USFIA - United States Fashion Industry Association

PPI Trade Fact of the Week: U.S. clothing tariffs are unfair to women

PPI’s Ed Gresser, Vice President and Director for Trade and Global Markets, once again highlights how import tariffs unfairly target women’s clothing in his latest trade fact of the week. Building on his Valetines Day trade fact covering higher tariffs for women’s underwear, Gresser’s latest piece looks at women’s and men’s clothing overall, finding that “combining all the categories, tariff rates on women’s clothing are on average 16.7%, 2.9 percentage points higher than the 13.6% average for men’s.”

Gresser also notes that FTAs don’t help much and may even amplify the issue with restrictive and complex rules of origin. The New Democrat Coalition in the House published an eight-point trade policy plan which includes the goal to “advance equity in trade policy by considering solutions to reduce gender bias and regressivity in the tariff system.”

Gresser writes that the findings point to systemic problems with U.S. tariffs for clothing:

What does this all mean in practice? Last year’s tariff payments totaled $4.7 billion on $31.1 billion worth of women’s clothes, and $3.1 billion for $24.2 billion worth of men’s clothes. Or, in more direct terms, markups and U.S. transport and overhead costs mean that the cost of an average shirt or coat roughly quadruples from arrival at the border to the cashier, the tariff system appears to be raising the price women pay for clothes, relative to men, by an average of an extra dollar per garment. Looking at this another way, a 2018 working paper from the U.S International Trade Commission concluded that the higher rates on women’s clothes — their finding, pre-“301” tariff, was 14.9% for women’s clothes and 12.0% for men’s — plus the fact that women on average tend to purchase more clothing than men, meant that buyers of women clothes shouldered an additional $2.77 billion in tariff burden than buyers of men’s clothes. Gender bias in the tariff system accounted for about $1.8 billion extra burden on buyers of women’s clothing as of 2015, and presumably somewhat more now.

PPI: Brace yourself: Trump’s trade war is about to make Americans poorer

Writing in an op-ed for The Hill, PPI Founder and President Will Marshall highlights the problems with President Trump’s use of tariffs to attempt a restructuring of the world’s economy.

The president can sign all the executive orders he pleases, but he can’t throw history into reverse or repeal basic economics.

Marshall points out that Americans “aren’t buying MAGAnomics.”

Consumer confidence has plummeted to a 12-year low, with families cutting back on spending in anticipation of a return to high living costs.

Investors are rattled too. By mid-March, the stock market had lost more than $3 trillion since Trump took office — the equivalent of 10 percent of America’s $30 trillion GDP.

In a recent YouGov poll, 61 percent of voters said tariffs hurt average working people, while just 14 percent said they would help.

And takes on Trump’s attempt to return manufacturing jobs to America.

The president apparently sees tariffs as a form of reparations for working Americans. But the culprit isn’t trade or globalization or “neoliberalism.” It’s the emergence of a post-industrial economy shaped mainly by technological change, rising education levels and growing demand for services.

Factory employment has declined in all advanced countries, even manufacturing powerhouses like Germany and Japan. But thanks to tech-driven productivity gains, U.S. manufacturing output has increased by more than 60 percent since 1999, even as our factory workforce has contracted by about 25 percent.

The U.S., like most other high-income countries, has evolved into a predominantly service-based economy. Services account for 80 percent of non-farm jobs. Even if more factories sprout up here, job gains are likely to be modest due to automation.

In fact, since Trump’s first set of tariffs, manufacturing employment has stagnated, up by only 30,000 since 2018, compared to 400,000 in the second Obama term.

And with over half a million manufacturing jobs open over the last five years, blue-collar workers themselves appear ambivalent about factory careers.

A 2023 YouGov poll commissioned by the Progressive Policy Institute asked non-college workers where they think their children will find the best jobs and careers. Most (44 percent) choose the communications and digital economy, while just 13 percent picked manufacturing.

