In the wake of US Vice President Kamala Harris’s concession speech, dressed in a purple Tory Burch pantsuit, Stephen Lamar, president and CEO of the American Apparel & Footwear Association, was already fielding calls from industry leaders concerned about the impact of a possible second Trump presidency on the apparel sector.
Lamar’s primary worry? The potential for higher tariffs under another Trump administration, which could drive up costs for US brands and retailers. Apparel manufacturers are already bracing for the possibility of increased import taxes, which would raise the price of goods for consumers.
Meanwhile, in Europe, Goldman Sachs economists revised their growth projections for 2025, downgrading them to just 0.8% from 1.1%. The economists cited the potential effects of Trump’s tariffs, warning that if Trump follows through on his promise of additional duties, further cuts to growth forecasts could follow.
As the apparel industry looks for ways to navigate these potential changes, California Governor Gavin Newsom called for a special legislative session to protect the state’s values and rights in the face of an incoming Trump administration. Newsom’s response raised expectations that other blue states may follow suit, introducing new state-level regulations on issues such as manufacturing, distribution, and sustainability.
However, industry experts caution that such a patchwork of state laws could create significant challenges for apparel companies. Rachel Kibbe, founder of Circular Services Group, warns that differing regulations across states would only confuse consumers and make compliance difficult for companies.
Though Trump has been unpredictable in the past, his promises to implement stricter immigration policies have raised particular concern for the apparel sector. The fashion industry relies heavily on low-wage labor, especially undocumented workers, across many parts of the supply chain. If these workers were deported, it would drive up labor costs and, consequently, apparel prices.
The industry is still reeling from the tariffs Trump imposed during his first term, which the Biden administration largely maintained. These tariffs have significantly raised prices on many goods, including socks and sneakers, as brands are forced to pay tariffs on raw materials and finished products.
Today, about 98% of clothing and footwear sold in the US is made overseas, primarily in countries like China, Vietnam, and Portugal. Lamar argues that despite calls for “onshoring” production, there simply isn’t enough infrastructure or skilled labor to bring manufacturing back to the US.
Despite these challenges, Lamar is shifting his focus to working with lawmakers to address the pressing issues facing the industry, particularly in dealing with counterfeit goods. Lamar sees an opportunity in Trump’s past criticisms of online retail giants like Amazon and is looking at the Phase One trade agreement with China as a possible tool to curb the spread of counterfeit goods through third-party platforms.
There are also calls for changes to the de minimis rule, which allows small imports worth less than $800 to bypass tariffs. This rule has contributed to the rise of ultra-fast fashion in the US, and some advocates hope the Trump administration’s stance on Chinese imports will lead to reform.
One piece of legislation gaining traction is the Americas Act, which has bipartisan support. The act seeks to foster trade within the Western Hemisphere, close loopholes like the de minimis rule, and provide incentives for apparel recycling, including $14 billion in loans and grants for infrastructure updates.
Though the road ahead is uncertain, Kibbe remains cautiously optimistic about the potential for positive change, particularly in encouraging trade reforms and reducing the reliance on tariffs. “I’m hopeful that lawmakers will recognize that tariffs won’t solve immigration issues,” she says.
Related topics:
