US Merchandise Processing Fee and Harbor Maintenance Fee Calculation

The landed-cost template says "MPF 0.3464%, HMF 0.125%" and nothing else. On a $412,000 ocean entry that template accrues $1,427.17 of merchandise processing fee, the broker bills $670.86, and the $756.31 gap sits in a variance account until someone reclasses it. On the next entry, an air shipment, the same template adds a harbor maintenance fee that was never charged. Neither error is large on its own; across a year of entries they distort every SKU's landed cost.

Both fees are simple once each rule is applied in the right order: remove exempt value, apply the MPF percentage and then its fiscal-year floor and ceiling, apply HMF only where a vessel unloaded the goods at a listed port, then allocate both to lines so the total matches the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) to the cent. Written down that way, the calculation becomes a testable rule instead of a guess.

• What you will get: the current rates and limits with their CFR paragraphs, the exemptions that change the fee base, three worked entries in dollars with an Indian exporter's rupee view, a line allocation method and a broker-invoice reconciliation routine.
• Who it is for: analysts who maintain landed-cost tables, DC and import managers who sign off receipts, and controllers who own the freight-in and duty accounts.

Which import entries carry MPF, HMF, both or neither

Two questions decide which fees apply before any arithmetic starts: is the entry formal or informal, and did the goods arrive on a commercial vessel at a listed port? Formal entries pay the ad valorem MPF; informal entries pay a flat MPF; HMF depends only on vessel use. Getting this sort right removes most of the errors seen in practice.

The merchandise processing fee lives in 19 CFR 24.23. It applies to merchandise that is formally entered or released, and paragraph (a)(2)(iii) treats a withdrawal from a bonded warehouse for consumption as an entry for this purpose. The harbor maintenance fee sits in 19 CFR 24.24 and is a port use charge on commercial cargo loaded on or unloaded from a commercial vessel at a port listed in paragraph (b)(1). The two fees share a value base but nothing else.

The informal threshold comes from 19 CFR 143.21(a), which allows informal entry for merchandise not exceeding $2,500, with a lower $250 limit for some articles in Chapter 99, Subchapters III and IV. Splitting one commercial shipment to stay under the threshold is a compliance problem, not a fee strategy, so treat the entry type as a fact the broker reports rather than a lever the calculation can pull.

The 0.3464 percent MPF and its fiscal year 2027 floor and ceiling

MPF on a formal entry is 0.3464 percent of the value, then clamped. For entries from 1 October 2026 the result cannot be lower than $34.58 or higher than $670.86. The percentage stays fixed in the regulation; the floor and ceiling move every October, so a fee table keyed by effective date is mandatory.

Paragraph (b)(1)(i)(A) of 19 CFR 24.23 sets the 0.3464 percent rate and bases it on the value of the merchandise determined under 19 U.S.C. 1401a, the same appraised value used for duty. Paragraph (b)(1)(i)(B) holds the base-year limits of $25 and $485, adjusted under 24.22(k) by the change in the Consumer Price Index since fiscal year 2014. CBP publishes the adjusted figures in the Federal Register each summer.

• FY2027 ad valorem limits: minimum $34.58 and maximum $670.86, published as CBP Dec. 26-14 on 31 July 2026 and required from 1 October 2026.
• FY2026 limits for back-dated checks: minimum $33.58 and maximum $651.50 under CBP Dec. 25-10, required from 1 October 2025.
• Manual formal entry surcharge: $4.15 in FY2027 under 24.23(b)(1)(ii), on top of the ad valorem fee.
• Informal entry flat fees: $2.77 automated, $8.30 manual and $12.45 where CBP staff prepare the entry, from 24.23(b)(2) as adjusted.

The clamp only matters outside a band of entered values. Dividing the floor by the rate shows that any non-exempt value under roughly $9,982.68 pays the $34.58 minimum. Dividing the ceiling by the rate shows that anything above roughly $193,666.28 pays the $670.86 maximum. Between those two points the fee is simply value multiplied by 0.003464.

Merchandise processing fee calculation on a formal US entry applies 0.3464 percent to the 19 U.S.C. 1401a value under 19 CFR 24.23(b)(1)(i)(A), then clamps the result to the FY2027 limits of $34.58 and $670.86, so entered values between about $9,983 and $193,666 pay the straight percentage.

Harbor maintenance fee: 0.125 percent of vessel cargo, uncapped

HMF is a flat 0.125 percent of the appraised value of imported cargo unloaded from a commercial vessel at a listed port, with no minimum and no maximum. A large ocean entry can therefore pay more HMF than MPF. The fee is reported on the entry summary and paid with duty.

