A new wave of U.S. trade tariffs on imported products come into effect, impacting goods from a wide range of countries. While the policy is broad, the impact on e-bikes and bicycle components is expected to be both immediate and significant.

Exploring impact and opportunity, we’ll start by taking a U.S. market view.

Roughly 50% of e-bikes sold in the U.S. still originate in China, with another 27% from Taiwan, 20% from Europe, and only around 3% assembled domestically. As costs rise, brands are scrambling to rethink their strategies — but changing supply chains is no small task.

Complicating matters further, the rules of origin in U.S. trade law often determine a product’s country of origin based on the source of its frame — not where it’s assembled or where other components come from. In many cases, even if an e-bike is assembled in Europe or the U.S., it may still be classified as Chinese-origin if the frame comes from China and hasn’t undergone “substantial transformation.” That makes many products far more exposed to tariffs than companies realize.

Now lets consider what this may mean outside of the US.

European brands could face their own challenges soon. If the U.S. strategy leads to a reciprocal response from the EU — as has been signalled — trade tariffs on U.S.-bound products could reach 25% or more, further reshaping the global trade landscape for e-bikes and cycling products.

Chris Nolte, co-founder of Bloom — a services marketplace working with hardware brands in the micromobility, drone, and robotics sectors — says the industry is already being forced to adapt.

“We’re seeing automotive manufacturers in the U.S. repurpose their lines to build e-bikes, scooters, and other non-automotive products,” Nolte says. “There’s unused capacity, skilled labour, and a real willingness to get involved — but brands have to act decisively.”

To FTZ, or not FTZ: Is that the question?

Tools like Foreign Trade Zones (FTZs) are also re-entering the conversation. These zones allow for tariff deferral or exemption on components imported for domestic assembly. While historically used by large corporations, there are efforts underway to make these more accessible to smaller and mid-sized manufacturers.

“This isn’t about finding loopholes,” Nolte says. “We’re helping companies across sectors understand and navigate and implement strategies like FTZs, regional assembly, and country-of-origin compliance. These aren’t just policy tools — they’re levers for resilience, and they’re becoming more relevant by the day.”

For European bike brands, this moment presents both a challenge and an inflection point. With rising costs and trade barriers, many are asking whether now is the time to build more flexibility into their supply chains — whether through U.S. assembly, regional partnerships, or new approaches to manufacturing altogether.

Some are already taking steps — tapping into shared infrastructure, rethinking how components are sourced and classified, even exploring options like Foreign Trade Zones to reduce exposure to tariffs.

Still, it’s unclear how far this shift will go.

Europe, through a combination of anti-dumping policies and regional investment, has managed to grow its local manufacturing base significantly. Will the U.S. follow a similar path — using these trade dynamics to spark a more resilient domestic supply chain?

Or will this simply become another tax and burden for the industry to navigate, with few tangible outcomes?