US apparel trade bodies have welcomed the launch
of a new Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) but say there should be a tariff
negotiation component, particularly for goods such as clothing and footwear.
US President Joe Biden launched the Indo-Pacific
Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) in Tokyo, Japan, earlier this week
with a dozen initial partners: Australia, Brunei, India, Indonesia, Japan,
Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand,
and Vietnam. Together, the partners represent 40% of world GDP.
The White House says the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity will
strengthen US ties in the region to “define the coming decades for
technological innovation and the global economy.”
Specifically, the framework will focus on four key pillars:
IPEF has received support from US apparel trade bodies, with both the United
States Fashion Industry Association (USFIA) and the American Apparel and
Footwear Association (AAFA) submitting comments with the United States Trade
Representative (USTR) about the Administration’s negotiating objectives in
advance of this week’s launch.
Apparel sector reaction to The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework
for Prosperity
Julia Hughes, USFIA president, told Just Style the key points are that the
organisation supports more engagement with the Indo-Pacific countries and
supports a fresh approach to the region.
“We
emphasise that we believe that there should be a tariff negotiation component
to the Framework, especially for products like apparel and footwear that are
still burdened with high tariffs,” she said, adding it also supports the
development of joint policies to eliminate forced labour in supply chains.
USFIA says in its comments to USTR: “USFIA would be remiss if we did not
convey that import taxes such as tariffs are the primary obstacle to the
creation of fair and resilient supply chains in the region. Any agreement that
fails to lower tariffs on clothing will represent a missed opportunity to create
a more equitable trading system.”
Meanwhile, the AAFA’s senior vice president of policy, Nate Herman, told
Just Style: “The proposed IPEF is a small first step. It offers the potential
to reengage with our allies in that part of the world. At the same time, it
shows the danger of the US not fully executing important trade agreements.
Partial engagement and half measures are not the path to long-term success.”
In its own comments to USTR, the AAFA said its members welcome the
development of a new IPEF but noted for trade agreements to work well and
benefit all the parties, they must be comprehensive and reciprocal.
“We understand the Biden Administration’s stated position that the framework
will not include market access through tariff liberalisations, however, lower
tariffs benefit US stakeholders. For instance, 98% of apparel, footwear, and
related goods sold in the United States today are imported. Yet the US still
maintains high duties on these products – some of the highest we levy on any
products – adversely affecting US consumers who ultimately pay those duties in
the form of higher prices. When trade agreements reduce those duties, US
consumers benefit, particularly those at the lowest end of the income scale.
“Lower US duties also enable investment in US job creation and investment in
US innovation in the US global value chains that fuel our industry. At the
same, we note there are sensitive subsectors in our industry – such as certain
footwear lines where there is domestic production – that may require separate
handling as a result of those sensitivities.
“Our strong recommendation is that any lengthy tariff phase-outs that
reflect those sensitivities be tailored so they affect just those products, and
not impose border taxes unnecessarily on products that do not require special
treatment.”
AAFA also recommends the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity
(IPEF) incorporates less restrictive rules of origin requirements if they are
to be fully utilised.
“Restrictive rules of origin for apparel and footwear have usually meant
that the economic and political assumptions that governed the industry during
the negotiations dictate the terms of trade in perpetuity. Furthermore, US
trade agreements should be aligned and be able to connect with each other to
enable US apparel and footwear companies more efficiently utilise supply chains
and more effectively utilise the trade agreement. A small example is the
provision in the Central America-Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreement
(CAFTA-DR) that enables the use of Mexican fabrics. This provision should be
expanded to include all materials and be replicated to include all US trade
agreements.
“Echoing our comments on duties, we recognise that sensitive product lines
may require special treatment. Again, our strong recommendation is that any
restrictive rules be focused just on those sensitive lines so that other
products are not afflicted by more burdensome rules.”
By Just Style