Paragraph (a) of 19 CFR 24.24 imposes the 0.125 percent port use fee. For imports, paragraph (e)(2) bases it on the CBP appraised value of the shipment, the same basis as duty, and makes the importer liable at unloading. Paragraph (e)(2)(ii) puts it on the entry summary, CBP Form 7501 or its electronic equivalent, alongside duty and other fees.

• No fee on intraport moves: paragraph (d)(1) excludes the mere movement of cargo within a port.
• One fee per vessel call: under (d)(2), cargo charged on unloading is not charged again when reloaded on the same vessel, and the reverse.
• Informal-eligible imports: (d)(3) removes the fee from imported cargo that qualifies for informal entry under 143.21, and from domestic shipments valued at $1,000 or less.
• Quarterly de minimis: (d)(4) waives a quarterly payment when the value of all shipments assessed for the quarter is $10,000 or less, which matters to zone users and domestic shippers.
• Listed exemptions: (c) covers bunker fuel and ship's stores, specified Alaska, Hawaii and possession movements, in-bond cargo for direct export, and US government cargo, among others.

Exports no longer pay. In United States v. United States Shoe Corp., 523 U.S. 360 (1998), the Supreme Court held the harbor maintenance tax unconstitutional under the Export Clause as applied to exports. Any landed-cost or outbound costing template that still charges 0.125 percent on export shipments is carrying a dead rule.

Exempt lines, trade agreement claims and mixed entries

Exemptions change the fee base, not the rate. Before multiplying, remove the value of lines that 19 CFR 24.23(c) carves out, then apply the percentage and the clamp to what remains. Exemptions for MPF do not automatically exempt the same lines from HMF, which has its own list.

The MPF exemptions most importers meet are in paragraph (c). Originating goods under the USMCA, or goods qualifying for preference under 19 CFR 182.82 and entered on or after 1 July 2020, are exempt under (c)(3). Products of Israel are exempt under (c)(5). Paragraphs (c)(6) to (c)(15) exempt originating goods under the agreements with Singapore, Chile, Australia, Bahrain, the CAFTA-DR countries, Oman, Peru, Korea, Colombia and Panama, subject to entry dates.

Mixed entries need care. Paragraph (c)(3) says the fees apply only to goods that are not originating, so an entry with $90,000 of USMCA originating goods and $40,000 of non-originating goods pays MPF on $40,000, which is $138.56. The regulation text does not state how the floor and ceiling are prorated in that case, so agree the method with your broker and record it on the fee rule.

A three-entry worked calculation in dollars and rupees

Three entries cover nearly every case: one inside the clamp band, one below the floor and one above the cap. Each uses illustrative values, FY2027 limits and an illustrative ₹88.00 per dollar rate for the Indian exporter's view. Values are already converted to dollars at the rate for the date of exportation, which 19 CFR 159.32 fixes by reference to 152.1(c).

The share-of-value row explains why a flat landed-cost uplift fails. Small entries pay proportionally more because of the floor; large ocean entries pay proportionally less MPF because of the cap, while their HMF keeps climbing with value. An Indian exporter quoting delivered duty paid on Entry C who used a flat 0.4714 percent would have priced ₹1,70,910.78 of fees against an actual ₹1,04,355.68.

Consolidation helps at the low end. Three separate formal entries of $9,000 each would each pay the $34.58 floor, $103.74 in total, while a single $27,000 entry of the same goods pays $93.53. The saving is modest per shipment but compounds across hundreds of weekly entries from one supplier, which is why the entry count belongs in carrier and broker reviews.

Harbor maintenance fee calculation for an ocean import applies 0.125 percent to the CBP appraised value under 19 CFR 24.24(e)(2) with no ceiling, so a $412,000 container entry carries $515.00 of HMF while its MPF stops at the FY2027 cap of $670.86.

Allocating entry-level fees to SKUs in landed cost

ACE calculates both fees per entry, but inventory is valued per SKU, so the fee must be split. Allocate each fee by the line's share of fee-bearing entered value, round to cents, and post any rounding residue to the largest line so that the allocated total equals the ACE amount exactly.

Value is the right key because both fees are value-based. Weight or quantity keys, which work for freight, would push MPF onto heavy cheap items that did not drive it. Lines removed from the base by an exemption get zero MPF; if they arrived by vessel they still take their share of HMF, because the MPF exemption list in 24.23(c) does not exempt them from 24.24.

The fee then follows the same accounting path as inbound freight and duty. Our article on freight GL coding covers when inbound costs join inventory and when they go to the period; for the entry-to-ledger match itself, see the guide to CBP ACE entry reconciliation and landed-cost posting.

