USFIA - United States Fashion Industry Association

Specialty Fabrics Review: U.S. textile groups unite behind trade incentive program to strengthen U.S. manufacturing

On a 6 July deadline, Yahoo Finance reports on the recent joint proposal from USFIA for a tariff credit program:

ATA | July 6, 2026

The following is an excerpt....

Industry organizations representing U.S. textile manufacturers, apparel brands and retailers urged the Trump administration to adopt a newly developed textile and apparel trade incentive program they proposed in a joint submission to the U.S. Trade Representative’s Office (USTR) July 6. This is the first time these organizations have teamed up to publicly advocate for a joint trade policy initiative.

In their written submission to USTR related to proposed actions in Section 301 investigations of various economies’ policies on goods made with forced labor, the groups — which normally take strongly divergent policy positions on trade — jointly proposed a program designed to “reshore domestic manufacturing, stabilize and grow Western Hemisphere textile and apparel supply chains, and help brands and retailers to diversify sourcing at a critical time.”

“Our joint efforts have resulted in the development of a novel trade incentive program that would achieve various important goals,” including “the revitalization and growth of U.S. textile manufacturing, exports and investment, resulting in over 56,000 new jobs” in the United States. Additionally, increased U.S. textile exports under the program could “drive billions of dollars of new domestic investment” and benefit the entire supply chain, including cotton farming, according to the joint submission.

The program is designed to “allow brands and retailers to earn tariff credits when they buy U.S. textiles and qualified apparel goods from key Western Hemisphere U.S. free trade agreement partners. Brands and retailers could then apply those credits to offset potential Section 301 tariffs from eligible countries — a win-win strategy to unlock significant growth for U.S. textile manufacturers, brands, and retailers,” the organizations state in their joint submission.

To view the full USTR submission, click here.

The associations developed and put forth the new incentive program in response to a textile mechanism proposed by USTR as part of the Section 301 investigations on forced labor.

“We believe with the right incentives we can grow jobs substantially in the United States, reopen shuttered factories, and make the critical investments needed to maintain and to grow America’s textile industry by also helping brands and retailers find new opportunities. As such, we respectfully request the United States Trade Representative to consider including our proposed incentive program as a component of any remedy that results from the Section 301 investigations currently underway.”

If adopted by the administration, the groups note their textile and apparel trade incentives program “has the potential of doubling U.S. textile exports to the Western Hemisphere, reaching a total of $29 billion annually. This significant increase in U.S. textile exports would create substantial new U.S. jobs and unleash a much-needed wave of textile sector investment in the United States.”

The public submission was filed by the National Council of Textile Organizations (NCTO), American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA), United States Fashion Industry Association (USFIA) and the U.S. Industrial and Narrow Fabrics Institute (USINFI).

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: Cotopaxi repays workers at Taiwan mills for predatory recruitment fees

On a 1 September deadline, Supply Chain DIve reports on Cotopaxi's response to potential forced labor in its supply chain:

Kelly Stroh | September 1, 2026

Dive Brief:

Cotopaxi repaid workers in two Taiwan fabric mills for the portion of predatory recruitment fees tied to the brand’s production volume at the facilities, per an environmental, social and governance report published in April.
After discovering the indicator of forced labor at the mills in 2024, Cotopaxi worked to address recruitment fee violations and advance worker protections, per the report. The outdoor gear maker collaborated with the American Apparel & Footwear Association, Fair Labor Association, Dignity in Work for All and Verité, an independent nonprofit organization supporting fair labor practices.
Outside of the predatory recruitment practices identified in Taiwan, Cotopaxi reported that it did not uncover any additional forced labor findings from its broader monitoring efforts.

Dive Insight:

Managing forced labor risks is a key issue for U.S. fashion companies in regard to sourcing and trade compliance, according to a 2026 Fashion Industry Benchmarking Study published by the U.S. Fashion Industry Association. The issue ranked as survey respondents’ No. 6 top concern for the year, up from 10th in 2025, per the report.

