Donald Trump has won the US presidential election, and this victory will certainly affect trade and business in the country, including the fashion industry. Troup is known for his writings, America First; and his policies are likely to focus more on domestic production, restructuring tariffs, taxes and trade agreements. These changes will affect fashion brands that depend on international supply chains, but will also change consumer prices, affordability and industry practices. Let’s take a closer look at what may lie ahead for USA fashion industry, given Donald’s trade policies Trump and also have a speculative view of how things might have looked under the Kamala Harris administration.
During the campaign, Trump suspended the 2024 US election
Trump’s “America First” policy and its impact on fashion
Donald Trump’s administration has always shown a strong interest in transforming trade policy in favor of American products. During his first speech as America’s president, his “America First” campaign aimed to strengthen domestic manufacturers and minimize the country’s dependence on foreign goods in general, as is the case with most fashion brands. Tariffs, the main element of his trade policy, directly affected the cost and supply of raw materials and manufactured goods for fashion brands in the United States. These tariffs often covered basic materials such as textiles, clothing and accessories that are usually sourced from Asia, especially China.
LIVE | US President-elect Trump FULL Victory Speech | “We created history” | Florida is LIVE
The intent of this policy was to bring more fashion manufacturing jobs back to the US. Reality, however, showed the opposite. While the tariffs are expected to boost domestic production, most brands have been unable to find large manufacturing capacity for their ready-to-wear garments due to infrastructure challenges and the high cost of manufacturing clothing in the US. As a result, most brands have faced an increase in the cost of products that they either pass on to their consumers or absorb at their own expense.
This has reduced their pricing structures or compromised the range and quality of materials accepted. Fast fashion brands have been unable to maintain their low-cost appeal due to rising import costs. This meant that both luxury and affordable brands suffered financial losses, but some smaller brands died due to an inability to cover higher production costs.
Donald Trump
The goal was to create more fashion manufacturing jobs in the US. But everything turned out to be too difficult for this reason alone. Although the aim was to make domestic production more attractive, high cost factors and the country’s lack of such infrastructure for major apparel manufacturers made the pivot unattractive for most brands back home without increasing overall costs. As a consequence, production became more expensive for them, and most of these brands either passed this on to their customers or absorbed it themselves in the form of lower profit margins.
Therefore, this meant that luxury brands of fashion and high-end retailers had to reduce their pricing structures or reduce the volume and grade of material they use. In contrast, fast fashion brands have suffered a loss of value for money due to the rising cost of imports. Eventually the new production costs put financial stress on both luxury and economy brands, causing some smaller brands to eventually close.
Donald Trump and Melania Trump
Tariffs and taxes on imports: Ambiguous
Under Trump, the United States has imposed tariffs on goods from several countries, particularly China, which accounts for a large share of the raw materials and finished goods used by American fashion brands. Tariffs were imposed on billions of dollars worth of Chinese goods, including a variety of textiles, clothing and accessories.
For some of these companies, the tariffs have increased the cost of raw materials many times over, killing profits or forcing brands to raise prices for consumers. Major brands – Nike and Levi’s – have diversified their production base in different countries. They easily arranged to move their production units to other geographical locations such as Vietnam or Mexico. Smaller brands had a harder time. Many have had to look for other places to manufacture their products, which is an expensive and time-consuming process involving renegotiating contracts, finding new suppliers, and adapting to new production conditions.
The changes made clothing and accessories more expensive for consumers, especially for brands that had no choice but to pass those extra costs down. This made it an incredibly difficult landscape for the US. the fashion market in terms of brands and consumers trying to adapt to higher prices for fashion items.
Donald Trump will probably become the President of the United States again.
Made in the USA, a distant dream?
The textile and apparel infrastructure in the manufacturing sectors declined over time as such production was outsourced because it was cheaper elsewhere. However, with the new force towards domestic production, it may not be able to adequately respond to a number of infrastructural needs, skilled labor, as well as power reasons, especially given the sensitivity of the clothing markets to prices, paying high prices for clothing, as far as it is possible. Also, the cost of clothing and apparel made in America would be much more expensive compared to other countries where labor and manufacturing overhead were relatively lower.
Brands that tried to produce domestically often found it difficult to compete with the availability of imported goods. For example, it can cost two to three times more to produce denim in the US than in countries like Bangladesh or China. As a result, only high-end or niche brands have been able to adopt the Made in USA label without losing their competitive advantage.
Donald Trump
How the fashion industry has adapted
The fashion industry has been looking for creative changes to adapt to the new retail landscape. Many brands have begun looking to diversify their supply chains, reducing their reliance on China and shifting production to countries with favorable trade agreements, such as Vietnam, Indonesia and India. This trend continues to grow as more and more brands look for ways to avoid tariffs and lower production costs.
Some companies have begun to use a drop-in service strategy, moving their operations closer to the United States in places like Mexico or through Central America. The nearshoring option allows brands to maintain shorter supply lines than from Asia; however, this means encountering various logistical hurdles and often slightly higher manufacturing costs from Asia. Additionally, many brands are investing in sustainable practices and using materials that appeal to their growing consumer base that finds value in environmental responsibility, while using this shift as an opportunity to market their services as potentially more expensive.
Donald Trump
The pros and cons of Trump’s policies on the fashion industry
Advantages
Expanding local brands: Trump’s policies focus on producing more locally produced goods, thus favoring those firms that already used more local products or could now relocate their production.
Less Vulnerability in the Supply Chain: In the past, the imposition of tariffs on products from China has forced firms to diversify their supply chains so that any such disruptions do not create the same type of problems for them in the future.
Disadvantages
Increase in cost of production: If Trump follows through on his old plan, import prices will rise and things may become unaffordable for consumers.
Economic uncertainty: Under the Trump administration, constant changes in trade policy have created uncertainty, making long-term planning and budgeting difficult for many companies.
Reduced market growth: Higher prices due to tariffs will limit consumer purchasing power, especially for fast fashion brands that focus on low-cost goods.
How a Kamala Harris Presidency Could Affect the Fashion Trade
Had Kamala Harris If Donald Trump had become president, the fashion business could have taken a different course. Harris has often advocated free trade policies and economic policies focused on inclusiveness and sustainability. Her administration could take a cooperative approach with countries like China in multilateral trade agreements as well. This would mean a lot of stability for the industry.
Harris’ approach to the fashion trade would likely emphasize sustainable practices, and her administration could introduce incentives for brands that prioritize ethical labor practices and environmental responsibility. For example, instead of tariffs, Harris could encourage companies to switch to sustainable fabrics and production methods with tax credits or grants. This could bring both economic and environmental benefits by attracting a growing consumer base that appreciates environmentally conscious practices.
Moreover, as a woman of color and the daughter of immigrants, Harris could promote closer relations with Asian countries, including India, where much of the textile industry takes place. This would facilitate smoother trade relations and help preserve the affordability of fashion imports.
