Introduction Counterfeiting has been described as “the world’s second oldest profession.” In 2018, worldwide counterfeiting was estimated to cost the global economy between USD 1.7 trillion and USD 4.5 trillion annually, as well as resulting in more than 70 deaths and 350,000 serious injuries annually. It is estimated that more than a quarter of US consumers have purchased a counterfeit product.
The counterfeiting problem is expected to be exacerbated by the unprecedented shift in tariff policy. Tariffs, designed as an import tax or duty on an imported product, are often a percentage of the price and can have different values for different products. Tariffs drive up the cost of imported brand name products but may not, or only to a lesser extent, impact the cost of counterfeit goods.
In this article, we examine the extent of the global counterfeit dilemma, the role experts play in tracking and mitigating the problem, the use of anti-counterfeiting measures, and the potential impact that tariffs may have on the flow of counterfeit goods.
Brand goods have always been a target of counterfeits due to their high price and associated prestige. These are often luxury goods and clothing, but can also be pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and electronics. The brand name is an indication of quality materials, workmanship, and technology. People will pay more for the “real thing,” or decide to buy something cheaper that looks “just as good.” In many cases, “just as good” is a counterfeit of the brand name product.
A tariff is an import tax or duty that is typically paid by the importer and can drive up the cost of imported brand name products. For example, a Yale study has shown that shoe prices may increase by 87% and apparel prices by 65%, due to tariffs. On the other hand, counterfeit products don’t play by the rules and can often avoid paying tariffs, such as the case of many smaller, online transactions, shipped individually.
Therefore, we expect to see an increase in counterfeit products as well as a need to increase efforts to reduce the economic losses of counterfeiting.
The Scale of the Counterfeit Problem In their 2025 report, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), estimated that in 2021, “global trade in counterfeit goods was valued at approximately USD 467 billion, or 2.3% of total global imports. This absolute value represents an increase from 2019, when counterfeit trade was estimated at USD 464 billion, although its relative share decreased compared to 2019 when it accounted for 2.5% of world trade. For imports into the European Union, the value of counterfeit goods was estimated at USD 117 billion, or 4.7% of total EU imports.”
In a 2020 report, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) estimated the size of the international counterfeit market as having a “range from a low of USD 200 billion in 2008 to a high of USD 509 billion in 2019.”
According to the OEDC / EUIPO General Trade-Related Index of Counterfeiting for economies (GTRIC-e), China continues to be the primary source of counterfeit goods, as well as Bangladesh, Lebanon, Syrian Arab Republic, and Türkiye.
Based on customs seizures in 2020-21, the most common items are clothing (21.6%), footwear (21.4%), and handbags, followed by electronics and watches. Based on the value of goods seized, watches (23%) and footwear (15%) had the highest value. However, it should be noted that items that are easier to detect and seize are likely to be overrepresented in the data.
Although the share of watches declined, and electronics, toys, and games increased, it remains unclear whether this represents a long term trend or just a short term fluctuation. In general, high value products in high demand continue to be counterfeited.
Data from the US Library of Congress indicates that 60% – 80% of counterfeit products are purchased by Americans. The US accounts for approximately 5% of the world’s consumers; however, it represents greater than 20% of the world’s purchasing power.
Though it is still possible to find counterfeit products at local markets, a large number of counterfeit goods are obtained through online retailers and shipped directly to consumers as small parcels classified as de minimis trade. This allows for the duty-free import of products up to USD 800 in value. Counterfeit items may be knowingly or unknowingly purchased from online retailers and shipped directly to consumers, duty-free. Purchased products can be shipped via postal services, classified as de minimis trade. Approximately 79% of packages seized contained less than 10 items. Given the size and volume of the packages arriving daily, many or most will evade scrutiny by customs officials. This means of import is increasing over time. In 2017-19 it was 61% of seizures. By 2020-21, it was 79%.
Economic Impact of Counterfeiting The scale of the counterfeiting problem has significant impacts on the US economy, US business interests, and US innovations in lost sales and lost jobs. Moreover, counterfeit products are often made quickly and cheaply, using materials that may be toxic. The companies producing these goods may not dispose of waste properly and may dump it into waterways, causing significant environmental consequences.
Counterfeit products from electrical equipment and life jackets to batteries and smoke alarms may be made without adhering to safety standards or be properly tested. These products may fail to function when you need it and may lead to fire, electric shock, poisoning, and other accidents that can seriously injure and even kill consumers.
Counterfeit cosmetics and pharmaceuticals can also lead to injuries by either including unsafe ingredients or by failing to provide the benefits of the real product.