Several apparel companies have grappled with the risk of modern slavery across their supply chains. Ultra-fast fashion brand. Shein, for instance, in 2023 was probed by U.S. senators whether the company’s goods were made using forced labor. In 2024, Shein reported that it found two cases of child labor in its supply chain, which prompted the brand to suspend orders from those suppliers and conducted investigations. In 2024, a Skechers supplier was also accused of using forced labor.

In 2024, human rights investigation nonprofit Transparentem interviewed more than 90 migrant workers employed by textile suppliers in Taiwan, which revealed that there were forced labor indicators tied to predatory recruitment practices at those facilities, according to Cotopaxi’s 2024 Impact Report. Cotopaxi was one of more than 40 buyers linked to nine Tier 2 and Tier 3 Taiwan-based suppliers with evidence of labor abuses.

According to the International Labour Organization, predatory recruitment practices can occur during the recruitment process and lead to forced-labor conditions. This can include workers being charged recruitment fees and debt bondage linked to repayment of those fees, as well as deception around the nature and conditions of the work.

Cotopaxi maintains third-party audits of all its Tier 1 and Tier 2 suppliers while conducting “numerous” onsite visits to help create better transparency and monitoring of its supply chain, per the brand’s 2025 ESG report. Cotopaxi has a total of five fabric suppliers in Taiwan, according to its annually updated supplier data.

Aside from facility-level remediation, Cotopaxi said it is working to address the “root causes” of forced labor at the systems level by engaging with industry associations and policymakers, as well as leveraging its own resources and grant-making activities, according to the 2025 report. Cotopaxi has supported legislation including California’s Garment Worker Protection Act and the New York Fashion Sustainability and Social Accountability Act to combat human rights violations common in the apparel industry.

In regard to the labor abuse discovered in Taiwan, Cotopaxi visited suppliers based in the country in December 2024, per the 2024 report. Cotopaxi was also one of many companies seeking to have in-person conversations with the Taiwan’s government, the Taiwan Textile Federation and other government and foreign policy officials to root out abuses at the policy level.

This year, Cotopaxi also worked with the AAFA and peer brands to advance a “No Recruitment Fees” standard across Taiwan, advocating for suppliers to bear the cost of recruitment, per the 2025 report.

This isn’t the first time Cotopaxi has addressed unethical recruitment within its supply chain.

In 2022, a routine third-party audit identified risks associated with predatory recruitment practices at a Tier 1 supplier in the Philippines, including limited access to restrooms and pre-employment medical appointments not covered by suppliers.

To resolve the violations, Cotopaxi, alongside a working group and two other brands using the same supplier, tapped a third-party audit and remediation consultancy. In 2024, Cotopaxi announced that the remediation initiative was successfully completed.

Read the full article here.

Supply Chain Dive: Fashion brands plan to consolidate sourcing over next 2 years

On a 29 July deadline, Supply Chain DIve reports on results from USFIA's 2026 Benchmarking Study.

Kelly Stroh | July 29, 2026

The following is an excerpt....

A growing number of fashion brands are consolidating existing sourcing bases, opting to work with fewer but more capable vendors over the next two years, according to a 2026 Fashion Industry Benchmarking Study published by the U.S. Fashion Industry Association.

As part of a “new phase of sourcing strategy,” 30 U.S. fashion companies surveyed between April and June 2026 are adjusting their tactics due to ongoing trade and tariff uncertainty, per the study published in partnership with Sheng Lu, professor and director of graduate studies in the Department of Fashion and Apparel Studies at the University of Delaware.

Because U.S. tariffs will continue to have an impact on cost, “the goal is to maintain geographic diversity while consolidating sourcing networks to work more closely with key strategic partners overseas that offer sourcing flexibility and strong compliance,” USFIA President Julia Hughes said in a foreword.

