The United States’ imposition of a 30% tariff on South African imports is expected to disrupt Namibia’s supply chains, inflate import costs, and put pressure on the local currency.
However, economists say the situation also presents a chance for Namibia to reposition itself in global trade.
Namibia’s reliance on South Africa for goods, logistics, and the currency peg makes it vulnerable to spillover effects.
“Namibia has actually been largely left aside. We have relatively small tariffs that are being imposed on us—15% is down from 21% previously pushed by the U.S. government,” said Rowland Brown, Economist and co-founder of Cirrus Capital.
Brown explained that the tariffs are a result of political tensions, particularly South Africa’s international positioning, and are expected to ripple through the region due to the integrated nature of the Southern African Customs Union (SACU).
“The Customs Union is basically a group of countries that agree to tariff external goods and potentially services in a certain manner together so that you don’t have inter-regional trade that circumvents those tariffs,” he said.
Namibia imports up to 70% of its goods through South African logistics corridors, and any significant change in South Africa’s economic position would have immediate consequences.
“In the Namibian instance, the most significant manner in which we expect to be impacted, is through the common exchange rate,” said Brown.
“The draconian tariffs imposed on South Africa—should we see sanctions against South Africa—there could be quite significant implications for the currency. This would impact Namibia as well.”
Junior Economist at Simonis Storm, Almandro Jansen, agreed that Namibia’s dependence on South African supply chains leaves it exposed.
“Namibia’s dependence on South African supply chains is both logistical and systemic. Approximately 60-70% of Namibian imports either originate in or pass through South Africa. In a region as tightly integrated as SACU, a tariff of this magnitude on South Africa distorts the entire regional trade architecture,” Jansen said.
He added that in the short term, Namibia could benefit from redirected South African exports originally meant for the US.
“In the short term, we could see South African exporters redirect goods originally earmarked for the U.S. into regional markets, including Namibia. That might offer temporary benefits, more inventory, and possibly lower prices as producers look to clear stock. But that reprieve will likely be brief,” he said.
Jansen cautioned that a slowdown in South African production would affect Namibia’s access to essential goods. He also pointed to the potential for Namibia to seek its own advantages in US markets.
“Namibia, if it can demonstrate clear rules-of-origin compliance and domestic value-add, could negotiate tariff-free access for its own exports in mining (uranium, copper), high-integrity beef, and specialty agri-processing,” Jansen said.
However, independent economist Klaus Schade warned that Namibia’s ability to negotiate independently is limited by SACU rules.
“Any trade negotiations should be led by SACU since we are in a customs union with a common external tariff. Hence, SACU member states cannot negotiate trade deals individually,” he said.
Jansen stressed that Namibia’s need to diversify its trade links is urgent, and Brown added that the country’s response to this moment could shape its future standing. “Namibia is sort of sticking its head out as a standout entity in the region and on the continent. Should we be able to take advantage of this by being strategic and building a solid relationship with the likes of the US, it could be quite good for Namibia,” said Brown.
