US fashion manufacturing equipment suppliers can see opportunities for reshoring apparel and fabric production to the US but there are also concerns about the major tariff barriers being erected by President Donald Trump.

US-based fashion manufacturers explored the viability of re-establishing manufacturing in the US in Austin, Texas at the same time as US President Donald Trump announced so-called ‘reciprocal’ tariffs linked to trade deficits with global trading partners.

During the Sewn Products Equipment & Suppliers of the Americas (SPESA) Advancements in Manufacturing Technologies Conference on 2-3 April in Austin, Texas, industry manufacturing veteran Tony Anzovino, director of product development and sourcing for Arkansas-based retailer Dillard’s Inc, asked rhetorically: “Can manufacturing come back to the US? Are tariffs going to help that?”

He continued: “Possibly” as “there is a knowledge gap, a technology gap that occurs. It’s really difficult to move Washington and state legislatures. It’s really difficult to bring an industry back that has been labour-intensive…There’s a lot of cash involved.” 

Are US tariffs a concern or an opportunity?

Anzovino, whose resume boasts decades of experience superintending factory production for Abercrombie & Fitch and Haggar Clothing, told SPESA president Michael McDonald during a fireside chat: “I’m absolutely certain a lot of people in the industry did not sleep well last night.”

He added: “I slept fine. We’ve seen these cycles before. This is just another bump in the road.” 

Georgia-based AI-software company Aptean senior solutions architect Justin Hershoran and regional account director Anthony Mele were more optimistic. Outfitted patriotically in red-white-and-blue shirts emblazoned with the American flag, the duo emphasised areas in the value-chain where US technology might provide a comparative advantage for a reshored manufacturing industry. 

At first glance, the $15-$20 hourly labour costs in the US pose a daunting barrier to domestic production when compared with the $1-an-hour wage paid to stitchers and other textile workers in established industry outsourcing centres such as Vietnam and Bangladesh.

The Aptean team noted that labour accounts for just 30% of the manufacturing cost of a garment, and so it is possible to shave costs across the manufacturing process to create more cost competitiveness with these poorer countries.  

Moreover, their research shows 78% of US shoppers would prefer to buy products made in the US, which has an annual GDP of $82,769 per head, rather than from poorer exporting countries such as Vietnam, Cambodia and Bangladesh, whose GDPs per head are just $4,282, $2,429, and $2,551 respectively. 

While the survey shows that high prices are the chief deterrent to 62% of Americans purchasing home-grown clothing, Americans are nonetheless willing to pay a 10% premium. 

Hershoran and Mele argue that a combination of AI-aided software operating more efficient machines, coupled with a full panoply of labour-development strategies can make up a lot of ground. Increasing labour efficiency, they argue, can be achieved with training programmes, incentive plans, and an emphasis on producing higher-quality goods. 

Lack of US education for garment manufacturing

Ideally, the public sector would play a key role in developing skilled workers. Hershoran, a senior solutions architect at Aptean, wishes the US emulated educational practices adopted by Latin American countries: “We don’t have trained labour in this country,” he said. “We don’t have schools teaching people how to produce. We don’t have anything at the college level teaching manufacturing of soft goods.”   

Today, the US fashion and textile industry employs roughly 500,000 workers, a precipitous drop from the 3.8m workers employed up and down the supply chain in 1975. Yet, the US remains the world’s number-one fashion market, reports industry-tracker UniformMarket, with apparel revenue of $365.70bn outstripping the far more populous countries of China ($313.82bn billion) and India ($101.39bn).

It was against this background that SPESA assembled the industry in Austin, Texas with the dual mission of grappling with “advancements in manufacturing technologies” and showcasing central Texas’ Austin-San Antonio corridor’s emergence as a regional fashion hub. 

Questions being asked during the event’s panels included: Whether artificial intelligence (AI) means the inevitable loss of more jobs in the US and the wider Americas? Could advances in AI be harnessed to drive productivity and benefit American entrepreneurs? Is reshoring manufacturing and production in the fashion industry possible and is it actually occurring? How do technological innovations like 3D printing effect on-demand production, e-commerce and fast fashion? Could technology and worker training enable higher-wage US manufacturing to compete with the top producers among low-wage countries, such as China, Vietnam, Bangladesh and India? 

Rebekah Hoffer of Stitch Texas, an Austin division of Los Angeles-based Lefty Production Co, an apparel design, development and manufacturing company, provided a first-person account of hurdles her firm encounters: “We are focused primarily on development. And when development is complete, most of my clients come in wanting to produce domestically. But they leave producing overseas. And the main reason is the cost of labour and the cost of materials.”  

While these challenges and trends are not new, President Trump’s imposition of sweeping, across-the-board tariffs on US trading partners — which rocked Wall Street, triggered panic-selling by shareholders, and hurtled worldwide stock-market indexes into freefall — added a layer of complexity to the proceedings. 

Using technology, AI to make US nearshoring more cost-effective

It also highlighted the potential relevance of technology as tariffs force a reassessment of reshoring. Aptean has developed an array of software tools ranging from worker-training programmes to computer software that tracks a worker’s activity. Ostensibly, the software programme enables the employer to construct rewards and incentive programmes.  

“Goodwill Industries took advantage of our software and increased revenue 24%,” said Mele. “Each team’s efficiency went up,” he added. “Our software provided quality control.”  

The versatility of artificial intelligence was on display on yet another SPESA panel. Geoff Taylor, president of New York and Los Angeles-based AI-software developer TUKAweb/Tukatech, demonstrated AI technology that not only aids in the design and manufacturing process but radically transforms marketing and sales. 

In the design process, AI software is capable of tailoring bespoke made-to-measure clothing with a virtual photo shoot. The 3D technology seamlessly fits out and dresses photorealistic models – or avatars – in the designer’s newest style with just a few clicks of a button.  

Using an overhead screen, Taylor demonstrated a lifelike female avatar assuming a variety of poses while modelling a dress. The designer can swiftly change the avatar’s hairstyles, shapes and sizes, facial expressions and features, and even race and ethnicity: “This is really great, especially for e-commerce,” Taylor remarked. 

Thanks to AI, a designer will no longer be required to manufacture a physical prototype of, say, 100 bike jerseys, hire lives models and “wait for someone to buy one,” Taylor said. If an item fails to catch on, the designer isn’t stuck with a worthless batch of rejected prototypes. 

For those Luddites and others resisting AI, admonishes Taylor, “the biggest risk is staying on the sideline. They’re not going to be competitive.”  

By Just Style