Can Tech Plug the Gaps Between Immigration Policies and Reshoring Aspirations?

Yahoo

5 days ago

President Donald Trump has created an aggressive, America-first agenda for his second presidency.
Part of his focus has been bringing manufacturing back into the United States, as evidenced by his continued comments about reshoring amidst the topsy-turvy of his tariff strategy. In some industries, that's a feasible proposal—but in fashion and apparel, it may prove a bit more difficult.
More from Sourcing Journal
Federal Appeals Court Grants Trump Temporary Relief on Tariff Ruling
April Air Cargo Demand Climbs 5.8% as De Minimis Reform Drives Pre-Deadline Surge
Podcast: Inside SJ's Tech Report: The Human Issue
Sourcing strongholds like China, Vietnam and Bangladesh offer brands and retailers the ability to purchase mass quantities of goods—often made cheaper than they could be in the United States. But with their supply chains in jeopardy due to tariffs and general economic uncertainty, some companies have taken a harder look at what reshoring would actually require.
Niki English, senior director of brand development at AJG Fashion Consulting, said that brands have long shown interest in nearshoring or onshoring, but most ultimately balk at the prices associated.
'It has always been a discussion: 'Hey, can we manufacture closer? Can we manufacture in the U.S.?' When we run cost scenarios, it just doesn't play out because of the cost of production in the U.S.,' she said. 'For some brands, it can definitely be workable, but for people looking to compete in the mass market or lower-price retail space, it's often just not workable.'
Kristen Anderson, design director at women's intimates brand Iteration, said the company is among the many that have investigated—but ultimately shied away from—manufacturing in the U.S. She said that products that have technical components to them, like bras, are even harder to find qualified manufacturers for in the U.S.
'Even if it was possible, it would be so costly that nobody would want to buy it because we wouldn't be able to afford it,' Anderson said.
While Anderson said her team would love to produce products in the U.S., Iteration couldn't find a manufacturer that could feasibly make its products in a cost-effective way. Instead, the brand turned to Sri Lanka, which faced a prohibitive tariff of 44 percent on Trump's 'Liberation Day.'
Tariffs on most countries remain on hold because of 90-day pauses instated by Trump, meant to usher in trade deals, and uncertainty over Trump's authority to instate double-digit tariffs remains.
But part of the equation for domestic manufacturing is often importing the textiles or components that need to be included in a finished product. Once final tariff rates have been settled, whether by Trump or by his Republican allies in Congress, added costs for materials could make onshoring aspirations difficult to turn into reality in a cost-effective way, said Mark Burstein, senior vice president, Americas at supply chain management company Inspectorio.
'Many brands and retailers have actively dispatched teams across the U.S. searching for domestic apparel producers. However, a significant challenge remains: limited fabric availability. Most domestic apparel factories haven't been able to scale operations effectively due to constraints like small order volumes that fail to achieve efficiency targets or price points so low that factories would operate at a loss,' Burstein told Sourcing Journal. 'While high tariffs imposed on major international apparel partners could potentially create opportunities for domestic growth, the persistent lack of fabric variety remains a substantial barrier.'
While brands' onshoring aspirations have increased since Liberation Day, Trump's immigration policies may have a deeper-than-expected impact on fashion and apparel companies' ability to source products domestically.
When Trump was elected in 2016, the then 70-year-old campaigned on a promise to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. Once he became president, he enacted a series of pro-business policies—including cutting the corporate tax rate, rolling back regulations and taking a hardline stance against trade partners like China—to support that goal, according to The Poynter Institute.
Simultaneously, Trump made immigration a central issue of his presidency, frequently warning about the dangers of undocumented immigrants.
But immigrants play a critical role in domestic manufacturing—particularly where the apparel industry is concerned. In 2016 alone, an estimated 23.1 percent of workers in the textile, apparel and furnishings sector in the U.S. were undocumented immigrants, according to New American Economy. That amounts to roughly 120,000 individuals powering a key segment of the industry.
Almost 10 years later, Trump is still singing the same tune. Before his second term began, Trump stated 'On Day One…We will begin the largest deportation operation in the history of our country.'
And he has kept true to his promise.
Earlier this year, Trump sent planes full of Latin American migrants to Colombia, fulfilling his repeated campaign promise to deport undocumented immigrants en masse and using that as a bargaining chip for U.S. economic gain.
According to Witness at the Border, a migrant advocacy group, Trump sent at least 350 deportation flights out of the U.S. between Jan. 20 and mid-March. Those flights went to countries like Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico and El Salvador, among others.
He has also repeatedly promised to secure the Southern border of the U.S. to prevent the flow of illegal immigration.
As part of his latest efforts to curb illegal immigration, former President Donald Trump signed a proclamation in May launching Project Homecoming, a program aimed at encouraging undocumented immigrants to voluntarily leave the U.S. According to the White House, the initiative offers two options: Depart voluntarily with federal support and financial assistance, or remain and face stricter enforcement and penalties.
'The continued presence of illegal aliens in our nation forces American taxpayers to bear a tremendous fiscal burden to support them,' Trump said. 'As president, it is my legal obligation to exercise all tools at my disposal to end this invasion, remove the illegal-alien invaders from the United States and protect the American people, [which is why I'm launching] Project Homecoming.'
But that kind of policy could be a mismatch with Trump's apparent reshoring aspirations.
Jamie E. Wright, founder and CEO of the Wright Law Firm, a labor and employment law firm, said domestic apparel manufacturers are likely to face significant headwinds as a result of Trump's policies.
