U.S. and Xinjiang Cotton Are Locked in a Trade War of Their Own
Far from 'America First,' U.S. cotton appears to be on a losing streak—at least, as far as the country's foremost trade nemesis is concerned.
Writing in a report late last month, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Service, or FAS, said that U.S. cotton exports to China plummeted by 73 percent in the seven months between August 2024 and February 2025, collapsing America's previous 29.6 percent market share to just 17.1 percent.
More from Sourcing Journal
Temu Stops Direct-from-China Shipments to U.S. Consumers
SHIPS for America Act Reintroduced to Reinvigorate US Shipbuilding
Research Draws 'Probable' Links Between Shein and Xinjiang Textile Production
While anti-American sentiment amid fraying trade relations is one reason for the dramatic decline, a bigger one, according to the FAS, is the 'excellent weather' that resulted in bumper harvests in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, which contributed 92.3 percent of China's cotton this marketing year. Despite U.S. restrictions on products of Xinjiang origin through the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, along with mounting global antipathy toward the same because of concerns over a Muslim crackdown, the region's cotton saw a 10.8 percent increase in production and an almost 100 percent trade uptake by the end of March.
And China, if anything, only appears to be doubling down on the province, with production outside Xinjiang expected to fall further 'due to limited subsidies, lower cotton prices, reduced quality, higher input costs and competition from alternative crops,' the FAS wrote. In December, the China Cotton Association raised its estimate for Xinjiang's cotton production to 6.1 million metric tons, reflecting a 10.8 percent year-on-year increase that will account for almost 95 percent of the national output by this time next year. Industry contacts similarly expect ginned cotton volumes in the region to increase from the 6.39 million metric tons yielded this past marketing year, itself an 18.9 percent uptick from the year before.
'In contrast, the Yangtze and Yellow River regions show declines due to limited mechanization, higher labor costs and lack of price support policies, with the National Monitoring System reporting the steepest drop in these regions,' the report said. 'Several industry sources did share that the high concentration of cotton production in Xinjiang poses a challenge for industrial development and that to mitigate the risks, there should be efforts to gradually restore and maintain cotton production in inland areas. However, the latest surveys do not show any sign of the restoration.'
There's also the fact that China continues to subsidize the relocation of yarn and textile manufacturers from other regions of the country to Xinjiang. The FAS cited a local news article that said that Xinjiang's spinning capacity reached 29.1 million spindles with 62,400 looms in operation, both of them historic numbers. Spinning capacity is expected to increase further as the Xinjiang government plans to spin 45 to 50 percent of Xinjiang cotton by 2028, 'with the goal of developing Xinjiang into a global textile hub,' the FAS added.
Coupled with a recent Xinjiang Cotton Industry Development Leadership Group meeting that emphasized accelerating the construction of the China Cotton and Cotton Yarn Trading Center, developing a 'Xinjiang Cotton' public brand certification system and broadening export markets in Southeast Asia, Central Asia and Eastern Europe under the Belt and Road Initiative, Xinjiang will maintain its 'dominant position' in China's cotton supply, potentially reducing its need to import during the 2024-2025 marketing year, while 'developing more export-oriented textile manufacturing to offset challenges in traditional markets like the United States,' the FAS said.
Another impediment for U.S. cotton is growing competition from Australia and Brazil, which are producing fibers that Chinese spinners consider not only to be of comparable or improving quality but also competitively priced. Looking ahead, the report said, Australia and Brazil are expected to maintain their position as the primary cotton suppliers to the Chinese market for the remainder of the 2024-2025 marketing year, especially to meet the demands of textile orders from countries looking to shun Xinjiang cotton, whether due to UFLPA compliance or otherwise.
But also not helping are the Trump administration's trade provocations. The report predicted that Beijing's imposition of 140 percent tariffs on U.S. cotton will 'all but stop further imports from the United States.' Statistics from bonded zones at Chinese ports indicate that domestic importers have been actively liquidating U.S. cotton stocks in recent months—and replacing them with their Brazilian counterparts—to sidestep tariffs.
That U.S. tariffs of 145 percent, plus the closure of the so-called de minimis 'loophole,' will also reduce Chinese textile exports of non-Xinjiang textiles and finished apparel to the United States might provide some cold comfort. The hit isn't unsubstantial: In 2024, textile exports to the United States accounted for 10.7 percent of China's total textile exports, valued at $14.8 billion, and 22.7 percent of China's total apparel exports, or $36.1 billion's worth. And while large-scale textile and apparel companies in China have been transferring some production to Southeast Asia, smaller firms with limited resources may 'struggle to adapt,' the FAS said.