Compared to 2025 statistics, substantially fewer brands plan to source from additional companies or expand their vendor network over the next two years, per the study. This means that instead of pushing rapid geographic expansion and diversification, some brands are prioritizing capacity, flexibility, inventory agility and regional balance.

For instance, last year Nike said it was negotiating with retail partners and suppliers to offset tariffs, among other actions. Ralph Lauren, meanwhile, said it would work closely with its suppliers to adjust production levels to countries with lower U.S. tariff rates. PVH Corp., which owns Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger, last year outlined efforts to work with vendors and its supply base to curb tariffs.

Only about 21% of survey respondents plan to source goods from more countries through 2027 — a significant drop from nearly 59% in 2025. About 26% of surveyed brands plan to source apparel from more suppliers or vendors, down from 41% the year prior.

Meanwhile, nearly half of respondents plan to source from fewer suppliers over the next two years, which is almost three times the share reported in 2025.

According to selected comments, some survey respondents said they are consolidating to fewer vendors with production in several countries and implementing additional quality standards to rationalize the supplier base. Other brands said they are opting for a “lower number of vendors to stabilize lead time and cost.”

However, the shift in sourcing strategy does not “indicate a retreat from sourcing diversification” across the entire industry, per the report. Another brand said in a comment that it is looking to expand into new regions while pulling back in others.

“We have a very diverse country strategy. We just need to focus on building even stronger capabilities in the developing countries, where we have just started,” per another respondent comment.

While popular tariff mitigation strategies include applying for tariff refunds and exploring first sale valuation, about 58% of brands are diversifying sourcing, down from 83% the year prior. Meanwhile, 63% are renegotiating supplier contracts compared to 61% in 2025.

“The results suggest that U.S. fashion companies today view successful tariff mitigation as requiring not only sourcing capability but also strong expertise in trade regulations and close collaboration with suppliers and other supply chain stakeholders,” per the report.

Sourcing diversification has also become more geographically balanced compared to last year, according to the study. This year’s survey results show that respondents reported sourcing apparel products from 49 countries, up from 46 in 2025. Asia continues to be the dominant sourcing region, but the number of brands using suppliers in countries such as Vietnam and Bangladesh has declined.

However, despite a larger collective pool of sourcing countries, at an individual level, companies are relying on more concentrated supplier bases. While 65% of surveyed brands are procuring from 10 or more countries, only 7% reported sourcing from 20 or more in 2026, down from rates between 20% and 30% in 2024 and 2025.

“This result suggests that while sourcing diversification remains a key strategy among leading U.S. fashion companies in the current business environment, companies are also dynamically balancing other factors, such as risk, operational efficiency, and required resources,” per the report.

Read the full article here.

Supply Chain Dive: Tariffs aren’t swaying fashion brands toward domestic sourcing

On a 6 February deadline, Supply Chain DIve reports on ongoing US Trade policy uncertainty.

Kelly Stroh | October 8, 2025

The following is an excerpt....

There is “no clear evidence” that the Trump administration’s tariff policies have swayed U.S. fashion companies to up domestic sourcing, according to a 2025 Fashion Industry Benchmarking Study published from the U.S. Fashion Industry Association.

Each of the 25 fashion companies surveyed between April and June for the report said they expect higher tariff and trade barrier costs this year. Around 70% of respondents reported that they had delayed or canceled sourcing orders due to tariff hikes from the Trump administration.
So far, adjusting procurement networks has been the most commonly adopted tariff mitigation strategy, per the study, with more than 80% of respondents saying that they would diversify their production footprint to other countries and regions.

Read the full article here.

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.

Taiwan Textile Federation: Tariffs and trade policies are the most pressing issues for fashion sourcing executives in 2026.

On a 23 July deadline, the Taiwan Textile Federation highlights USFIA's 2026 Benchmarking Study:

July 23, 2026

The following is translated into English via Google Translate from the original source.

