BikeBiz Column: Is MSRP in USD still the benchmark?

Funn MTB’s Dominic Loh weighs in on a growing debate within the bike industry, arguing that the U.S.’s unique tariff landscape necessitates a departure from a globally uniform MSRP, advocating for either distinct U.S. pricing or transparent tariff surcharges to ensure fairness and maintain international competitiveness.

Should the U.S. Bike Market have its own Pricing?

For the longest time, the outdoor and bike industry have pegged the MSRP to US dollars as the benchmark pricing of the world.

The global bike industry is feeling the effects of a fractured trade landscape, with the United States standing out due to its aggressive tariff stance. As American importers grapple with high duties on bikes and components—especially those from China—a central question has emerged: Should the U.S. market have its own listed pricing, instead of inflating prices globally to absorb these costs?

Understanding the Tariff Disparity

Unlike Europe, the UK, Asia, or Oceania, where free trade agreements or low import duties keep bicycle costs relatively stable, the U.S. has layered substantial tariffs on bike imports. Since the U.S.-China trade war began, many products now face 25% or more in additional tariffs, on top of the longstanding 5-11% base import duty. Recent changes in 2025 pushed these even higher, sometimes nearing 70-90% total for some bike categories.

This leaves U.S. brands with a dilemma: increase prices globally to maintain consistency or pass the tariff costs only to American consumers?

Why Separate Pricing Makes Sense

1. Fairness to Global Customers: Customers in tariff-free countries shouldn’t pay higher prices due to U.S. trade policies. A universal price hike spreads the burden unfairly.
2. Transparency in the U.S.: U.S.-specific pricing or a clear “tariff surcharge” lets consumers understand exactly why they’re paying more. Brands like Specialized and State Bicycle Co. have already introduced such surcharges to separate government-imposed costs from product value.
3. Operational Flexibility: A separate surcharge can be updated or removed if tariffs change. It also avoids the complexity of repricing every model across all markets.
4. Global Market Competitiveness: Keeping pricing lean in non-U.S. markets allows brands to remain competitive internationally while managing U.S. costs separately.

Considerations for Asian-Based Brands

Asian-based bike brands face unique challenges and opportunities when it comes to global pricing strategy. Given the current tariff environment, these brands must carefully consider regional differences. In the United States, pricing needs to reflect the substantial tariff burden, either through higher MSRPS or transparent tariff surcharges. In contrast, Europe and the United Kingdom—where tariffs are lower or managed through targeted anti-dumping measures—allow more competitive pricing without heavy additional costs. Oceania (especially Australia and New Zealand) presents a relatively open market with low or zero tariffs, enabling more aggressive pricing strategies.

Within Asia, where many brands already have strong local manufacturing advantages and lower logistics costs, pricing can remain highly competitive. By adopting a differentiated pricing model—one that adjusts for tariffs and regional trade realities—Asian brands can maximise profitability while maintaining fairness and market competitiveness across diverse global regions.

Concerns with Separate Pricing

Some worry that U.S.-only pricing might alienate American consumers, create confusion at checkout, or increase administrative overhead for brands and retailers. There’s also the risk that visible fees might dissuade buyers. However, these concerns can often be addressed with clear communication and consistent pricing tools.

Conclusion: A Practical Solution

In today’s environment, maintaining a universal price means other regions effectively subsidise U.S. tariffs. Separate U.S. pricing, whether through a distinct MSRP or a transparent tariff fee, is a more equitable and sustainable approach. Until trade policies change, treating the U.S. as a unique pricing market is not only practical—it’s necessary for the health of the global bike industry.