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 U.S. imposed a 10% baseline reciprocal tariff on imports from most countries without a finalized trade agreement, including Uzbekistan, starting in April 2025. While the direct impact is considered minor due to the nature of current trade, the indirect effects of the global tariff landscape are a greater concern.
Here is an update on the US tariffs and Uzbekistan:
Area | Status (October 2025) | Key Details |
US Tariff Status on Uzbekistan | 10% (Implemented) | Uzbekistan is subject to the 10% universal reciprocal tariff (also known as the "Liberation Day" tariff) applied to goods from most countries without a bilateral trade agreement with the U.S. |
Trade Deals/Agreements | None (No free trade agreement) | Uzbekistan does not have a current Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the U.S. Bilateral talks for its accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) were completed in late 2024, with accession aimed for 2026. |
Direct Impact on Exports | Relatively Low | The direct impact of the 10% tariff is considered small because a large majority (∼86%) of Uzbekistan's current exports to the U.S. are services, which are not subject to these goods tariffs. |
Indirect/Secondary Impact | High Risk | The greatest risk to Uzbekistan's economy comes from the indirect effects of the broader global tariffs, such as a slowdown in global trade that could hurt exports to its main partners, like China, Turkey, and Russia. |
Affected Companies/Sectors | Light Manufacturing & Metals | The direct impact falls on Uzbekistani companies exporting goods to the U.S., primarily in the following categories: Precious metals (Gold), Aluminum, and Light manufacturing/Textiles (due to rising integration into global supply chains). |
Key Trade Context
US Trade Relations: Despite the tariffs, the U.S. remains an active partner. In late 2025, Uzbekistan signed a large commercial agreement with Boeing for aircraft procurement, which the U.S. government publicly highlighted as a "fantastic deal."
De Minimis Revoked: The August 2025 revocation of the de minimis exemption for low-value shipments globally means that all packages from Uzbekistan (regardless of value) are now subject to the applicable duty rate, increasing costs and complexity for small e-commerce sellers.
Vulnerability: Analysts from the Asian Development Bank (ADB) have warned that Uzbekistan faces a higher risk from trade tensions than its Central Asian peers due to its increasing integration into international supply chains, which makes it more vulnerable to a slowdown in global demand or broader tariffs (especially those that affect Chinese-processed goods).
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 |