According to the 13th Annual Fashion Industry Benchmarking Study 2026 released by the U.S. Fashion Industry Association (USFIA), amid continued volatility in the global trade environment, U.S. fashion companies are accelerating adjustments to their procurement strategies to cope with the impact of tariffs, including renegotiating contract terms with suppliers, diversifying their sourcing sources, and strengthening supply chain resilience.

The report points out that although trade policy remains the most pressing issue for fashion industry executives in 2026, many companies have gradually shifted from short-term crisis response to long-term supply chain planning, focusing on supply chain optimization, compliance building, and operational resilience enhancement to cope with the increasingly complex global economic and trade environment.

This study was conducted by Professor Sheng Lu and Research Assistant Emily Delaye of the Department of Fashion and Apparel Studies at the University of Delaware. The survey was from April to June of this year 2026, and interviewed senior executives of 30 major fashion brands retailers importers and wholesalers in the United States.

The survey results show that 92% of the surveyed companies believe that protectionist trade policies and related policy uncertainties (including tariff shocks) are one of the two most pressing challenges facing companies this year, followed by inflation and the overall economic outlook in the United States.

Among the overall operational risks faced by businesses, geopolitical management ranked fifth. Respondents pointed out that ongoing or emerging geopolitical tensions, such as the Russia-Ukraine war, Middle East conflicts, and U.S.-China relations are increasingly affecting global procurement, logistics, and business operations; among them, the U.S.-Iran conflict was listed as one of the major sources of risk that could disrupt the garment supply chain this year.

Compared to 2025, businesses are significantly more concerned about several challenges this year. Among them, rising production or procurement costs has jumped to the third largest challenge, while foreign protectionist trade policies and policy uncertainty continues to rank high. In addition, the importance of addressing the risk of forced labor has also increased significantly, rising four places from last year, indicating that businesses are paying increasing attention to supply chain compliance requirements.

Regarding the actual impact of U.S. tariff policies, more companies reported a negative impact on their financial performance compared to a year ago, not only increasing procurement costs but also reducing resources invested in sustainable development and product innovation. However, companies are also actively taking various countermeasures, including applying for tariff refunds, renegotiating supplier contract terms, and accelerating the diversification of procurement sources to mitigate the impact of tariffs.

USFIA President Julia Hughes stated that it is “not surprising” that trade policy and tariffs have become the most pressing issues for businesses this year. She pointed out that the biggest difference this year is that Brands and retailers are shifting their strategies for dealing with tariffs and trade uncertainty, with successful sourcing models moving from an emphasis on “diversification” to “consolidation.”

Qu stated that as tariff challenges will continue to impact corporate costs and supply stability in the foreseeable future, companies are committed to maintaining a diversified geographical sourcing layout integrating their sourcing networks and establishing closer, long-term partnerships with overseas strategic partners who possess sourcing flexibility and strong legal compliance capabilities.

Julia Hughes further pointed out that fashion brands and retailers generally believe that the Trump administration's tariff policies have had a direct and significant negative impact on their business operations, including impacts on financial performance, increased procurement costs, and reduced resources available for new products development and innovation. She stated that compared to the past focus on “avoiding” tariffs, companies are now more inclined to manage tariff costs through diversified strategies, with the primary measure being applying for carefree funds under the international emergency economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

Furthermore, the United States has continued to escalate its tariff measures recently. On July 15th, the office of the United States trade representative announced a 25% tariff on Footwear imported from Brazil; meanwhile, on July 20th, president Trump announced a 50% tariff on Canadian imports (including apparel and textiles), indicating that the United States protectionist trade policies are continuing to intensify, and the global fashion supply chain will continue to face greater uncertainty and adjustment pressure in the future.

Read the full article here

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.”

The Daily Star: India’s US tariff parity: Real threat or overblown fear for Bangladesh?

On a 17 February deadline, the Daily Store reports on the recent US-India trade deal in relation to Bangladesh.

Refayet Ullah Mirdha| February 17, 2026

The following is an excerpt....