Quinnipiac: 51% Oppose Trump Tariffs on Mexico, Canada, and China

Quinnipiac University reports that 51% of registered voters oppose Trump’s threatened tariffs against Mexico, Canada and China, while 38% support them. Unsurprisingly, 76% of Republicans support the plan, while 89% of Democrats and 53% of independents opposed the tariff plan. Neither a majority of men (47%) nor women (30%) support the tariffs, though 53% of registered voters without a 4-year college degree support them.

Retail Dive: Tariffs on $200B worth of imports from China start Sept. 24

By Shefali Kapadia

Upon written and oral public comments, officials removed about 300 tariff lines from the original list and did not add any additional items or categories. The total value of goods, however, remains around $200 billion. Despite the removal of some textile and apparel products from the list, many products from those categories as well as accessories were still subject to the new tariffs. Industry associations chimed in following the announcement to express their opposition to the tariffs.

"These tariffs on imports of textiles, apparel, and accessories do little to punish China for its intellectual property and technology transfer practices but do a lot to harm American fashion brands and retailers as well as consumers of their products," said United States Fashion Industry Association President Julia K. Hughes.

Click here to read the entire article on the Retail Dive website.

Sourcing Journal: Brands, Retailers Face Sourcing Paralysis As Inventory Dwindles

Kate Nishimura | May 6, 2025

Despite the 90-day pause on President Donald Trump’s “reciprocal” tariff scheme, the impacts of the duties are likely to be felt at retail much sooner.

It will be weeks, not months, before consumers start to see dwindling inventory—sparse racks, spotty shelves—at their favorite stores, according to many experts.

And that’s only the beginning. Because amid the uncertainty, retailers are pushing out decision-making about back-to-school and the fall and winter holidays—choices and commitments that would normally be taking shape now.

Instead, brands and retailers are in a holding pattern and attempting to avoid solidifying their sourcing and inventory strategies for as long as possible, according to Julia K. Hughes, president of the U.S. Fashion Industry Association (USFIA).

“Everyone hopes to get some insights about what the Trump trade deals will look like,” she explained. “Aside from China, the question is whether the 10-percent tariffs stay in place or [whether] the big ‘reciprocal tariffs’ return on July 9. It’s difficult to sign contracts when no one knows what the costs will be.”

In the case of China, which faces 145-percent duties on U.S. imports, the tariffs are essentially an embargo, she said. That’s a problem because for fashion brands, there aren’t a lot of options for sourcing certain products, and there’s not enough time to switch to new markets, especially with reciprocal duties looming. “Sweaters are a great example where China is the major manufacturer of all types of sweaters—cotton, wool and man-made fiber,” Hughes said. The prohibitive cost of importing them will inevitably lead to a smaller selection at retail.

As confusion persists, “Small business owners are canceling orders and will be the first to be affected,” she added. “For larger companies, no question that the uncertainty is hurting everyone’s ability to plan. They are ready to raise prices, and they are working with key suppliers on business plans, but I get the sense that they are postponing a lot of decisions until there is some clarity about what comes next.”

Read more on Sourcing Journal

Sourcing Journal: Industry Laments ‘Potentially Crushing Burden’ of Trump’s Tariffs

Kate Nishimura | March 4, 2025

The White House’s Tuesday tariff announcement was confirmation, not a revelation, but it still sent shockwaves through the markets. Now, groups representing the interests of apparel, footwear, textiles and retail are grappling with the long- and short-term implications of 25-percent tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada and a deepening of duties on China-made product.

Whether their members are U.S. brands and retailers dealing in finished goods or American manufacturers trading in inputs and materials, industry advocacy groups bemoaned what they view as the skewering of a collaborative hemispheric supply chain and a strong, interconnected consumer market bolstered by free trade....

U.S. Fashion Industry Association (USFIA) president Julie Hughes also expressed dismay at the president’s decision to take on the industry’s major nearshore trading partners, saying that the tariffs “ignore the complex Western Hemisphere supply chains and close trade ties created by textile and apparel companies during the more than 30 years since a regional free trade agreement first went into effect.”

According to Hughes, farmers, retailers and shoppers will bear the brunt of the impact of tit-for-tat trade wars. Canada on Tuesday announced its own duties on more than $100 billion in American-made goods—starting with apparel, among other categories. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said her government would respond imminently with its own duties on U.S. goods.

