US AAFA writes to Massachusetts committee opposing The Fashion Act
While the legislation is well intended, it creates a costly and burdensome regulatory mechanism that cannot effectuate the results it seeks, AAFA noted.
US trade body AAFA wrote to the Massachusetts joint committee on environment and natural resources sharing its concerns over The Fashion Act, aimed at environmental accountability in the fashion sector. The act creates a costly and burdensome regulatory mechanism that cannot effectuate the results it seeks, AAFA noted. It does not allow for full alignment with the Science-Based Targets Initiative.
The act establishes requirements that do not align with standards and initiatives referenced in the act, as well as legislative and regulatory requirements to which the fashion industry is already subject, AAFA president and chief executive officer Steve Lamar wrote in the letter.
This lack of harmonisation creates an unnecessarily complicated compliance framework for companies without providing a material sustainability benefit. In some instances, such conflicts can undermine the goals of the initiatives to which the legislation points, he noted.
Harmonisation with European Union (EU) regulations will be critical and it will also be important to learn from what was unworkable for the EU, the letter said.
The European Union's Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (which applies to many US companies, both in and outside the fashion sector) and the California Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (SB 253) both currently require covered companies to report on their greenhouse gas emissions.
The Fashion Act does not align with the established timelines or assurance levels in either piece of legislation. It does not align with other pending climate legislation in New York, New Jersey, Colorado or Illinois as well, AAFA remarked.
While The Fashion Act requires fashion sellers to set targets, it does not actually allow for full alignment with the Science-Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) . The act prohibits some sellers from using intensity-based targets, even though SBTi validates such targets, the AAFA letter said.
Holding companies to absolute targets means mergers or acquisitions could put companies out of compliance, while divestment of business would give the appearance of emissions reduction without actual achievement, the letter noted.
The act provides overly prescriptive data collection requirements that are not required by SBTi, and are not actually implementable, AAFA observed.
Despite the industry adhering to dozens of chemical regulations across the globe, The Fashion Act piles additional, impractical requirements that are not aligned with existing programmes and would actually discourage the addition and detection of new chemicals in wastewater, Lamar wrote.
'Sales of fashion products by third-party sellers on online marketplaces would be exempt from the requirements under the bill as it is written. If the intention of the legislation is to make marketplaces clean up their production, this bill misses the mark. With third-party sales expected to comprise almost two thirds of all e-commerce sales by 2027, this represents a significant omission,' the AAFA letter mentioned.
Finally, the legislation provides no incentives, no diplomatic or technical support and no guidance for the industry to achieve its objectives, it added.
Fibre2Fashion News Desk (DS)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
16 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Trade tariff uncertainty & US Fed rates led to volatile swings in bullion
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel The month of July 2025 displayed a two-way trend for bullion, offering both buyers and sellers opportunities to book profits. Bullion began the month in a range-bound manner as investors assessed US Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's cautious stance on rate cuts. Meanwhile, a weaker US Dollar Index lent support to the greenback-priced the trend shifted, and gold prices reacted sharply to a series of unexpected announcements from US President Donald prices surged after the US Senate, controlled by Republicans, passed a wide-ranging tax-cut and spending bill, dubbed the 'big, beautiful bill.' The bill proposed significant cuts to several social service programs and was projected to add $3 trillion to the fiscal deficit over the next decade. This raised fiscal concerns and drove investors toward the safe-haven asset— addition, President Trump rattled global markets by announcing a wave of tariffs on various countries: 50% on US copper imports, 35% on imports from Canada, blanket duties of 15–20% on most other trade partners, and 30% on imports from Mexico and the European Union, all effective from August 1. These measures followed failed trade negotiations with major US European Union and Mexico called the tariffs unfair and disruptive, with the European Commission preparing to target $84.1 billion worth of US goods for potential retaliatory tariffs if talks failed. To add to the uncertainty, President Trump publicly expressed a desire to fire Fed Chair Jerome geopolitical tensions escalated as Israel launched powerful airstrikes in Damascus, damaging the Defence Ministry and striking near the presidential palace. The attack increased geopolitical worries and further supported demand for gold. In Japan, the ruling coalition lost control of the upper house, weakening Prime Minister Ishiba's authority as the US tariff deadline developments caused jitters in the markets and pushed safe-haven demand sharply higher. Both MCX Gold and Gold Spot surged, touching Rs 100,329 per 10 grams and $3,431 per ounce, what goes up must come down. The final week of July brought an abrupt reversal. Both MCX Gold and Gold Spot fell sharply—by over 2%—after President Trump clarified that he was not planning to fire Powell, though he continued criticizing him for not cutting interest Trump struck a trade deal with Japan to lower auto tariffs, marking the most significant agreement since the tariff announcements in April 2025. Similarly, the US reached a framework trade agreement with the European Union, imposing a 15% import tariff on most EU goods—thus averting a major trade war between the two global trading month-end, the Federal Reserve kept interest rates unchanged and gave little guidance on potential cuts, reducing the appeal of the zero-yield the US and Mexico agreed to extend their existing trade deal by 90 days to allow more time for negotiations toward a new agreement. This further dampened gold's safe-haven the near term, MCX Gold October Futures (CMP: Rs 98,700) is expected to decline towards Rs 96,500 per 10 grams.(The author is DVP- Research, Non-Agri Commodities and Currencies, Angel One Ltd : Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of the Economic Times)
Time of India
16 minutes ago
- Time of India
‘US itself trades with Russia': India hits back at Trump's ‘substantial' tariff threat
US President Donald Trump has accused India of profiting from Russia's war in Ukraine and threatened steep new tariffs. 'They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed,' he claimed. India hit back, calling its Russian oil imports a national necessity and slammed the US and EU's double standards. Despite criticising India, the West continues major trade with Russia. EAM Jaishankar also responded, defending India's energy security policy. Show more Show less
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
16 minutes ago
- First Post
What does US import from Russia as Trump rants about India's oil trade?
