Bogotá, D.C., June 19, 2026
Highlights
- The National Government has submitted a draft decree that would temporarily increase tariffs on certain imports from countries with which Colombia does not have a trade agreement in force.
- The initiative, grounded in Article 259 of the National Development Plan (Law 2294 of 2023) as part of the country’s broader trade defense agenda, seeks to strengthen domestic industry through targeted protection built on technical and commercial criteria.
- According to official simulations included in the draft, it could reduce imports by approximately 11.2%, equivalent to roughly USD 79 million.
- Beyond its immediate impact, the draft anticipates trade defense and competitiveness debates that are likely to define the economic and commercial agenda of the next government.
More Than a Tariff Measure
If your company imports raw materials, inputs, or finished goods from countries that do not hold trade agreements with Colombia, this draft decree could directly affect your costs, sourcing strategies, and investment planning.
Colombia’s proposed Smart Tariffs would apply targeted tariff increases to specific products selected on the basis of domestic production levels, import trends, and industrial growth potential.
Unlike across-the-board increases, the draft contemplates increases of 10 and 20 percentage points above the Most Favored Nation (MFN) tariff rate for certain tariff subheadings on imports originating from countries without trade agreements currently in force with Colombia.
In practice, this is a trade policy instrument designed to support sectors where domestic production exists and growth potential is present, using tariff protection selectively rather than applying it across the economy as a whole.
Under the draft, an initial universe of 158 tariff subheadings was screened and, after excluding those already covered by existing measures, special regimes, prior trade remedy orders, prior evaluations, or lacking a valid entry in the National Production Registry, 72 subheadings were found eligible under the Smart Tariffs methodology.
The implications, however, extend well beyond the tariff schedule.
The Government expects that “the positive impact on domestic production would translate into greater utilization of installed capacity, the preservation and creation of formal employment, and the strengthening of national supply chains.”
The draft decree arrives at a moment when Colombia is seeking to consolidate its economic recovery and is heading into a new political cycle that will inevitably reopen debates on competitiveness, industrial policy, foreign trade, and international integration.
According to the draft, the trade deficit with non-preferential partners reached USD 676.2 million in 2025. Official simulations suggest that the measure could generate a cumulative import reduction of close to 11.2%, equivalent to approximately USD 79 million.
Against this backdrop, the draft raises a broader question that will remain relevant regardless of the electoral outcome: what role should trade policy play in Colombia’s economic growth strategy?
On the procedural side, the decree would apply the framework established by Decree 3303 of 2006 (or any successor regulations), which governs tariff adjustments and restructuring. It would permit tariff increases without breaching Colombia’s WTO-bound ceilings, and would not apply to imports from preferential trading partners.
How Does This Compare to Existing Safeguard Measures? (Medida de salvaguardia 1407)
The Smart Tariffs regime bears a notable resemblance to Colombia’s existing safeguard measures, governed by Decree 1407 of 1999 and related regulations. In both cases, the practical effect is to temporarily raise tariffs on imports from non-preferential partners (without exceeding Colombia’s WTO commitments) with the aim of providing additional protection to domestic industry.
The two instruments are, however, legally distinct. A formal safeguard requires a specific showing: a surge in imports, demonstrable harm or risk of harm to the domestic industry, and a direct causal link between the two. The Smart Tariffs proposal, by contrast, appears to work from a different analytical basis, focusing primarily on the share of imports in domestic supply, the existence of local production, available industrial capacity, and economic modelling.
This raises a policy question worth monitoring: could the coexistence of two instruments with similar effects but different approval standards influence which one governments prefer to use? It is reasonable to ask whether a mechanism that requires less formal documentation might, over time, be chosen more often than one that demands a full evidentiary record. If that pattern were to develop, import protection in Colombia could become more frequent or longer-lasting than the original design of either instrument intended.
We raise this not as a criticism of the current proposal, but as a structural consideration that policymakers and the business community should keep in view as the Smart Tariffs regime evolves.
Monitoring Effectiveness vs. Managing Tariff Complexity
A concern that needs close attention is the cumulative effect that frequent use of this mechanism could have on Colombia’s tariff structure. One of the most significant achievements of Colombian trade policy over the past three decades has been the pursuit of greater consistency, transparency, and predictability in import duties. Recurring sector-by-sector tariff adjustments, driven by macroeconomic, industry-specific, or firm-level pressures, risk increasing the complexity and dispersion of that structure, raising compliance costs for businesses, and reducing the predictability that investors and traders rely on.
