From the Sector

INDA, the Association of the Nonwoven Fabrics Industry, announced the INDA International Trade Handbook, available in the INDA store and free to download for INDA members.

The handbook was written in partnership with the law firm Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg P.A. and represents several months of work compiling U.S. trade and customs policy and compliance information impacting the nonwovens sector. The handbook is a comprehensive, 240-page guide to help you and your business understand and comply with U.S. international trade law.  

Information included in the handbook features active tariffs on goods coming into the U.S. as of April 9, 2025, and tariff rates and classification codes for nonwoven roll goods and finished goods. You can preview the table of contents here.

The US is EU 5th most important trading partner, with total trade exceeding €9 billion.
American customers enjoy high end fashion items, but also technical textiles coming from Europe. Adding a 20% duty will hamper that relationship.
 
EURATEX Director General Dirk Vantyghem warned against this tariff escalation: "This decision is like going back in time; it will lead to a loose-loose relationship within the global textile industry. EURATEX stands for free but fair trade, based on common rules which are respected by all; the EU and the US should lead by example, and promote high quality and sustainable textile products.”

The National Council of Textile Organizations (NCTO), representing the full spectrum of U.S. textiles from fiber to finished sewn products, issued the following statement today from President and CEO Kim Glas regarding the Trump administration’s notices imposing 25 percent tariffs on imports from Mexico and Canada and additional 10 percent tariffs on China.

Statement by NCTO President and CEO Kim Glas:

“The newly imposed tariffs on imports from Mexico and Canada threaten a crucial textile and apparel coproduction chain with our two valued trade partners—one that sustains nearly 500,000 American jobs and a total of 1.6 million jobs across North America.  Destabilizing this production chain coupled with the de minimis loophole will only exacerbate migration and the fentanyl crisis.  We appreciate that President Trump has drawn much needed attention to these significant problems, but we believe there is another way that achieves critical objectives that grow U.S. jobs, stabilizes the Western Hemisphere, and closes dangerous tariff loopholes that are hurting us all.  We want to work with the President to find solutions that work to meet all these objectives.

“The U.S. textile industry ships $12.3 billion, or 53 percent, of its total global textile exports to Mexico and Canada and those component materials often come back as finished products to the United States under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). This coproduction chain under USMCA represents $20 billion in two-way trade and spurs U.S. investment in the region as well as at home.

“Equally as important, it serves as an alternative and counterweight to the China-led, Asia- based production platform that competes based on illegal tactics, such as the used of forced labor, subsidies and counterfeits, and has largely come to dominate global trade.

“For these reasons, we are extremely concerned that the imposition of penalty tariffs on imports from our critical USMCA partners will only serve to benefit China and other Asian countries and harm the U.S. textile industry, which has lost 27 plants in the past 20 months.

“Separately, we welcome President Trump’s plan to impose an additional10 percent penalty tariff on imports from China, bringing the total of new tariffs on China to 20 percent this year. In fact, we encourage even higher penalty tariffs on China and recommend that these penalty duties be specifically targeted to finished apparel and textile imports.

“In addition, we are calling on President Trump to close the de minimis loophole to all commercial shipments from China, Mexico and Canada, and more importantly from all countries. This loophole facilitates 4 million shipments a day to the United States that often hide illegal and unethically made products, unsafe goods and illicit fentanyl and other narcotics to our doorsteps.

“Raising tariffs on countries without closing this destructive loophole will only serve to drive more shipments to the duty-free de minimis loophole. Incentivizing greater use of de minimis will further harm U.S. manufacturers and exacerbate the fentanyl crisis, because this loophole will continue to provide a workaround for importers of consumer products and drug cartels alike who are seeking to avoid punitive trade enforcement.”

“We look forward to continuing to work with the Trump administration on these important trade policies that have widespread implications for the U.S. textile industry and those of our free trade partners. This is a pivotal moment for the domestic textile industry, and we believe the right policies will preserve and bolster this vital manufacturing base and spur more job creation and investment.”

National Council of Textile Organizations (NCTO) President and CEO Kim Glas issued a statement commending U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) notice of proposed rulemaking aimed at curtailing de minimis shipments that are harming the U.S. manufacturing base and U.S. consumers.

