In this age of political strife, it is very good to see a bipartisan effort to make life easier for the poor. The Affordable Footwear Act (AFA), introduced into Congress in November, is such an effort. Both in its own right, and as an example of the inequities in the system, the disproportionate tariffs on shoe imports should be repealed and help all Americans save a few dollars on their next pair of work boots, pumps, or sneakers.

The little-known shoe tax has its roots in the early history of American trade policy. A hundred years ago, tariffs raised most of the government’s revenues. But after six decades of trade liberalization, the tariff system is now a small backwater in tax policy (there are no tariffs on toys, furniture, semiconductor chips, personal computers, or telephones).

A few household goods, however, are still subject to tariff rates almost as high as those of the 19th century.

Shoes are the extreme case, with tariffs 10 times the average rate, and cheap sneakers face the highest tariffs the U.S. imposes on any manufactured good. Footwear tariffs are simply a hidden, regressive tax on a household necessity (whose impact is most onerous for low-income families with children, who spend the largest share of their income on the necessities of life).

Americans bought about 2.4 billion pairs of shoes last year. China, Italy, Vietnam, Brazil, and Indonesia are the top suppliers. The value of these shoes at the border was $19 billion, and the U.S. government collected footwear duties amounting to almost $1.9 billion on the shoes. While the average weighted U.S. tariff rate across all traded goods is 1.6 percent, tariffs on shoes begin at 8.5 percent for leather dress shoes, rise to 20 percent for running shoes, and peak at more than 60 percent for some grades of cheap sneakers.

The bulk of America’s imports of inexpensive shoes come from countries that are not FTA partners and are ineligible for preferential rates, such as China and Vietnam.

The consequences for families—especially those with low incomes—are dramatic. Tariffs inflate the cost of the cheapest shoes by about a third. A $2.28 pair of sneakers arriving at the border is assessed a 48 percent excise tax, adding $1.09 to the price, which is passed along to shoppers. To put the tax in perspective, the $1.09 border tax is roughly three times the 39-cent federal tax on a $2.28 pack of cigarettes, four times the national gas tax, and twice the $13.50-per-gallon tax on whiskey, vodka, and other spirits. And as the sneakers travel through the supply chain on the way to the retailer’s shelf, the tariffs are magnified by retail markups and state sales taxes.

Many tariffs are in place to protect American industries and jobs from international competition. But the shoe tariffs support virtually no domestic shoemaking and protect no U.S. manufacturing jobs, because America’s footwear manufacturers today produce specialty and high value footwear, not the kinds of inexpensive shoes that make up the bulk of imports. The inexpensive shoes and sneakers with the highest tariffs have not been made in the United States since the 1970s.

America’s 16,000 shoe industry jobs are almost all in design, research, marketing, or specialized production of sophisticated gear for workers in hazardous jobs, rather than mass-market shoe production. Yet, high and protectionist tariffs on inexpensive footwear have been untouched since the 1950s. The industries that lobbied to put them in place are long gone. Today, these tariffs serve only to needlessly raise the price of shoes, without fulfilling the usual rationale for protectionism—saving U.S. manufacturing jobs.

If you wish to understand a person’s life, the familiar proverb goes, walk a mile in his shoes. The Affordable Footwear Act would make the next pair more affordable for low-income families. Congress should give America’s households a little extra help by repealing the archaic, unnecessary, and regressive tariffs on shoe imports. wt