'The labor shortage in U.S. manufacturing is already significant, and if immigration restrictions under a second Trump administration mirror or tighten past policies, we could see a real contraction in the available workforce,' Wright said. 'The apparel sector is particularly vulnerable because such a large percentage of the labor force has historically included undocumented or immigrant workers. If enforcement ramps up and pathways to work remain limited, the pool of eligible workers will shrink, fast.'
There are several problems that come alongside Wright's assessment. Losing a large subset of workers also means that domestic factories will lose those workers' specialized skills—and according to those in the industry, that could be daunting to backfill.
Prior to working with Iteration, Anderson worked for several brands, including one that sold swimwear. She said the company employed several sewists to help make samples, but noted that filling those positions—and retaining the workers—proved difficult because of high demand for their specific skill set.
'We never had a sewist in the sample room that was under the age of 50,' she said. 'Almost every single one of them was mature and speaking another language primarily. That population is going to get smaller and smaller with all of the [changes] happening right now, and they're going to be more and more afraid to work.'
Anderson and other experts said they worry about the treatment of immigrant workers for that exact reason; Eric Kingsley, partner at Kingsley Szamet Employment Lawyers in California, said more restrictive immigration policy opens the door for poor treatment for, in particular, undocumented workers.
'The clothing sector's reliance on immigrant labor, and in particular those who are undocumented, creates a situation where workers are especially vulnerable to exploitation. More restrictive immigration policies serve to embolden the worst perpetrators in the sector to drive down wages, ignore safety standards and punish complaining workers, knowing that such workers fear deportation,' Kingsley told Sourcing Journal. 'As these policies continue to tighten, we can expect deteriorating working conditions and more widespread wage suppression, not only for undocumented workers but throughout the entire labor market, as fewer and fewer workers feel secure in demanding their rights.'
Those issues compound an already stark reality: As of January 2024, more than 600,000 U.S. manufacturing jobs remained unfilled, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; the problem is worse in nondurable goods than it is in durable goods manufacturing. For many Americans, working in a factory or manufacturing facility isn't an attractive proposition.
With a president hyperfixated on onshoring, a labor shortage, a lack of large-scale facilities, steep offshore competition and tight immigration policies as the backdrop, it could be difficult to find a skilled labor force capable of handling apparel and fashion manufacturing in the immediate near term.
But if onshoring becomes more of a reality, experts believe technology could help plug some—though not nearly all—of the gaps left behind.
English said that while technology is suited to handle some tasks, it cannot fully replace the work of a sewist.
'I've seen fully automated sewing machines for things like towels or square [items], but as soon as you start to have 3D shapes…you need to have that human involved,' English said. 'The way I think automation could help the most would be efficiencies—laying out a pattern on the fabric most efficiently to reduce waste, or those types of planning [functions]. When it comes to the actual making, we're not anywhere near being able to replicate that.'
Farzin Shadpour, partner at Silicon Foundry, said that while automation is likely to aid reshoring in the fashion and apparel industries, the technical infrastructure inside U.S. apparel manufacturing facilities today is sparse, and other industries have a leg up.
With that in mind, he said the industry would need to digitize existing records and remove data silos, then automate the physical world. Bringing the fashion and apparel industries' manufacturing prowess up is also likely to require building new factories in hubs suited to handle the volume of incoming demand.
'It's possible to improve what we have, but if you're reshoring something and you want to compete with outside, then it should be built from the ground up with automation in mind,' Shadpour told Sourcing Journal, noting that any new-build factory would take at least two years to come to fruition.
What's more, even if a company can expedite the construction of a new facility—or look to purchase robotics and automation tools that could make current factories more efficient—the inventory for such items may not exist, Shadpour said.
'A robot is not something that they have sitting around on the shelf,' Shadpour said. 'Most of [them are] made to order. Let's say you order 100 robots. They make it for you, and then they ship it to you in three months, so it's not something that can happen overnight.'
Max Ma, CEO of merchandising software company 7thOnline, said that while he believes reshoring is potentially feasible in the longer term, the government would likely need to help subsidize the costs of building new factories, integrating emerging technologies and upskilling existing workers, something Trump seems unlikely to support give his 'tanks and technology' over T-shirts and sneakers comments.
'I don't see any reason for the government not to incentivize the business in the first place, if they believe this will generate jobs and generate tax income,' Ma said.But even if technology is integrated in a meaningful way into existing or emerging manufacturing facilities, English said another major part of the equation will be reskilling employees who have previously worked in manufacturing facilities—or training a completely new sector of the workforce—on how to work side by side with emerging technologies.Kingsley said immigrants employed by today's manufacturing facilities could be excluded from such training—particularly if they are undocumented. And with a president largely unsympathetic toward immigrants' success, that could lead to obsolescence for a large subsection of workers powering the apparel manufacturing operations in the U.S. today.
'Systematic discrimination in recruitment or training can exclude these workers from emerging opportunities even if they have transferable skills,' Kingsley said. 'Without targeted policies creating avenues for legal status, open retraining schemes and enforcement of anti-discrimination laws, these obstacles will remain.'