Objective: To investigate whether kinesiotaping improves excessive foot pronation compared with sham kinesiotaping. Design: Quasi-randomised, double-blind study. Setting: One primary care centre. Participants: One hundred and thirty participants were screened for inclusion. Sixty-eight participants with pronated feet [Foot Posture Index (FPI). ≥. 6] were enrolled, and the follow-up rate was 100%. Interventions: Participants were allocated into one of two groups: an experimental kinesiotaping group (KT1) and a sham taping group (KT2). Measures were collected by a blinded assessor at baseline, and 1. minute, 10. minutes, 60. minutes and 24. hours after taping. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was total FPI score, and the secondary outcome was rear-foot FPI score. Results: There were no significant differences in total FPI score between kinesiotaping and sham taping at any time point. Similarly, there were no significant differences in rear-foot FPI score, apart from at 60-minute follow-up when the difference between groups was significant (P= 0.04) but the effect size was very small (0.85 points on the rear-foot FPI score between -6 and +6). Conclusions: Kinesiotaping does not correct foot pronation compared with sham kinesiotaping in people with pronated feet.