“The Western Hemisphere’s apparel and textile supply chain is deeply intertwined and retaliation will hurt Americans,” Hughes said. “The ‘Made in’ label only tells part of a garment’s story,” she added, noting that the journey of even a simple cotton T-shirt can be a winding one, incorporating inputs and labor from multiple markets. U.S. cotton growers, for example, supply about 60 percent of the raw material to support Mexico’s textile production needs.

And together, Mexico and Canada supplied about $3.1 billion apparel imports to the U.S. in 2024.

China, too, still has an outsized role to play in the life of the American consumer, despite Trump’s longstanding political objectives in targeting the PRC, the USFIA lead said. “There will be a major impact on costs and inflation from the 20 percent additional tariffs on imports from China,” she added. “Apparel and textile products already face some of the highest tariff rates of any U.S. imports, reaching as high as 32 percent.”

Read more on Sourcing Journal

Sourcing Journal: Markets Rally as Trump Backtracks, Pausing Tariffs For 90 Days

Kate Nishimura | April 9, 2025

Seismic shakeups to global trade took shape Wednesday as the Trump administration’s reciprocal tariffs were slated to take effect—but didn’t.

...

“We are relieved that President Trump is pausing the onerous reciprocal tariffs on most of our trading partners. Ninety days offers an opportunity to hold serious discussions about trade barriers and craft substantive market opening agreements,” Julia Hughes, president of the U.S. Fashion Industry Association (USFIA), told Sourcing Journal. “Our motto at USFIA is ‘Fashion Made Possible by Global Trade’ and we know that fashion benefits from the opportunity to source across the globe.”

While the tempering of tensions with much of the trading world represents a step in the right direction, Hughes said she remains “concerned about the escalating trade war with China.”

“Ultimately no one wins in a trade war so we hope that today’s dueling tariff increases will lead to a serious negotiation to resolve the long-standing trade issues between the U.S. and China,” she added.

Read more on Sourcing Journal

Sourcing Journal: Tariff Ticker: Costco Seeks Discounts from China Suppliers, Industry Appeals to USTR on Forthcoming Duties

Kate Nishimura | March 19, 2025

...

U.S. fashion industry trade groups, meanwhile, are eager to make their voices heard in an effort to stave off new duties before the administration’s self-imposed April 2 deadline. After receiving detailed reporting from Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on America’s trade deficits, the president has said he will make moves to address any inequities through “reciprocal” tariffs.

The administration solicited public comments on the matter through March 11. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) said it’s taking stock of those responses while it’s “reviewing and identifying any unfair trade practices by other countries,” with the goal of “recommending appropriate actions to remedy such practices and reporting to the President proposed remedies in pursuit of reciprocal trade relations.”

U.S. Fashion Industry Association (USFIA) president Julia Hughes submitted comments on behalf of the Washington trade group’s members.

“We recommend that the most successful policy to achieve trade reciprocity would be for the United States to lower the tariff rates of products for which our trading partners apply lower tariff rates,” she wrote. “For consumer products such as textiles and apparel, this would help combat inflation and assist consumers who struggle to afford basic necessities.”

Read more on Sourcing Journal

Sourcing Journal: TPP Trade Deal Signed Without the US—Which is More Focused on Formally Ordering Steel Tariffs

By Tara Donaldson

Now that the U.S. will officially add a 25 percent tariff on foreign steel imports and 10 percent on aluminum, the country could end up in an even worse position on trade. For one, the E.U. has threatened levying a 25 percent tariff on Levi’s jeans coming from the U.S.—and the region isn’t alone in its line of thinking.

“These tariffs aren’t quite as high as tariffs on the fashion industry, which can reach 32 percent on some products. However, we know these tariffs will be catastrophic for the U.S. economy and jobs,” the United States Fashion Industry Association said in a statement following the tariff announcement Thursday. “We’re not being partisan or subjective; it’s Trade Policy 101—and we can expect widespread net job loss in the United States as a result, according to early studies, not to mention regressive taxes on American consumers. This is not the way to support American companies and jobs, and definitely not the way to participate in the global economy.”

