purpose was to stop unfair funding, or subsidies, that Chinese mattress makers were getting. These subsidies allowed them to sell mattresses at a lower price, which is unfair to U.S. companies.

The Review Process

On April 1, 2026, the Department began a review to decide if they should keep the duty in place. This was called a “sunset review.” During this review, U.S. mattress companies expressed their opinion that the duty should remain. They sent a letter to the Department on April 15, 2026.

Submissions and Responses

By May 1, 2026, the U.S. companies had provided detailed reasons why the duty should not be removed. But, the Chinese government and Chinese mattress companies did not send any arguments against the duty. Because there was no opposition from China, the Department moved quickly in their review.

Results of the Review

The Department of Commerce finished the review and decided to keep the duty in place. This decision means that the Chinese companies will continue to face charges of 97.78% on their mattress products when they sell them in the U.S.

Conclusion and Responsibilities

This decision is final for this review cycle. U.S. companies with access to special information must handle it properly according to the rules.

This update should help those interested in trade and business between the U.S. and China understand what’s happening with the mattress market.

Legal Disclaimer

This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.