// Fee rule, evaluated once per entry summary (illustrative structure)
// V_i      = entered value of line i in USD, per 19 U.S.C. 1401a
// E_i      = 1 if line i is MPF-exempt under 19 CFR 24.23(c), else 0
// vessel   = 1 if unloaded from a commercial vessel at a 24.24(b)(1) port
// informal = 1 if released on an informal entry
// FY table = { min: 34.58, max: 670.86, rate: 0.003464 } for FY2027

V_mpf  = SUM( V_i * (1 - E_i) )
MPF    = informal ? 2.77
                  : MIN( MAX( ROUND(V_mpf * 0.003464, 2), FY.min ), FY.max )
HMF    = (vessel AND NOT informal) ? ROUND( SUM(V_i) * 0.00125, 2 ) : 0

// Line allocation, value key, residue to largest line
MPF_i  = ROUND( MPF * V_i * (1 - E_i) / V_mpf, 2 )
HMF_i  = ROUND( HMF * V_i / SUM(V_i), 2 )
check  : SUM(MPF_i) == MPF  AND  SUM(HMF_i) == HMF   // tolerance 0.00

Reconciling broker invoices against the ACE statement

The broker invoice, the ACE entry summary and the ERP accrual should show the same MPF and HMF for each entry. Reconcile per entry number, not per invoice total, because one broker invoice can carry several entries and one fee error can hide behind another.

Three sources hold the numbers. The entry summary in ACE is the authority on what CBP assessed. The broker invoice passes those fees through, sometimes with its own service charges on the same document. The ERP accrual is what your landed-cost template predicted at receipt. A fee variance means either the template is wrong or the broker filed something you did not expect, and both deserve a look.

1. Key by entry number: store the 11-character entry number on the receipt and the accrual, so each fee line can be matched without reading invoice text.
2. Recompute independently: run the fee rule on the entered values from the entry summary, not on the purchase order value, which may include international freight that 1401a value excludes.
3. Compare three ways: the recomputed fee, the ACE figure and the broker's billed fee must agree to the cent; any difference parks the invoice.
4. Classify the variance: wrong fiscal-year table, missed exemption, mode error, manual surcharge, or broker keying error each has a different fix and owner.
5. Correct the template once: a variance traced to the template is fixed in the fee table and re-run for open receipts, not adjusted invoice by invoice.

The incident below shows what happens when the accrual is built from a combined percentage. The entry number, invoice and voucher references are illustrative.

• Day 1, 09:12: broker transmits the entry summary for entry Q7X-0418826-3, ocean, entered value $412,000; ACE shows MPF $670.86 and HMF $515.00.
• Day 1, 09:40: the warehouse receipt posts landed-cost voucher LCV-77120 using the template's uncapped 0.3464 percent, accruing $1,427.17 MPF and $515.00 HMF.
• Day 2, 14:05: broker invoice BRK-55031 arrives with MPF of $670.86; the three-way match flags a $756.31 variance and parks the invoice.
• Day 14, 16:30: an AP clerk releases the invoice and posts the variance to freight-in expense, while 40 percent of the received units have already shipped at the overstated cost.
• Controlled path: the fee rule clamps MPF to $670.86 at receipt, the accrual matches ACE, the invoice auto-matches and no reclass is needed at month-end.

Our guide to freight fuel surcharge calculation deals with a different kind of add-on: a carrier's contractual price adjustment tied to a diesel index, negotiated and audited against a tariff. MPF and HMF are government fees set by regulation, so the controls here check law and fee tables rather than a carrier agreement.

Automating the fee check without automating the judgement

The arithmetic, the fee-table lookup and the three-way match should run as fixed system rules with no override. Deciding whether a line qualifies for a trade agreement exemption, or whether an entry should be informal, stays with trade compliance; software can collect the evidence but should not make the call.

Landed-cost fee reconciliation should match MPF and HMF per entry number across the ACE entry summary, the broker invoice and the ERP accrual with zero tolerance, because 19 CFR 24.23 and 24.24 fix both fees to the cent and any difference signals a stale FY2027 table or a misread mode.

Rollout checklist for trade compliance and logistics finance

A working setup needs one fee table with effective dates, the exemption and mode facts captured at entry, an allocation rule and a reconciliation report. Most teams can stand it up in a quarter by running the new rule beside the old template before switching.

Fee rules are a small piece of import cost control, but they touch every entry, which makes them a good first test of how well your broker data, ERP and finance close work together. For more on costing and audit across the network, browse the Logistics and Supply Chain hub. If you are scoping a landed-cost or broker-integration project, you can send us your requirements.