Trimtabist
Check the duty on a customs entry you have already filed, against the tariff schedule as it stood on that line’s own entry date.

The two checks, and what neither one proves

The cheapest thing on this site for a skeptic to verify, so it is worth stating precisely rather than impressively. There are two checks, they are different animals, and we used to describe them as one.

Completeness
114 of 114 months · worst deviation 0.000%
What it compares
The sum of our per-country Census rows against the same Census API’s own world-total row, same month, same vintage.
What it proves
The pull is complete and the country filter is right — on every month from 2017-01 to 2026-06.
What it does not prove
Anything external. It cannot fail unless the pipeline dropped rows. It is not a reconciliation, and Treasury is not in it.
Agreement with Treasury
A different check with a different number: duty assessed at entry ÷ Treasury gross receipts sits at 0.85–0.95 in every year, 2017 to 2026.
Why the Treasury ratio is always below 1
The assessed book excludes anti-dumping and countervailing duties and fees, and entry month is not cash month. The gap is explained, not residual.

Why gross, not net
From May 2026 court-ordered IEEPA refunds drove Treasury net toward zero, so the same ratio reads 1.78 on the net book for 2026. That is a vanishing denominator, not a finding.

Agreement is not reconciliation
No Treasury figure is used to build these numbers. Two books that were never joined landing inside an explained band is worth something — not the word reconciled.
Withdrawn · 2026-08-26

Until the 2026-08-26 audit the ledger said: “Reconciled against US Treasury monthly customs receipts (yearly ratio 0.89–1.03) and Census world-total rows (0.000% deviation, 114/114 months).”

Two errors in one sentence. Calling the 0.000% a reconciliation invited a reader to believe an external check had closed to zero; none had. And 0.89–1.03 was not reproducible by any statistic — it mixed a ratio-of-sums against the net-of-refunds book with a mean of monthly ratios. Against gross the honest band is 0.853–0.947 in every year including 2026. Logged, and one machine-readable surface still serves the old string — logged too, rather than quietly patched.

Check it yourself

SELECT substr(b.month,1,4) yr, count(*),
  round(sum(b.duty)/sum(m.gross_usd),3) AS ratio_of_sums,
  round(avg(b.duty/m.gross_usd),3)   AS mean_of_monthly
FROM burden_national b JOIN mts_customs m USING(month) GROUP BY yr;

Both inputs are public and neither is ours. The assessed side is our CSV, or re-pull it from Census; the Treasury side is MTS Table 4, classification Customs Duties, no key. If a year lands outside 0.85–0.95, one of us is wrong and we would like to know which.

One limitation, and it is ours

The Census world-total rows are not stored, so the completeness check is not re-runnable from our files — you would have to re-pull those rows to audit it, and until we store them you are taking 0.000% partly on trust. The 2026-08-26 audit recommended storing them. It has not been done.

Two months have been independently re-pulled and matched to the dollar, 2019-06 and 2023-03. Two of 114 is a spot check, not a verification, and is described here as one.

how the numbers are made · what we got wrong · what we tested and it failed · check one of your own entries