In a strict sense, yes. The loopholes has been there for decades but widespread exploitation did not start until around 2008-2010 when sellers in Asia realised that they could send trinkets to US customers for next to nothing and still make some profit. Additionally it is hard to collect import duty and VAT on small personal imports, but domestic sellers who buys stock in bulk are rarely exempt, so the price gap grows further.
It's not a loophole and it was a business deal not a treaty. The USPS exec thought he was being clever by getting free shipping to China, but he didn't realize that there is practically no mail shipping US to China, and lots of mail shipping China to US.
>It's not a loophole and it was a business deal not a treaty.
Participation in the Universal Post Union is a political matter. Countries cannot simply back out if they think certain terms are unfair.
>The USPS exec thought he was being clever by getting free shipping to China, but he didn't realize that there is practically no mail shipping US to China, and lots of mail shipping China to US.
For the same article it still costs China less to send to the US than the other way around because the former counts as a developing country, though the unbalanced volume does compound the problem. After all the scheme was not drafted with many small parcels of personal imports in mind and it will take decades to fix.