The Tariff Counterfeit Connection Tariffs may be seen as a tax on consumers and raise the price of imported products that are already the target of counterfeiters such as luxury leather products and apparel. It’s commonly understood that raising prices on genuine products can only drive up the demand for counterfeit goods. In general, consumers will have less disposable income and the brand goods they desire will cost more which is bound to increase the demand for counterfeit goods.
Although recent changes removing the USD 800 tax exemption on de minimis shipments from China and Hong Kong will make it more expensive for counterfeiters to ship their goods internationally, tariffs are typically applied as a percentage of the cost of an object. This will cause the price of more expensive legitimate goods to increase even more than the cheaper counterfeit goods and likely make the counterfeit products even more attractive economically.
Therefore, we expect to see an increase in counterfeit products as well as an increase in efforts to reduce the economic losses of counterfeiting.
The Role of Technical Experts in Counterfeit Detection Technical experts play an important role in both the prevention and detection of counterfeits and helping to identify counterfeiting entities.
Whether counterfeit money, clothing, shoes, electronics, cosmetics or pharmaceuticals, the first step in fighting counterfeits is detecting them. In some cases, the counterfeit product is obvious. A leather product may not be leather, a logo may be wrong, packaging may have a spelling mistake, or a holographic label may be missing. These products may be seized by customs. However, some counterfeit products are very difficult to detect. In the case of a counterfeit memory card with less than the stated capacity or a pharmaceutical that contains the wrong active ingredient, technical analysis may be needed to identify the parts. Technical analysis may also be used to try and identify the source of the counterfeit goods.
For prevention measures, manufacturers may use radio frequency identification (RFID) or Near Field Communication (NFC) tags within their products. RFID tags are microscopic semiconductor chips attached to a metallic printed antenna. The tag itself may be flexible and easy to incorporate into packaging or into the product itself. A passive RFID requires no power and has sufficient storage to store information such as product name, stock keeping unit (SKU), place of manufacture, date of manufacture, as well as some sort of cryptographic information to attest to the authenticity of the tag. A simple scanner powers the tag using an electromagnetic field and reads the tag. If manufacturers include RFID tags in products, an X-ray to identify a product in a de minimis shipment (perhaps using artificial intelligence technology) and an RFID scanner to verify the authenticity of the product can be used to efficiently screen a large number of packages.
Many products also may be marked with photo-luminescent dyes with unique properties that may be read by special scanners and allow authorities to detect legitimate products. Similarly, doped hybrid oxide particles with distinctive photo-responsive features may be printed on products. These particles, when exposed to laser light, experience a fast increase in temperature which may be quickly detected.
For either of these examples, the ability to identify legitimate products, or – due to the absence of marking – track counterfeit products, allows authorities to map the flow of the counterfeit goods through the supply chain as they are manufactured, shipped, and are exported and imported to countries.
For many years, electronic memory cards such as SD cards and USB sticks have been counterfeited. In many cases, the fake card will have a capacity much smaller than listed. For example, a 32GB memory card for a camera may only hold 1GB. Sometimes, these products may be identified by analyzing the packaging for discrepancies from the brand name products. In other cases, software must be used to verify the capacity and performance of each one, which is time-consuming when analyzing a large number of products.
Forensic investigators, comprised of forensic accountants and forensic technologists, are heavily involved in efforts to combat this illicit trade. By analyzing financial records, supply-chain data, and transaction histories, they trace the origins and pathways of counterfeit products. Their work often involves identifying suspicious procurement patterns, shell companies, and irregular inventory flows that signal counterfeit activity.
Forensic investigators often begin by mapping the counterfeit supply chain, an intricate web that often spans continents. Using data analytics, transaction tracing, and inventory audits, they identify anomalies in procurement, distribution, and sales records. These methodologies help pinpoint the origin of counterfeit goods, the intermediaries involved, and the final points of sale. By reconstructing the flow of goods and money, forensic investigators can begin to unmask activities.
Cross-border partnerships are essential for tracking assets, sharing insights, and coordinating with financial regulators. Public-private partnerships further enhance the effectiveness of anti-counterfeiting efforts. Forensic investigators often serve as bridges between government agencies, brand owners, and financial institutions, facilitating the exchange of key information. These partnerships increase information-sharing, streamline investigations, and amplify the impact of enforcement actions. A promising development in this space is the World Customs Organization’s Smart Customs Project, which integrates artificial intelligence to detect and intercept counterfeit goods. Forensic investigators can leverage this initiative by analyzing AI-generated alerts and incorporating them into broader financial investigations, which allows for faster and more accurate identification of illicit networks.