Statement by NCTO President and CEO Kim Glas (17 January):
“We welcome CBP’s announced notice of proposed rulemaking exempting de minimis tariff-free benefits on imports ‘specified as trade and national security actions.’ This rulemaking represents a step forward in minimizing the impact of this disastrous loophole in U.S. trade law that has facilitated a surge of duty-free imports that are normally subject to penalty tariffs under various U.S. trade remedy statutes. Failure to collect these duties has exacerbated the flow of goods found to be in violation of U.S. trade laws that are costing American jobs and damaging our manufacturing sector.

“With this rulemaking, CBP and the administration seek to eliminate de minimis treatment for all imported products subject to U.S. trade remedies and penalties, including the current Section 301 tariffs on China. This is an important and much overdue reform.”

CBP states that the number of shipments over the past 10 years entering the United States claiming the de minimis administrative exemption has increased by more than 600%--from approximately 139 million a year in Fiscal Year 2015, to over one billion a year in FY 2023. During FY 2024, de minimis shipments rose once again to over 1.36 billion, according to CBP. The agency notes that the exponential increase ‘has created challenges for CBP’s effective enforcement of U.S. trade laws, health and safety requirements, intellectual property rights, and consumer protection rules.’     

“We have long called on the administration to use its existing authorities to mitigate the damage to our industry created by de minimis, which has functioned as a massive tariff loophole for low-cost, subsidized, and unethical Chinese imports and undermined the competitiveness of the U.S. textile industry—a key contributor to the workforce and the U.S. economy.

“The U.S. textile industry, a strategic supplier of goods to the U.S. military and PPE, is experiencing severe demand destruction fueled by 4 million de minimis shipments a day flooding our market with cheap, often illegal imports because of this outdated trade provision that rewards Chinese e-commerce platforms, importers and tariff cheaters with an open door to the U.S. market.

“The administration’s decision to initiate the rulemaking process in its final days is a significant and meaningful action for our domestic industry and that of other manufacturing sectors. We urge CBP to expedite the rulemaking process to the fullest extent possible and appreciate the agency’s strong engagement with our industry.

“Further, we strongly urge the incoming Trump administration to not only endorse this proposed rulemaking but to expeditiously implement a comprehensive solution to the growing de minimis problem beyond the action announced today. Noting the magnitude of the problem, and the inability of CBP to effectively enforce our trade laws with the flood of de minimis packages coming in daily, we are calling on President-elect Donald Trump to take immediate steps to end de minimis by executive order. We are also pressing Congress to work together with the new administration on a permanent and comprehensive solution to immediately close this disastrous loophole once and for all.

“We are strongly committed to working with CBP on the rulemaking process as well as the Trump administration and both sides of the aisle in Congress to get this done immediately to help provide relief to this most impacted industry and others. “

• Growing geographic separation between cotton production and textile manufacturing since the 1990s

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) released a comprehensive study about Chinese cotton in August 2022. The authors, Fred Gale and Eric Davis, concentrate on textiles, imports and Xinjiang.

China is the world’s largest textile manufacturer and the largest cotton consumer, but changes in China’s economy are reshaping the geography of its cotton-textile sector. Nearly all of China’s cotton is produced in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR), also known more simply as Xinjiang.

Their study reviewed the regional patterns of China’s cotton textile industry development and identified growing geographic separation between cotton production and textile manufacturing since the 1990s using data from Chinese sources. The study investigated spatial patterns of demand for imported cotton by analyzing lists of Chinese companies applying for a share of the import quota from 2016 to 2022. Multiple regression analysis was used to control for potentially confounding influences when investigating whether companies in coastal provinces were more likely to use imported cotton than similarly sized companies in other regions.

Textile manufacturers — the main consumers of cotton — are concentrated in coastal and central regions where the share of China’s cotton production fell from over 50 percent to 10 percent during 2011–21. These geographic changes are a factor influencing global trade in cotton and textiles. Additionally, the use of forced labor in Xinjiang attracted more attention to the industry, prompting the United States and other countries to ban products produced in the region.

This study reviews the economic, geographic, and policy factors reshaping the industry and influencing the global trade of cotton and textile products. The study also examines data on Chinese companies applying for a share of China’s cotton import quota to gain insight about the demand for imported cotton.

China became the world’s largest producer, consumer, and importer of cotton soon after joining the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001. Despite adopting a tariff-rate quota (TRQ) system for cotton imports and issuing supplemental quotas in most years, the large number of cotton goods manufacturers that request shares of the quota suggests demand for imported cotton exceeds  the quota.

