United States trade commission ruled on Oct. 22, 2026 that extra duties on mattresses from seven countries stay in place.<\/p>\n
The U.S. International Trade Commission ruled on Oct. 22, 2026, that extra duties on mattresses from seven countries should stay in place1<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n The decision covers mattresses from Cambodia, China, Malaysia, Serbia, Thailand, Turkey and Vietnam. It was published in the Federal Register on Oct. 27, 20261<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n In short, nothing gets cheaper at the border. Mattresses from these seven countries will keep paying the extra duties that have applied since May 2021, on top of normal customs duty.<\/p>\n The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) is the federal agency that judges whether imports harm American producers. It looked again at duty orders on mattresses in what is called a five-year review, or "sunset review". This is a check, held every five years, on whether a duty is still needed.<\/p>\n The commission found that removing the duties would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury<\/strong>, meaning serious harm, to the U.S. mattress industry "within a reasonably foreseeable time"1<\/a><\/sup>. That finding keeps the duties alive.<\/p>\n The ruling covers two kinds of duty:<\/p>\n The commission completed and filed its decision on Oct. 22, 20261<\/a><\/sup>. One commissioner, Samuel T. Negatu, did not take part1<\/a><\/sup>. The commission’s full reasons are in USITC Publication 5803, dated October 20261<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n The Department of Commerce, which sets the size of these duties, issued the original orders on May 14, 20212<\/a><\/sup>. Two agencies share the work. Commerce decides whether goods are dumped or subsidized, and by how much. The trade commission decides whether those imports hurt U.S. makers.<\/p>\n Both agencies must agree before a duty order can continue after five years. In 2026, each reviewed its own part.<\/p>\n The U.S. side of the case was brought by eight mattress and foam makers and a union3<\/a><\/sup>. The trade commission found their answers adequate3<\/a><\/sup>. They are:<\/p>\n These firms and the union filed papers with both agencies asking that the duties continue4<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n Commerce ran its part of the review first. It also found that removing the orders would let the unfair pricing or subsidies return.<\/p>\nWhat did the Trade Commission decide about mattresses?<\/h2>\n
\n
Why do the mattress duties exist?<\/h2>\n
The mattress duty orders<\/h4>\n
\n
What did Commerce find in its own review?<\/h2>\n
Likely dumping margin if the orders ended, %<\/h4>\n