Jurisdictional complexity is a major hurdle in anti-counterfeiting efforts. Forensic investigators work closely with legal teams to navigate these challenges to ensure that investigations comply with local laws, and evidence is admissible and can withstand scrutiny in court, especially when dealing with offshore accounts and international money laundering schemes.
Forensic investigators follow the money, tracing illicit profits through bank accounts, shell companies, and cryptocurrency transactions. Their findings not only help recover stolen assets but also support disputes by providing expert testimony that quantifies financial losses and identifies the bad actors.
Conclusion Imitations of brand name products have become more convincing, harder to detect, and the sources of the counterfeit goods more difficult to identify. While counterfeiting clearly has evolved because of technological advancements, e-commerce, and the growing sophistication of bad actors, the process has now been complicated even further by the unpredictable tariff and trade policies that are affecting businesses worldwide.
Consequently, companies need to take a multi-faceted approach to these new challenges introduced into the counterfeiting of products by tariffs. By engaging high-tech product authentication measures, utilizing technology-based alerts about counterfeits, and retaining the specialized skills of forensic investigators and other experts, companies will be able to navigate the risks posed by the complex and changing relationship between tariffs and counterfeit goods.
To learn more about this topic and how it can impact your business or connect with James E. Malackowski simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
To connect with David Fraser or Matthew Brown - contact :
Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held
+1 786 833 4864
Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com
Global consulting firm J.S. Held releases its proprietary “Lending Climate in America” survey results from Phoenix Management, a part of J.S. Held. The second quarter survey results highlight lenders’ views on important issues, including policy decisions along with their national and global impact.
Each quarter, Phoenix Management, a part of J.S. Held, surveys lenders to identify important trends focused on the latest economic issues, business drivers, and credit trends in the current lending climate. The “Lending Climate in America” survey provides valuable information to lenders, attorneys, private equity sponsors, and the financial news media, exploring topics like:
What factors do lenders see as most likely to impact the US economy in the next six months? Phoenix’s Q2 2025 “Lending Climate in America” survey asked lenders which factors could have the strongest potential to impact the economy in the upcoming six months. Sixty-seven percent of lenders are paying the most attention to the possibility of a U.S. recession, while 40% of lenders believe overall political uncertainty has the strongest potential to impact the economy. Lenders also expressed moderate concern regarding the possibility of constrained liquidity in capital markets. To see the full results of Phoenix’s “Lending Climate in America” Survey, please visit: https://www.phoenixmanagement.com/lending-survey/ What shifts do lenders observe in their customers’ hiring and capital improvement plans? Lenders revealed what actions their customers may take in the next six months. Over half of the surveyed lenders believe their customers will raise additional capital. Most telling was that lenders believe only 3% of their customers have plans to hire new employees (down from 56% in 1Q) and only 23% have plans for capital improvements (down from 67% in 1Q).
Which industries are expected to see the most volatility over the next six months? For the first time in recent memory, the 3 industries that respondents identified as most likely to experience volatility in the next six months were different from the prior quarter - consumer products (60.0% versus 20.7%), retail trade (43.3% versus 31.0%), and manufacturing (33.3% versus 20.7%).
How do lenders plan to adjust their loan structures? Additionally, Phoenix’s “Lending Climate in America” survey asked lenders if their respective institutions plan to tighten, maintain, or relax their loan structures for various sized loans. For larger loan structures (greater than $25M), the plan to maintain loan structures remained relatively constant from Q1 to Q2, decreasing by 8 percentage points. As loan sizes decrease, the percentage of lenders that plan to maintain (as opposed to increase) their loan structures increased – quite dramatically in the under $15M range.
How has lender sentiment toward the US economy changed from Q1 to Q2? Lender optimism in the U.S. economy decreased for the near term, moving from 2.33 in Q1 2025 to 2.10 in Q2 2025. In this current quarter, there is heavy expectation of a C level performance (63%), with the remainder split between D and B levels. More telling, lender expectations for the U.S. economy’s performance in the longer term increased sharply from 2.11 to 2.53. Of the lenders surveyed, 57% believe the U.S. economy will perform at a B level during the next twelve months, a hefty increase from the prior quarter.
The “Lending Climate in America” survey is administered quarterly to lenders from various commercial banks, finance companies, and factors across the country. Phoenix Management, a part of J.S. Held, collects, tabulates, and analyzes the results to create a complete evaluation of national attitudes and trends.
To view the full results, click on the button below:
To connect with Michael Jacoby or for any other media inquiries, please contact:
Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held
+1 786 833 4864
Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com