India has been steadily expanding its presence in the US apparel market, and the numbers are striking.

According to the US Fashion Industry Association’s (USFIA) Fashion Industry Benchmarking study in 2025, cited on February 6 this year by Vogue Business, 77 percent of surveyed US fashion brands and retailers reported sourcing from India in 2025, with 60 percent planning to expand sourcing through 2027.

India captured 6.5 percent of US apparel imports by value in the first 11 months of 2025, up from 5.7 percent in 2022, according to US International Trade Commission data.

The country has become the third-largest supplier of men’s cotton knit tops to the US market, behind Vietnam and Bangladesh, with strong performance in women’s blouses, babywear, and home textiles.

India’s apparel shipments to the US reached approximately $5.33 billion in fiscal year 2024-2025, roughly a third of the country’s total apparel exports.

Read the full article here.

The Daily Star: US textile bodies question reciprocal trade pact clause

On a 24 July deadline, the Daily Store reports on USFIA's submitted industry association reciprocal trade pact clause letter:

Refayet Ullah Mirdha| July 24, 2026

The following is an excerpt....

However, in a recent letter to the United States Trade Representative (USTR), the National Council of Textile Organizations, American Apparel & Footwear Association, United States Fashion Industry Association and US Industrial and Narrow Fabrics Institute questioned the effectiveness of the mechanism.

“We note that USTR has proposed a tariff rate quota (TRQ) that we believe was modelled in part on what it previously negotiated with Bangladesh and Indonesia,” the leaders of the trade bodies wrote in the letter.

They said the textile clause was unlikely to create significant or immediate jobs or business opportunities in the United States and would not provide companies with the certainty needed for long-term investment and sourcing decisions.

Instead of relying on the ART, the bodies suggested that the USTR introduce a new textile mechanism under its Section 301 investigation. They also called on the USTR to focus on reopening closed textile factories in the United States, saying this would bring greater benefits to American clothing retailers.

Section 301 is a US trade investigation into imports made with forced labour. Following the investigation in April, the USTR proposed tariffs of 10 percent and 12.5 percent on exports from economies that fail to prove their products do not contain raw materials made with forced labour.

The trade bodies said any textile incentive should be linked to this new system, provided it is designed properly.

Mohammad Abdur Razzaque, chairman of Research and Policy Integration for Development (RAPID), said Bangladesh could face challenges if the Section 301 measures are enforced because its exports rely on raw materials imported from countries where forced labour may be used.

“The United States may be using the Section 301 investigation as a geopolitical tool. At this stage, there is no meaningful commercial benefit. It is a matter for further discussion,” Razzaque said, referring to the potential benefits of the textile mechanism in the ART.

Although the agreement was signed five months ago, the USTR has yet to explain how the textile clause will operate. Leaders of Bangladesh’s textile and garment sectors have repeatedly sought clarification, including during the visit of a USTR delegation and in meetings with officials at the US embassy in Dhaka.

Among all the provisions in the ART, the textile clause is seen as the only one that could directly benefit Bangladesh, although its impact depends on how the USTR implements it.

“We have asked the USTR and US embassy officials in Dhaka to explain the textile clause of the ART at several meetings, but we have yet to receive a response,” said Mahmud Hasan Khan, president of the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BGMEA).

“We are frustrated because we still do not have an explanation of the textile clause. Our buyers keep asking about it, and the delay is affecting our business decisions,” he added.

Read the full article here.

The Express Tribune: Pakistan's textile vision takes centre stage in Canada

On a 9 October deadline, the Express Tribune reports on the upcoming ATS 2025 Conference.

October 9, 2025

The following is an excerpt....

Julie Hughes, president of the US Fashion Industry Association, echoed the sentiment, stressing that in unpredictable times it was "more important than ever" for US and Canadian brands to meet key global suppliers.

Her association participated in discussions on how trade policy developments in the United States could impact sourcing decisions across North America, underscoring the interdependence of regional markets.

