
Ease of doing business
theboardiQ Tariffs Dashboard:
Powering Mutually Beneficial Global Trade.
Understand the complexities of international tariffs and ease of doing business across nations to cultivate balanced trade relationships, streamline operations, and deliver cost savings to end consumers.

Implications
The latest updates regarding US tariffs on Colombia show that the trade relationship has been significantly altered by the introduction of new "reciprocal" tariffs, which have been layered on top of the existing U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA).
Here is the updated table on US Tariffs, Deals, and Impacts concerning Colombia as of October 2025:
Area | Status (October 2025) | Key Details |
Current US Tariff on Colombian Goods | 10% (Implemented) | A 10% "Reciprocal Tariff" (part of the global "Liberation Day" tariffs) was imposed on Colombian exports to the US, effective April 5, 2025, and is currently in place. Colombia was placed in the lowest tariff bracket. |
Trade Deals / Agreements Status | U.S.-Colombia TPA (In Force), but Tariffs Apply | The original U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA), which aims for duty-free access for over 80% of industrial and consumer goods, remains technically in force. However, the new 10% tariff is applied in addition to any duties under the TPA, essentially overriding the agreement's preferential access for many products. |
Tariff Negotiations | Suspended | Bilateral negotiations between the US and Colombian governments regarding a reduction or removal of the 10% tariff were suspended on October 1, 2025, due to the U.S. government shutdown. |
Impact on Colombian Exports | Sharp Decline | Colombian exports to the U.S. fell by 13.7% in August 2025, coinciding with the implementation of the 10% tariff. Analysts link this drop to the new duties, which make Colombian goods less competitive. |
Companies/Market Impact | Higher Costs & Diversification | 1. Increased Import Costs: U.S. importers of Colombian goods (e.g., cut flowers, textiles, certain agricultural products) face a direct 10% cost increase. |
2. Competitive Disadvantage: Colombian goods lose competitiveness against products from countries that have secured better deals or were not subjected to the new tariffs. | ||
3. Colombian Diversification: The Colombian government is actively pursuing a strategy to reduce dependence on the U.S. market by expanding trade with Europe, China, and other Latin American nations. |
Further Context on Colombia Tariffs:
Legal Basis: The 10% tariff was imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a legal mechanism the Trump administration used to implement tariffs on a broad set of trading partners. The legality of these tariffs is currently being challenged in U.S. federal courts, with the case scheduled for the Supreme Court in November 2025.
Tariff Stacking: The new 10% tariff applies to a wide range of products and is levied on top of any pre-existing duties (though for many TPA-eligible products, the original duty was 0%).
Political Tensions: The economic turbulence adds to existing friction between the governments of President Trump and Colombian President Gustavo Petro, with the U.S. having previously used tariff threats to pressure Colombia on non-trade issues, such as counternarcotics policies.
US Revised Tariffs
Country Tariffs
Balance of Trade
Commercial Guide
Learn about the market conditions, opportunities, regulations, and business conditions in countries, prepared by U.S. Embassies worldwide, Commerce Department, State Department and other U.S. agencies’ professionals
Tariff Rate for US
World Bank staff estimates using the World Integrated Trade Solution system, based on tariff data from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development's Trade Analysis and Information System ( TRAINS ) database and global imports data from the United Nations Statistics Division's Comtrade database.
US Imports Guide
United States Imports from Countries during 2024, according to the United Nations COMTRADE database on international trade. United States Imports from Countries- data, historical chart and statistics - was last updated on April of 2025.
