The subfamily Cecidophyinae Keifer is morphologically defined by enlarged genitalia closely appressed to coxae II and a shortened female genital apodeme. According to the currently accepted classification, it comprises two tribes: Cecidophyini Keifer and Colomerini Newkirk & Keifer (Lindquist & Amrine, 1996; Amrine et al., 2003). These tribes are distinguished by the presence of setae sc in Colomerini, which are absent in Cecidophyini. Lindquist and Amrine (1996) emphasized that this distinction is based on a single morphological character considered evolutionarily plastic and potentially homoplastic. Moreover, Colomerini lacks clear synapomorphic support, raising concerns about the phylogenetic robustness of the current tribal delimitation. To date, molecular phylogenetic studies of Cecidophyinae have included only limited species sampling (Li et al., 2014; Chetverikov et al., 2015; Gankevich & Chetverikov, 2025). The aim of this study was to reconstruct the molecular phylogeny of Cecidophyini and clarify intergeneric relationships within the tribe using DNA sequence data, with particular emphasis on testing the monophyly of the included genera and assessing their phylogenetic position in relation to Colomerini. The analyzed material comprised 16 species representing six genera of Cecidophyini. Specifically, seven species of Cecidophyes Nalepa, five species of Cecidophyopsis Keifer, and one species each of Coptophylla Keifer, Bariella de Lillo, Achaetocoptes Farkas, and Chrecidus Manson were included in the analyses. Specimens were collected from their respective host plants and identified using standard morphological criteria. Genomic DNA was extracted from individual mites, and the D1-D2 region of the 28S rRNA gene was amplified and sequenced. The species Colomerus vitis (Pagenstecher) was selected as the sister outgroup, and Phytoptus avellanae Nalepa was included as an additional outgroup taxon. Phylogenetic analyses consistently recovered Cecidophyini as a well-supported monophyletic lineage, with C. vitis forming a stable sister taxon. Within Cecidophyini, two strongly supported clades were identified: one comprising Cecidophyes, Cecidophyopsis, and Coptophylla, and the other including Achaetocoptes, Bariella, and Chrecidus. Notably, species assigned to the genera Cecidophyes and Cecidophyopsis were distributed across multiple clades, indicating their polyphyletic origin. This study provides new molecular insights into the phylogenetic structure of Cecidophyini and contributes to a clearer understanding of intergeneric relationships within the tribe. Future phylogenetic analyses should incorporate additional genera from Africa, Asia, and the Americas that are absent from Europe. Broader taxonomic and geographic sampling will be essential for rigorously testing tribal monophyly and establishing a globally representative evolutionary framework for Cecidophyinae.