It is equally important that future applications of the regime explicitly incorporate a comprehensive downstream assessment: the effects on industrial users of the goods in question, on exporters that rely on imported inputs, on domestic value chains, and on the broader competitiveness of the economy.
The core tension, which we address in more detail below, is that tariff increases designed to help one group of companies can simultaneously raise costs for others, sometimes within the same sector.
Implications for Business
The subheadings covered by the draft span sectors including plastics, petrochemicals, electrical cables, metal manufactures, steel, wood, and a range of industrial inputs.
The impact will vary significantly depending on where a company sits in the supply chain, and the differences can be stark, even between companies that appear to operate in the same sector.
Domestic producers competing with imports stand to be the primary beneficiaries. For manufacturers that produce goods locally in the affected categories, higher tariffs on competing imports mean a stronger price position in the Colombian market, potentially improving margins, supporting production volumes, and creating conditions for investment and job creation.
Companies that rely on imported inputs (including manufacturers, processors, and assemblers who source materials or components from non-preferential countries) face a different calculation. For them, the measure translates directly into higher input costs, which may compress margins, reduce export competitiveness, or require adjustments to sourcing arrangements.
Within the same sector, it is entirely possible for two companies to experience opposite effects: one benefiting from reduced import competition, the other absorbing higher costs on the materials it needs to produce.
The central challenge, therefore, will not simply be identifying the new applicable tariff rate, but understanding how these changes affect competitiveness, cost structures, and growth plans across the organization and its supply chain.
Companies with exposure to internationally traded goods should begin evaluating now whether their products or inputs fall within the affected subheadings, and what the downstream effects on operations, margins, and market strategy could be.
A rigorous audit of tariff classifications will be essential in this process, enabling companies to determine the full tariff and fiscal impact of the decree on their cost and compliance posture.
A Trend That Goes Beyond Colombia
The Smart Tariffs measure fits within a broader global pattern in which governments are increasingly using trade policy as an instrument of industrial strategy and supply-chain resilience.
The United States’ investigations under Section 301 and the measures associated with the America First Trade Policy illustrate how international trade is evolving toward frameworks where competitiveness, economic security, and industrial strategy are deeply intertwined.
Viewed through this lens, the Smart Tariffs measure should not be read as an isolated tariff adjustment, but as part of a wider debate about the model of industrial development and international economic integration that Colombia is seeking to define.
Key Takeaways
If enacted, this measure could produce markedly different outcomes for companies within the same sector. Some organizations will benefit from stronger protection against competing imports; others will face meaningful increases in input costs or disruptions to their supply arrangements.
The key issue, therefore, is no longer whether Smart Tariffs are good or bad policy. It is how the measure will specifically affect your company, your products, your suppliers, and your competitive position in the market.
Two recommendations are worth putting forward to strengthen the policy in the interest of the Colombian business community:
- Tying any renewal of the Smart Tariffs to verifiable performance benchmarks (such as output, investment, employment, or capacity development) to ensure a rigorous and objective assessment of effectiveness before any extension is granted.
- Strengthening structured dialogue with affected industries, so that technical and statistical analysis is complemented by the operational knowledge of companies regarding sourcing realities, value chain dynamics, production requirements, and actual market conditions.
At CID-Pro Consulting, we assist companies, trade associations, and investors in assessing tariff and regulatory exposure, developing public policy strategies, and supporting decision-making in complex and rapidly changing environments (Policy Strategy). We also help organizations identify and manage regulatory risk (Risk Management) and structure corporate strategies to navigate increasingly demanding economic and commercial landscapes (Corporate and Business Advisory
The key to thriving in this new global order will be to anticipate, adapt, and take advantage of the opportunities that arise in a multipolar world.
At CID-Pro Consulting, we are committed to helping our clients navigate this complex environment by providing strategic analysis and solutions tailored to their needs..
We gratefully acknowledge the contribution of Obiorah Uzoh Briceño in the preparation of this newsletter. Obiorah is a future business administration graduate from the Colegio de Estudios Superiores de Administración – CESA.