Investing in USA
theboardiQ Economic Relevance Score, ranks States of USA based on 11 parameters
Sources : Forbes | USDA Economic Research | TCGen Total Innovation Rank Index | Best States for Manufacturing | World Population Review | Tax Foundation | US News | BEA Data | Wikipedia | International Trade Administration
theboardiQ's Economic Relevance Score provides a comprehensive, data-driven assessment of a nation's economic vitality and global significance. This score is meticulously calculated using 11 key parameters, each reflecting a critical facet of economic performance. It analyzes the representation of Fortune 500 companies within a nation, a strong indicator of its business environment and market size. The balance of trade surplus or deficit reveals the nation's international competitiveness and export strength. It incorporates Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a fundamental measure of overall economic output, and examine the health of key sectors like agriculture and manufacturing. The score also accounts for innovation, gauging a nation's ability to drive future growth through technological advancements. Crucial labor market indicators such as employment rates are considered, alongside fiscal policies reflected in tax rates. To capture the lived experience of citizens, it assesses cost of living and disposable income, providing insight into purchasing power and economic well-being. Finally, education levels are integrated, recognizing their pivotal role in fostering a skilled workforce and driving long-term economic development. By synthesizing these 11 parameters, theboardiQ's Economic Relevance Score delivers a nuanced and holistic view of a nation's economic standing, enabling informed strategic decisions. The Top 5 States in the assessment are Texas, North Carolina, Virginia, Florida and Washington. Texas does consistently well across most of the 11 variables especially in the areas of GDP, F500 representation in the State, Balance of Trade where it ranks 2nd nationally. North Carolina scores as the highest-ranking state nationally in manufacturing and performs consistently across the other variables. Virginia does well in disposable income where it ranks 3rd nationally. It also scores high in the variables of manufacturing and employment Florida holds the 4th ranking nationally for GDP and Tax Washington State scores the top spot for disposable income nationally, 2nd for education and 3rd for innovation. Colorado, with an overall rank of 7 scores the top spot for Education (schools and higher education). Nebraska, that ranked 10th overall, did well in Agriculture where it is ranked 3rd nationally as well as Trade Balance where it ranked 5th. Illinois, though ranked 20th overall did well nationally in F500 representation, GDP, Agriculture, and Disposable Income. Pennsylvania comes in at 21 overall doing well nationally in GDP (6th); Manufacturing (8th) and F500 representation (8th) New York scores 23rd overall with a 2 ranking in Disposable Income nationally, as well as 3rd in both F500 representation and GDP. California comes in at 29th overall and has the top spot ranking in a whopping 4 variables nationally – GDP, Innovation, Agriculture and F500 representation. However, performance in the areas of Trade Balance, Cost of Living, Tax, Manufacturing and Employment resulted in the overall ranking dipping. Wyoming at 30th overall scores the top spot nationally in the area of Tax Massachusetts at 31 overall does well in innovation where it is ranked 2nd nationally Arkansas at 36 and Alabama at 39, do well in overall Cost of Living where they are ranked 2nd and 3rd nationally, respectively. Louisiana ranked 44th overall is ranked 1st in Trade Balance nationally.

Economic
Relevance
Ranking
State | Info | Overall Rank | Agri | Innov | Mfg | Employ | Tax | Edu | GDP | F500 Rep | Trade Balance | Cost of Living | Disp Income |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Texas | 1 | 4 | 5 | 11 | 10 | 7 | 42 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 24 | 13 | |
North Carolina | 2 | 9 | 21 | 1 | 4 | 12 | 28 | 11 | 16 | 41 | 17 | 17 | |
Virginia | 3 | 32 | 24 | 6 | 2 | 28 | 7 | 13 | 6 | 34 | 35 | 3 | |
Florida | 4 | 21 | 11 | 15 | 1 | 4 | 35 | 4 | 7 | 40 | 30 | 37 | |
Washington | 5 | 16 | 3 | 36 | 28 | 45 | 9 | 9 | 15 | 9 | 43 | 1 | |
Missouri | 6 | 11 | 25 | 22 | 20 | 13 | 32 | 21 | 22 | 20 | 10 | 20 | |
Georgia | 7 | 15 | 26 | 9 | 3 | 26 | 34 | 8 | 9 | 43 | 26 | 19 | |
Minnesota | 8 | 6 | 10 | 47 | 6 | 44 | 8 | 20 | 10 | 33 | 33 | 9 | |
Ohio | 9 | 12 | 32 | 7 | 30 | 35 | 36 | 7 | 5 | 38 | 15 | 11 | |
Illinois | 10 | 5 | 23 | 31 | 23 | 37 | 16 | 5 | 4 | 47 | 32 | 7 |