Without the easing of tensions, however, the battle between U.S. and Xinjiang cotton will only intensify, perhaps even spill into third-country markets as Chinese garment manufacturers shift toward exporting to non-U.S. markets due to the tariff turmoil, said Sheng Lu, professor of fashion and apparel studies at the University of Delaware.
'Notably, while the UFLPA has effectively driven most Chinese cotton out of the U.S. market, China has 'shielded' Xinjiang cotton through increased subsidies and recent retaliatory tariffs on U.S. cotton,' he said. 'We can expect heightened competition and growing tensions between U.S. cotton and Xinjiang cotton, along with a more turbulent global cotton market shaped by geopolitics and trade policy.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
European consumer groups accuse Shein of using 'dark patterns'
Online fast fashion retailer Shein is facing a complaint lodged by the European Consumer Organisation (BEUC) and its 25 member groups from 21 countries. The complaint, submitted to the European Commission (EC) and consumer protection authorities across Europe, accuses Shein of employing manipulative tactics known as "dark patterns". These strategies allegedly coerce customers into making unintended purchases, exacerbating both the environmental harm and societal issues inherent in the fast fashion sector. The accusation is grounded in recent research conducted by BEUC's members throughout Europe, which highlights how such illicit practices not only lead to involuntary consumer expenditure but also perpetuate the distribution of potentially hazardous clothing items within Europe. The tactics undermine consumer efforts to support a more sustainable and environmentally conscious economy. In February 2025, the EC initiated its own investigation into Shein's adherence to EU consumer law. By May, it had called on Shein to align with EU consumer regulations and cease employing the "dark patterns". The complaint urges the EC and consumer protection authorities to demand that Shein cease using deceptive methods such as "confirm-shaming" [pressuring users into confirming a choice by making the "no" option seem negative or unpleasant]. emotional manipulation, infinite scrolling and "nagging," all of which are deemed unfair commercial practices under the EU's Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. It also urged the company to present proof that customer testimonials and "low stock" alerts are authentic. If it is unable to do so, Shein should be instructed to stop these practices. If Shein fails to take corrective measures, the authorities are called upon to intervene to protect consumers from serious harm until Shein complies with EU consumer law. The complaint also addresses the broader issue of "dark patterns" in the fast fashion industry, urging authorities to investigate other retailers engaging in similar unfair practices. BEUC director general Agustín Reyna stated: 'Shein's use of 'dark patterns' is a well-documented reality, which has been going on for several years now as BEUC members' research reveals. They make consumers spend ever more money on fast fashion products, that are harmful to themselves, the environment and the people that produce them. 'This ultra-fast fashion model is fuelled by manipulative practices that pressure consumers into buying ever more. Shein is designed to be addictive: it is driven by powerful algorithms to maximise consumer engagement and over-spending. We expect a strong and swift response from authorities to put an end to Shein's manipulative practices and to begin an industry-wide investigation'. In May 2025, Shein received validation of its net zero greenhouse gas emissions targets from the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi). "European consumer groups accuse Shein of using 'dark patterns'" was originally created and published by Retail Insight Network, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Harvard withheld their degrees for participating in a pro-Palestinian protest. They don't regret it.
'It felt like a culmination of things that had already been happening,' said Joshi in an interview this week with the Globe. 'It felt inseparable from the way they were treating pro-Palestinian protests in general.' A year since Harvard refused to award degrees to the 13 graduating seniors who participated in a pro-Palestinian encampment on Harvard Yard, the students say the experience left them feeling disillusioned about their Ivy League education and frustrated with what transpired, but grounded in their activism and largely unscathed. A handful are now pursuing graduate degrees from other elite universities, and others are working. Some are still participating in protests. A pro-Palestinian protest encampment behind a gate of Harvard Yard in April 2024. Andrew Burke-Stevenson for The Boston Globe Advertisement All were eventually awarded their Harvard degrees in the months after their intended graduation, the graduates said. After the war in Gaza between Israel and Hamas began, the 2024 tent encampments on Harvard Yard became one of the key symbols of a pro-Palestinian student movement that spread across the nation. At Harvard, both Jewish and Muslim students reported feeling uncomfortable, while a Advertisement On Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led militants killed some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and abducted 251 people from Israel. Gaza health authorities have said that Israel's retaliatory offensive has The Harvard student protesters agreed days before commencement in 2024 to dismantle the encampment; university leaders Days later, the students found out they wouldn't graduate since they were not in 'good standing' with