Click here to read the entire article on the Sourcing Journal website.

Sourcing Journal: Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ Tariffs Pack a Wallop

Kate Nishimura | April 2, 2025

...

Fashion industry advocates weigh in

Industry trade groups in Washington responded quickly to Trump’s Rose Garden announcements—and many bemoaned the impacts the new tariff structure will have on U.S. retail.

...

The U.S. Fashion Industry Association (USFIA) said it was “deeply disappointed” by the administration’s decision to impose new duties on imports, saying it would “particularly affect American fashion brands and retailers.”

According to the group, some of the countries targeted with “worst offender” tariffs are major suppliers for American importers and also important customers for U.S.-made exports.

“The fashion industry depends on global supply chains more than perhaps any other sector of manufactured goods. For instance, a bale of cotton might be grown in Texas, shipped to Europe to be spun into yarn, sent to Korea for fabric production, then to Vietnam for garment assembly, and finally to the U.S. for retail sale—back in Texas,” the group said, illustrating the global reach of the fashion supply chain.

Read more on Sourcing Journal

Sourcing Journal: Trump’s Tariff Plans Spark Uncertainty for the Denim Industry

By Andre Claudio | April 29, 2025 10:00am

President Donald Trump’s renewed push for tariffs on Mexican goods is sending ripples through the denim industry.

Since taking office as the 47th president just over two months ago, Trump has signed multiple executive orders that have caused panic across the globe, including efforts to dismantle the Department of Education and reduce the federal bureaucracy. However, one order that has put the denim industry—along with many others like pharmaceuticals and automotive—on edge is the president’s plan to impose new tariffs on key trading partners, including Mexico.

...

Dr. Sheng Lu, professor of apparel studies at the University of Delaware, is not as optimistic, though. Lu noted that if denim products made in Mexico do face new tariffs when exported to the U.S., their price competitiveness could be significantly impacted, potentially leading to a loss of market share.

Lu’s research for the “2024 Fashion Industry Benchmarking Study,” conducted in collaboration with the United States Fashion Industry Association, shows that a significant portion of U.S. denim imports from Mexico serve the mass and value market segments, where consumers are highly sensitive to price changes.

“While Mexico is a key supplier of denim products to the U.S. market, similar products are also widely available from Asian countries like Bangladesh and China,” he said. “Additionally, many ‘Made in Mexico’ denim garments incorporate U.S. cotton, yarns and fabrics through a regional supply chain. As a result, a decline in U.S. denim apparel imports from Mexico could also have a negative impact on the U.S. textile industry.”

Beyond the tariff increases themselves, Lu noted that a major concern for U.S. denim brands is the ongoing uncertainty surrounding trade policy. With no sourcing destination considered “safe” or immune to Trump’s tariffs, U.S. brands and retailers are hesitant to commit to expanding production in any country, he added.

“A significant increase in sourcing ‘Made in the USA’ products is unlikely due to limited production capacity,” he said. “Even sourcing diversification—once a widely adopted strategy to mitigate risk—may be less effective this time, as any country could be targeted.”

Read more on Sourcing Journal

Sourcing Journal: US, Canada Trade Leaders Discuss Whether Tariffs Are New Normal

By Tara Donaldson

During Monday’s fireside chat at the opening of Canada’s Apparel Textile Sourcing show, which was streamed via Facebook Live, Julia K. Hughes, president of the United States Fashion Industry Association (USFIA), said “From a U.S. perspective, I think it’s a bit of a new normal.”

Once countries start pointing to national security concerns as the reason for implementing new tariffs, the door opens for making a case that nearly anything could be considered a national security threat, Hughes explained, noting a concern that the world could be in store for ongoing bouts of U.S. protectionism expressed in tariff form.

Click here to read the entire article on the Sourcing Journal website.

Sourcing Journal: Weak Consumer Demand, Tariff Turmoil Set the Stage for 2026

On a 2 January deadline, Sourcing Journal reports on tariffs' effect in 2025.

Katie Nashimura | January 2, 2026

The following is an excerpt....