While the TRQ was intended to protect China’s cotton farmers, many farmers abandoned the labor-intensive crop as wages rose rapidly in many other industries and other crops produced higher returns. In response, officials encouraged cotton production in the relatively remote region of Xinjiang to prevent China from becoming reliant on imported cotton. Xinjiang growers receive a subsidy payment for cotton, and subsidies for machinery and seeds. A transportation subsidy induces textile manufacturers in eastern and central regions to purchase cotton from Xinjiang, which is about 2,200 to 2,900 miles from most of the country’s textile manufacturers. Financial support and other incentives encourage manufacturers to shift operations to Xinjiang.

Textile manufacturers in China are highly interested in importing cotton due to its lower price and quality. China imports about 20 percent of its cotton, and the United States is a chief exporter of cotton to China. While imported cotton is used in all provinces, manufacturers near the eastern seaboard show a greater propensity for imports. Nevertheless, in all regions, domestic cotton has the largest share of mill use.

Between 2016 and 2022, 1,581 companies applied for a share of the TRQ, and 265 companies applied in all 7 years. Most of these companies also applied for supplemental quotas issued with slightly higher tariffs. This large number of applicants suggests that imports could be even greater if quotas did not limit them. The operation of the quota application process is not public information, but data submitted by applicants suggests access to imported cotton is uneven. About 14 percent of applicants said imported cotton comprised over half of the cotton they used. Another 20 percent of companies requesting import quota did not use any imported cotton, suggesting that many applicants are unable to import. Textile manufacturers coped with limits on cotton imports by increasing their use of synthetic, chemical-based fibers or by importing cotton yarn. From 2000 to 2020, China’s yarn imports doubled from under 1 million metric tons to around 2 million metric tons with Vietnam supplying about 45 percent of that total in 2020.

The number of textile manufacturers in Xinjiang applying for a share of the cotton import quota rose from 37 to 68 between 2016 and 2022. However, imports constituted less than 2 percent of  the cotton Xinjiang applicants reported using—and 66 percent of them reported using no imported cotton—suggesting that applications from Xinjiang textile companies were often denied.
Analysis found that applicants in coastal provinces used more imported cotton than similarly sized applicants in other regions. Each location of a multi-plant company must apply separately for tariff-rate quotas. Textile manufacturers in Xinjiang that requested a share of the import quota included branches of some of China’s largest textile companies, but the analysis found that Xinjiang applicants used less imported cotton than similar manufacturing plants located in other regions. China’s role as a cotton importer appears to have peaked, while other countries are increasing their share of imports.

USDA baseline projections suggest that by 2030 Vietnam, Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh, and Turkey will together account for 47 percent of the world’s cotton imports while China will only account for 24 percent. The study cam be downloaded from the USDA website.

Textile Groups Urge U.S. to Maintain Penalty Tariffs on Finished Products

The Biden administration should maintain Section 301 penalty tariffs on finished textiles and apparel or risk reversing once-in-a-lifetime nearshoring trends and undermining critical investments and jobs in the U.S. and Western Hemisphere, three key American textile manufacturing groups said today.

In a formal submission to the U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) office, which is conducting a four-year statutory review of the tariffs, the associations expressed strong support for the continuation of penalty tariffs on imports from China and warned of the consequences associated with removing the tariffs.

“A key aspect of [the Biden administration’s trade] policy is the need to maintain Section 301 tariffs, absent substantive improvements in China’s pervasive, predatory trade practices,” the groups said. Lifting the tariffs “would also do nothing to achieve the administration’s goal of easing inflationary pressures, as apparel prices out of China continue to hit rock bottom even with the Section 301 tariffs,” they noted.

The submission was filed by the National Council of Textile Organizations (NCTO) and the Narrow Fabrics Institute (NFI) and Industrial Fabrics Institute (USIFI) – both divisions of the Advanced Textiles Association (ATA).  The associations represent the entirety of the U.S. textile production chain.

“For decades, China’s illegal actions have undermined virtually every domestic manufacturing sector and contributed to the direct loss of millions of U.S. jobs. These devastating state-sponsored practices include intellectual property theft as well as pervasive state-ownership of manufacturing, industrial subsidies, and abhorrent labor and human rights abuses in the Xinjiang region,” they noted. “Cancelling these tariffs would create further unhealthy dependence on Chinese supply chains and embolden future systematic trade abuses as bad actors know that the U.S. will not hold them accountable.”

The tariffs were imposed on China beginning in 2018 in response to China’s continuing IP and related trade violations. China has since failed to comply with an agreement it reached with the United States in 2020.