the university due to multiple campus policy violations related to the encampment. That prompted another wave of outrage among students and faculty, more than 1,000 of whom reportedly Graduating students walked out of the 373nd Commencement at Harvard University to call attention to the plight of Palestinians on May 23, 2024. The university's top governing board rejected the recommendation of faculty to allow 13 pro-Palestinian students who participated in a three-week encampment in Harvard Yard to graduate with their classmates. Craig F. Walker/Globe Staff Some protestors, including Joshi, were allowed to don their caps and gowns at Harvard's 2024 Commencement and walk across the stage. Joshi said she was handed a piece of white cardboard instead of a degree. Others, however, were barred from commencement. Syd Sanders, 23, was told to withdraw from the university (a directive that he says was later dropped) and was banned from graduation. He had several ongoing student disciplinary cases at the time related to what he described as 'a long and storied career' in on-campus activism. 'They kept trying to evict me,' Sanders said in an interview this week, 'They would go by my dorm and be like, 'Why is all your stuff still here?'' Sanders was the final of the 13 students to receive a degree, to his knowledge. Advertisement 'They mailed it to me in February,' Sanders said. In a statement, Harvard spokesperson Jonathan Palumbo said that the university does not comment on student matters and did not further comment for this story. The impact of the withheld degrees varied by graduate. Phoebe Barr, 24, was among the protesters who were placed on an involuntary leave by the university, meaning she lost access to her dorm room and could not work at her on-campus job for the remainder of the semester. 'I was homeless and unemployed very suddenly,' Barr said. She stayed on the couch of someone who offered her a place to crash. Those are the memories of Harvard she wants to recall, she said, the acts of kindness in the community. 'For all the hostility we received, we also saw a real outpouring of support from the community of Harvard students, faculty, and those who lived around us in Cambridge,' she said. Barr was denied access to the Harvard campus at the end of her senior year. Lane Turner/Globe Staff Barr's temporarily withheld history and literature degree also impacted her search for a job after college: She could not list her undergraduate degree as her highest level of education. Not knowing when she would get her degree, she said, was difficult and stressful as she cobbled together cover letters and resumes. To potential employers, she wrote that her degree was still pending. Her degree was conferred in July last year; she got a job at a Boston University library that fall. Joshi's probation was initially to last until May 2025, meaning she would graduate a year later than planned. That timing was a problem: If she weren't in good standing with the university, she'd lose her Harvard fellowship to fund a master's degree at the University of Cambridge in England. Advertisement The funding securing her spot at Cambridge eventually came through after Harvard conferred her degree over the summer. Sanders, however, said that, at least for him, the lack of a degree didn't have any impact on his professional life. He still moved to California and got his dream job as a union organizer. 'I can't imagine a career in college activism was an inhibitor to becoming a union organizer — it was probably an asset," Sanders said. The encampment taught him how to do effective community organizing, lessons he said he is applying today as he helps organize support for immigrants targeted for Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrests. 'It was the most sacred moment of community I have ever felt in my life,' Sanders said of the Harvard encampment. 'No regrets.' A protester hung a Palestine flag in the pro-Palestinian encampment in Harvard Yard on May 7, 2024. Lane Turner/Globe Staff Sanders is now an activist in Oakland and is working as a bartender and waiter (he quit his union organizing job). 'Just like everybody else who graduated on time, I'm figuring life out,' Sanders said. He's thinking of applying to grad school or getting another union organizer job; he still participates in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Had the protesters' probation resulted in them walking at graduation this year, they would've been at a much different ceremony. This May, Garber was greeted by 'It was pretty jarring,' said Barr, who attended the commencement to take part in a pro-Palestinian demonstration. 'Last year, he was booed by the audience.' Advertisement While she is glad to see Harvard fighting Trump, she said it does not negate her frustrations with how the university handled the encampment last year. Joshi added that while there is a lot of excitement for Harvard's stance against Trump, the school's stance on free speech and academic freedom still 'rings hollow' to her. She is now finishing a master's degree in sociology at the University of Cambridge — funded by the Harvard fellowship that almost didn't materialize — and writing her dissertation on South Asian involvement in the Palestinian movement in the UK. After graduation, she plans to find legal work at a nonprofit. Overall, she remembers the Harvard protests as a success: They drew attention to the thousands of children who have died in Gaza and will never have the chance to grow up to get a degree, she said. Material from the Associated Press was used in this report. Erin Douglas can be reached at


Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Will Harvard win its legal battle against the Trump administration?