The programmes also included daily sessions led by trend forecasting agency Peclers Paris, which made its debut at the Canadian show. The agency offered insights into colour forecasting, brand strategy, and the evolving aesthetics of global fashion.

Read the full article here.

The Financial Express: American brands push for tax refunds as RMG exporters eye order surge

On a 23 February deadline, the Financial Express reports on the recent US Supreme Court Ruling on IEEPA-based tariffs.

Monira Munni| February 23, 2026

Two major American trade organisations representing textile and apparel brands, retailers and importers have demanded refunds of import taxes following a US Supreme Court ruling that struck down President Donald Trump's sweeping global tariffs.

The American Apparel and Footwear Association (AAFA) and the United States Fashion Industry Association (USFIA) welcomed the Supreme Court decision that invalidated the use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs and mandated refunds of hundreds of billions of dollars collected under the measure.

Meanwhile, garment exporters in Bangladesh expect increased work orders from US buyers, saying the court ruling could improve buyers' purchasing capacity once the import taxes they paid are refunded.
In a statement on Friday, AAFA President and CEO Steve Lamar said, "We are confident in Customs and Border Protection's (CBP's) ability to move quickly and provide clear guidance to American businesses on how to obtain refunds for tariffs that were unlawfully collected."

He added that the CBP's modernised electronic refund process should help expedite repayments and urged the administration to work with Congress and stakeholders before considering any future tariff action.

The AAFA represents apparel, footwear and other sewn-product companies and their suppliers competing in the global market, contributing more than $523 billion annually in US retail sales.

In a separate statement, USFIA President Julia Hughes termed the Supreme Court ruling a "tremendous victory" for American consumers and businesses, noting that fashion brands and retailers already paid some of the highest tariffs on apparel and footwear.
She said that this is a positive step forward to improve affordability and remove the economic uncertainty that has held back many companies from making new investments.

"We call on the Trump Administration to move quickly to develop an efficient and automatic refund process that returns tariff money to the businesses that have paid more than $133 billion in IEEPA tariffs," she added.
USFIA represents textile and apparel brands, retailers, importers, and wholesalers based in the United States and doing business globally.

Talking to the FE, Shovon Islam, managing director of Sparrow Group, said that after the court ruling, American buyers are likely to receive tax refunds, which will improve their financial situation.

Buyers had reduced order volumes following the tariff hikes as the added costs weakened consumer demand and forced them to adjust purchases within their existing budgets, he explained.

Islam added that a subsequent 15 per cent tariff announcement by Trump -- lower than the earlier 19 per cent applied to Bangladesh -- would not create major difficulties for buyers.

He also said Bangladesh could become a preferred destination for US buyers as orders shift from China.

According to US official data, Bangladesh earned $8.20 billion from garment exports to the US, posting 11.75 per cent year-on-year growth despite an overall decline in America's apparel imports.

View the full article here.

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.

Trump Denies Agreeing to Roll Back China Tariffs

By Tara Donaldson

United States trade relations continue to be a roller coaster ride for companies caught in the fray.

“I think it’s fair to say that the administration has gotten China’s attention via these measures,” Bill Jackson, Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Textiles, said speaking at the United States Fashion Industry Association’s (USFIA) Apparel Importers Trade and Transportation Conference in New York City Thursday. “But I believe that we are working towards the conclusion or resolution of that announced in the phase one agreement that folks are hoping to see very soon.”

Click here to read the full article on Sourcing Journal's website.

U.S. Fashion Industry Strongly Opposes New Tariffs

WASHINGTON, DC – This evening, President Trump announced that he would move forward with tariffs on an additional $200 billion worth of goods from China, including several fashion and consumer products.

The United States Fashion Industry Association (USFIA) strongly opposes this action. In addition to amounting to a tax on consumers, these tariffs will add considerable disruption to the supply chain; the fact that the tariffs will start at 10 percent now and will rise to 25 percent on January 1st creates additional chaos in the fashion industry’s supply chains, which will have a wide-ranging negative impact on consumers, companies, and jobs in the United States. We urge the Trump Administration to reconsider this decision, and we will continue to join with our members and other industry groups to fight back on this tax on consumers and businesses.

“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 USFIA President Julia K. Hughes. “These tariffs are a direct tax on the American consumer—and will affect consumers at all income levels, from the single parent struggling to make ends meet as they purchase back-to-school necessities for their kids, to the consumer of high-end fashion manufactured in the United States, and every American family in between.”

Read USFIA’s testimony on this list of tariffs: https://www.usfashionindustry.com/policy/global-trade/usfia-testifies-at-ustr-s-301-hearing-in-august-2018

Read USFIA’s statement and post-hearing testimony about this list of tariffs: https://www.usfashionindustry.com/press/press-releases/usfia-files-post-hearing-comments-on-third-list-of-china-301-tariffs

Read about national, multi-industry efforts to fight these tariffs: https://www.usfashionindustry.com/press/press-releases/u-s-fashion-industry-joins-national-campaign-to-fight-taxes-on-consumers

To speak with an expert from USFIA, contact USFIA VP of Communications Samantha Sault at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or 301-529-1451.

UNCTAD Global Trade Update: The Impact of Escalating Global Tariffs on Small and Vulnerable Economies

The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development published an April 2025 Global Trade Update, looking at the impact of “reciprocal tariffs” on small and vulnerable economies. The report finds that small and least developed countries represent a marginal share of the U.S. trade deficit – less than 0.1% each – but their export abilities will be disproportionately affected by the “reciprocal tariffs.”

The new tariffs would generate minimal additional revenue, even if import volumes remained unchanged. Thirty-six of our trading partners would generate less than 1% of current U.S. tariff revenues. We share the graphic below but note that it is a searchable table in the Global Trade Update.

Their conclusion?

This is a critical moment to consider exempting them from tariffs that offer little to no advantage for US trade policy while potentially causing serious economic harm abroad.

The report also includes a timeline of U.S. trade policy decisions.

most trading partners facing reciprocal tariffs would generate minimal additional revenue for the us

Understanding Import Tariffs Under WTO Law

The European Parliamentary Research Service published an At A Glance report on understanding import tariffs under WTO law. The report includes information about multilateral tariff negotiations under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the principle of setting tariff ceilings in WTO embers’ individual tariff schedules, and most-favored nation tariff concessions and exemptions. We share the table below showing examples of bound tariff and MFN tariff rates:

EU WTO tariff chart

Login

Tariffs

On a 6 July deadline, Yahoo Finance reports on the recent joint proposal from USFIA for a tariff credit program:

On a 1 September deadline, Supply Chain DIve reports on Cotopaxi's response to potential forced labor in its supply chain:

On a 29 July deadline, Supply Chain DIve reports on results from USFIA's 2026 Benchmarking Study.

On a 6 February deadline, Supply Chain DIve reports on ongoing US Trade policy uncertainty.

On a 23 July deadline, the Taiwan Textile Federation highlights USFIA's 2026 Benchmarking Study:

A View of the Home Front

On a 17 February deadline, the Daily Store reports on the recent US-India trade deal in relation to Bangladesh.

On a 24 July deadline, the Daily Store reports on USFIA's submitted industry association reciprocal trade pact clause letter:

On a 9 October deadline, the Express Tribune reports on the upcoming ATS 2025 Conference.

On a 23 February deadline, the Financial Express reports on the recent US Supreme Court Ruling on IEEPA-based tariffs.

About

News

The State of Tariffs

Events

Reports

2026 USFIA Fashion Industry Benchmarking Study

Higher tariffs continue to trigger ripple effects across supply chains.

Trends to watch:

2026 Sourcing Trends & Outlook

Partners

Subscribe to USFIA's Mailing List