All 90 countries hit with tariffs will see more “visible and significant” impacts to their exports to the U.S. in 2026, though. Apparel as a category will be particularly hard hit by new duties, and Lu believes fashion firms “will face increased pressure to control their sourcing costs and protect their profit margins.”

With that scenario as a backdrop, fashion companies will likely turn to diversification to navigate market and trade policy uncertainties, he added. A 2025 Fashion Industry Benchmarking Study released by the U.S. Fashion Industry Association (USFIA) showed a record number of U.S. fashion brands and retailers (over 80 percent) were sourcing from 10 or more countries. Nearly 60 percent of them said their sourcing portfolios would continue to expand in 2026, and they’re looking for vendors with the ability to produce across multiple countries to mitigate risk.

Read the full article here.

Supply Chain Dive: Apparel industry ranks trade policy, tariffs as top business challenge

By Shefali Kapadia

What started with a few taxes on solar panels and washing machines has escalated to a trade battle affecting industries well beyond home appliances and energy.

With more and more tariffs tossed between the U.S. and its trading partners, including an announcement of duties on $200 billion worth of imports from China, "U.S. fashion brands and retailers are justifiably concerned," the study said.

Click here to read the entire article on the Supply Chain Dive website.

Supply Chain Dive: Trump slaps on steel tariffs but spares NAFTA neighbors

By Edwin Lopez

That, and the fact many U.S. allies have pledged to retaliate against the tariffs, targeting unrelated products like whiskey (a political choice to punish GOP leadership.)

"While our members don't import a lot of steel or aluminum, these tariffs could result in disastrous consequences for them," the U.S. Fashion Industry Association said in a statement. "Already, the European Union is calling out a variety of industries — including iconic American denim and t-shirts — as potential targets for tariff increases of their own."

Click here to read the entire article on the Supply Chain Dive website.

Tariffs and Textiles: Fashion Interrupted

The Asia Society Policy Institute is holding an event on June 26, 2025, at 9:30am titled “Tariffs and Textiles: Fashion Interrupted.” USFIA President Julia K. Hughes will join a panel of experts to discuss “how shifting U.S. trade policy, including recent tariff adjustments and the ongoing 90-day policy pause, is impacting the global textile and apparel landscape, with a particular focus on South Asia and Southeast Asia.” Register online here.

Tariffs Top the List of Worst Holiday Gifts for 2018

While we are eagerly awaiting the outcome from the G20 meetings between President Trump and other world leaders—particularly President Xi—we want to share some insights about the impact of the tariffs on the U.S. economy. Warning: you may need something a little stronger than eggnog after you read these new studies.

In a new study commissioned by Koch Industries and conducted by ImpactECON, President Trump’s tariffs could cause the U.S. GDP to fall nearly 2 percent in 2019. The effect on consumers is even harder, especially in the leadup to the holidays, with the average U.S. citizen expected to lose $915 in 2019, or close to $2,400 per household. Meanwhile, “all countries, except the U.S. and China, gain from U.S. trade actions and responses and increase GDP.” It’s worth noting that despite Koch’s conservative viewpoint and long-time support for Republican candidates, Koch Industries and the Koch network has been very critical of President Trump’s trade agenda.

Speaking of the holidays, Tariffs Hurt the Heartland says new tariffs on Christmas lights arrived just in time for the season. The majority of Christmas lights sold in the United States are hit by the Section 301 tariff dispute—and there are no major American Christmas light manufacturers, either. According to the findings,

[O]ver 80% of US imports of Christmas lights from the world in 2017 came between August and October as companies stock up for the holiday season, with China accounting for about 85% of those imports. Already subject to 8% Most Favored Nation (MFN) tariffs, the Section 301 dispute added another 10% tariff, to 18% overall. These took effect on September 24 – right in the middle of peak season for increasing holiday inventory. Lights could become even more expensive next Christmas, as the Section 301 tariff will increase to 25% (or an overall rate of 33%) on January 1, 2019.

Meanwhile, in a White House press conference earlier this week, Larry Kudlow, Director of the National Economic Council, said, “Tariffs represent only a small percentage of the U.S. economy. Our economy's in very good shape right now. And when you multiply through whatever numbers you want to use–$250 billion, or tack on another tranche, which may or may not happen, at a 10 percent tariff rate or more–it's really just a fraction of our economy.”