The high court has given more leeway to presidential powers, particularly on national security issues the White House has cited to justify its latest impositions on Harvard. Moreover, the battle of attrition could wear Harvard down on the financial front: the legal battles will be costly, and in the meantime, Harvard may lose students and scholars 'I think the government wins every time,' said Brad Banias, an immigration lawyer based in Charleston, S.C., and former trial attorney for the Justice Department. 'If I'm an international student and I have a choice between Harvard, Yale, Brown . . . why would I pick the one in a battle with the government?' Advertisement Under fire on multiple fronts, Harvard has filed two lawsuits against the administration: one to reverse the elimination of billions in federal funding after the school refused to agree to a series of demands; the second over the White House's efforts to block international students from attending Harvard, citing potential threats to national security. Advertisement On the latter fight, Harvard so far has won temporary relief. On Thursday night, US District Judge Allison D. Burroughs issued a temporary restraining barring President Trump from denying visas to all students seeking entry to the country to attend Harvard. Last month, the judge temporarily halted the administration's effort to immediately revoke Harvard's ability to enroll foreign students. In its lawsuit filed in May and amended Thursday, Harvard accused the administration of 'a blatant violation' of its First Amendment and due process rights as part of an ongoing, retaliatory campaign against Harvard and other elite schools by Trump. Banias said he believes the administration's actions against Harvard were 'unlawful retaliation' and predicted the school will obtain a permanent injunction to allow international students to continue their studies while the underlying lawsuit proceeds in court. But, he said, it's 'a coin flip' as to which side wins if the case reaches the Supreme Court. On the one hand, the court historically is hesitant to restrict a president's power on national security issues. Yet in this case, Banias said, the Trump administration is unlikely to prove that all Harvard student visa holders pose a national security threat. During Trump's first term, in a 5-4 vote in 2018, the Supreme Court upheld his ban on travel to the United States from several predominantly Muslim countries, a victory that came after two prior versions of the ban were struck down. The court found presidents have broad statutory authority to make national security judgments involving immigration. Laurence Tribe, a law professor emeritus at Harvard, said he's confident the university would prevail before the Supreme Court. Advertisement 'This has nothing to do with national security,' said Tribe, a liberal lawyer who's argued before the court dozens of times. 'The courts aren't stupid; they recognize a fig leaf when they see one.' He said Harvard has no choice but to fight Trump's actions. He noted Columbia University's more conciliatory approach: The Ivy League school in New York City agreed to change certain internal policies earlier this year in the face of federal funding cuts, but the Trump administration has continued to hammer the college. On the same day Trump announced the latest move targeting the student visas of Harvard enrollees, his administration sent a letter to the accreditation agency that oversees Columbia, writing that the school has violated civil rights laws and asking it to open an investigation. 'Columbia has seen the consequences of trying to deal with him,' Tribe said. 'We are not going to cave.' Daniel DiMartino, a fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute, said that if Harvard wins a permanent injunction, the school will be able to continue to admit foreign students, and likely run out the clock until Trump is out of office or the administration's attention shifts. 'If there is an injunction, essentially Harvard wins. If there is not an injunction, Harvard really is in trouble,' DiMartino said. But Trump's goal, he said, is not to stop foreign students from coming to Harvard: it's to cause the university enough problems that it has to agree to changes demanded by the White House. Trump and other conservatives say Harvard has discriminated against white and Asian people in admissions, failed to do enough to tackle antisemitism, and rebuffed efforts to have ideological diversity in its professorial ranks. Advertisement 'If their goal was actually just to forbid foreign students from Harvard, they would have done it much more slowly and given them notice,' DiMartino said. 'The administration is trying to make an example out of Harvard to threaten other universities into cooperating and not misbehaving.' And in a broad sense, with the legal fees that come with protracted fights, DiMartino said, 'Harvard will lose no matter what. It just matters how much they lose.' Harvard also sued the Trump administration in April after it announced it was slashing about $3 billion in federal grants to the university. That case is pending. Nancy Gertner, a former federal judge who teaches courses at Harvard Law School, said she believes the Supreme Court will come down on Harvard's side and predicted the case will move quickly because of the ongoing harm to the school and its students. Citing the administration's demand the school turn over disciplinary records and other information on international students, Gertner said the White House 'essentially wanted Harvard to be a whistle-blower,' and is now retaliating even though that information is not legally required or provided by any other schools. Northeastern constitutional law professor Jeremy Paul said the government is able to punish institutions that break the law, as the Trump administration says Harvard has in its handling of antisemitic incidents. But first, he said, they have to prove in front of a judge the institution has done so. They can't just make an allegation and then act unilaterally, as the administration has done, he said. 'The executive branch is acting as though they're both the prosecutor and the judge,' Paul said. Advertisement Shelley Murphy can be reached at