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 current trade landscape between the U.S. and Egypt has been significantly altered by the introduction of new U.S. "reciprocal tariffs" in 2025.
Here is an update on the US Tariffs, Deals, and Company Impact for Egypt as of October 2025:
US Tariffs Update (on Egypt)
Area | Status (October 2025) | Key Details |
New US Reciprocal Tariff | 10% (Implemented since April 2025) | The U.S. imposed a 10% reciprocal tariff on most imports from Egypt as part of a broader tariff strategy on many global trading partners. |
Qualifying Industrial Zone (QIZ) | Subject to 10% Tariff (Status reduced) | Products imported from Egypt under the QIZ agreement, which previously entered the U.S. duty-free, are now subject to the 10% reciprocal tariff. |
De Minimis Exemption | Suspended (Effective August 2025) | The rule that allowed low-value shipments (under $800) to enter the U.S. duty-free has been suspended for all countries, including Egypt. This adds duties to small e-commerce shipments. |
Deals and Agreements Status (US-Egypt)
The core trade agreements remain in place, but their benefits have been undermined by the new tariffs.
Agreement | Status | Key Implications |
Qualifying Industrial Zone (QIZ) Protocol | Active but Impaired | The QIZ, which allows duty-free access for Egyptian goods (primarily textiles/apparel) that include a small percentage of Israeli input, is technically active. However, the imposition of the new 10% U.S. tariff means these goods are no longer duty-free, significantly diminishing the program's primary benefit. |
Egyptian Response | Seeking Amendment | Following the tariff imposition, the Egyptian government is reportedly seeking to amend the QIZ agreement with the U.S. and Israel, with suggestions to reduce the required Israeli content percentage. |
Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) | Active | The BIT, signed in 1982, remains in effect to facilitate and protect investment between the two countries. |
Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) | Active | The TIFA remains the foundation for dialogue on trade and investment issues, but no progress has been reported on a full Free Trade Agreement (FTA). |
Export to Sheets
Companies Impacted
The primary impact on U.S. companies stems from increased sourcing costs and reduced competitiveness for their Egyptian partners, particularly in the largest export sector.
Sector | Nature of Impact | U.S. Company Exposure |
Textiles and Apparel (QIZ) | Increased Import Costs | This sector, which relies heavily on the QIZ for duty-free access, is the most affected. U.S. retailers and brands that source apparel from Egyptian QIZ manufacturers now face the 10% tariff, which can lead to higher consumer prices or reduced profit margins. |
Agriculture and Fertilizers | Input Cost Increase | U.S. companies that import Egyptian fertilizers or agricultural products are subject to the 10% tariff, increasing their input costs. |
Retail/E-commerce | Higher Logistics Costs | The global suspension of the de minimis exemption impacts U.S. e-commerce businesses that source low-value, high-volume items from Egypt, making small shipments more costly and administratively complex. |
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 |