We’re sure Santa might have a different view!

Tariffs: Bark Worse Than Bite?

We share with members an analysis by Charles Schwab that looks at the four potential reasons why the market is dismissing the threat of tariffs and reasons for caution, despite the market responding positively to Trump’s first week in office.

No Day One tariffs enacted as had been pledged.

Despite the fact that President Trump told reporters he was planning to enact the 25% tariffs against Canada and Mexico on February 1, there was no immediate action on tariffs and they were not mentioned in Trump’s inaugural address.

But there are still risks the market may be ignoring. Notably, President Trump's comments and the presidential memorandum on trade policy note that several federal agencies were instructed to review a broad range of trade issues and to report back with recommendations by April 1.

U.S. energy exports offered as a way for Europe and China to avoid tariffs.

President Trump and Scott Bessent, his nominee for Treasury Secretary, have suggested that Europe and China could avoid import tariffs if they buy more U.S. energy.

Producing enough energy to narrow the trade gaps may take substantial energy price inflation in the U.S., something the administration may be wary of facilitating.

The new political leadership in Europe and Canada are more like Trump, easing the path to cutting a deal.

Markets may be taking comfort in the rising potential for warmer cross-border relationships. Accommodative personalities may make trade talks go more smoothly but doesn't guarantee resolution to the focus around Trump's trade policies—the massive U.S. trade gap.

Global trade survived Trump 1.0.

If history is any indication, the current tariff proposals may simply be negotiation tools leading toward agreements with China and other countries, and potentially much less disruptive to economic growth, inflation, sales, and operations of multi-national corporations. The market seems to believe that Trump will continue to use dramatic tariff announcements as a tool of statecraft to extract actions or concessions, rather than tools of economic policy. The risk? Trump 2.0 may differ significantly from Trump 1.0.

TexFash: Trump Tariffs Threaten Growth, Investments and Development for Vulnerable Economies

Perspectives are varied, and it is not an open-and-shut case against US Prez Donald Trump as his political opponents would have us believe. The tariff calculations could be questionable and the unilateral announcement should be decried, but what’s amply clear is this: trade will never be the same again.

By Subir Ghosh | 7 April 2025

...

A View of the Home Front

The Trump announcement has been widely lambasted and lampooned by his political detractors.

Three brand-driven industry associations—Council of Fashion Designers of America (CFDA), American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA), United States Fashion Industry Association (USFIA)—have expressed apprehension over how this would affect industry. None of them think that the new tariffs will help domestic manufacturing, and that these would only render matters worse.

...

The USFIA feels this will adversely affect American fashion brands and retailers.

“Some of the major suppliers for U.S. imports and the major customers for US exports are targeted with the substantial ‘worst offender’ tariffs. The fashion industry depends on global supply chains more than perhaps any other sector of manufactured goods. For instance, a bale of cotton might be grown in Texas, shipped to Europe to be spun into yarn, sent to Korea for fabric production, then to Vietnam for garment assembly, and finally to the US for retail sale—back in Texas. Additionally, these garments may be sold not only in the US but also in global markets such as Singapore, Japan, Dubai, or London.”

Trade groups want China tariffs scrapped to offset virus impact

Just-Style published an article titled "Trade groups want China tariffs scrapped to offset virus impact". The article discusses a letter sent to Larry Kudlow, director of the US National Economic Council, calling for the immediate removal of China 301 tariffs on a number of consumer goods. USFIA and over 23 industry groups signed on to the letter. According to the industry groups who signed on to the letter, tariff removal should part of an "emergency response" by the Government as the economic impact of COVID-19 worsens. The letter states "Such a move would instantly put billions of dollars back into the US economy. This action also would provide certainty to American companies and encourage new hiring and new investment – moves that are now on hold given the unprecedented uncertainty facing the US economy. American consumers would also see benefits given that these tariffs act as a tax that often show up at retail in the form of higher prices. The lifting of these tariffs also requires no congressional action."

Read the full article here.