As Trump threatens steep tariffs on India over its Russian oil imports, data reveals the US quietly continues to import billions worth of palladium, uranium, and fertilisers from Russia. While Washington criticises New Delhi's energy ties with Moscow, its own trade in strategic commodities with Russia raises questions about economic double standards read more Daily newspapers with covers, dedicated to the recent phone call of Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump, are laid out at a newsstand in a street in Moscow, Russia, February 13, 2025. File Image/Reuters US President Donald Trump has been threatening India with steep tariffs over its oil imports from Moscow even as trade data shows that the United States continues to engage in selective but significant imports from Russia — a country Washington has otherwise sought to isolate since the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Most recently, Trump, in a series of online statements, accused India of buying heavily discounted Russian oil and profiting by reselling it. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD He threatened a hike in tariffs on Indian exports to the United States, going as far as proposing a 25 per cent duty and promising additional penalties. India reacted firmly to this public criticism. According to a statement from the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), India began purchasing oil from Russia only after its traditional energy suppliers diverted output to European markets post-2022. 'The United States at that time actively encouraged such imports by India for strengthening global energy markets stability,' the statement noted. 'It is revealing that the very nations criticising India are themselves indulging in trade with Russia. Unlike our case, such trade is not even a vital national compulsion.' India has repeatedly justified its energy trade with Russia as necessary for maintaining stable and affordable energy costs for its domestic consumers. Hardeep Singh Puri, India's Minister of Petroleum and Natural Gas, remarked in a recent CNBC interview: 'If people or countries had stopped buying at that stage, the price of oil would have gone up to 130 dollars a barrel. That was a situation in which we were advised, including by our friends in the United States, to please buy Russian oil, but within the price cap.' Even former US Ambassador to India Eric Garcetti had stated at a public event last year that 'we wanted somebody to buy Russian oil,' acknowledging Washington's prior encouragement of Indian purchases to stabilise global markets. The Indian government highlighted the continuing trade relationships between Russia and the United States, as well as the European Union, despite sanctions and political rhetoric. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Official data confirms that Europe and America have maintained selective imports of high-priority goods from Russia over the past few years. European Union-Russia trade The European Union's trade with Russia remains substantial. The EU's goods trade with Russia amounted to €67.5 billion ($78.1 billion) in 2024, and trade in services was worth €17.2 billion in 2023. E uropean LNG imports from Russia hit a record 16.5 million tonnes in 2024, surpassing the previous record of 15.21 million tonnes in 2022. Europe's commercial interactions with Russia cover a wide range of sectors including liquefied natural gas, fertilisers, mining products, industrial chemicals, iron and steel, and transport equipment. US-Russia trade The United States also maintained imports from Russia, particularly in strategic areas like nuclear fuel, precious metals, and agricultural products. American imports from Russia totalled approximately $3 billion in 2024, down from $36 billion in 2021, but key items continue to flow. According to the US International Trade Commission: Fertilisers : $1.1 billion in 2024. Palladium : $878 million. Uranium : $624 million. Aircraft engine parts: $75 million. Trade in services, on the other hand, showed resilience. In 2024, US services exports to Russia amounted to $1.3 billion, while imports were $384 million — resulting in a services trade surplus of $873 million, a 43 per cent rise over the previous year. From January to May 2025, US imports from Russia grew 23 per cent year-on-year to reach $2.1 billion, with palladium imports up 37 per cent, uranium up 28 per cent, and fertilizers up 21 per cent. Even the US Trade Representative acknowledges that critical imports such as uranium and palladium are shielded from full sanctions due to the lack of viable alternatives in the global market. A granular look at trade data reveals that the United States continues to purchase a wide range of products from Russia. These include industrial commodities, precious metals, chemicals, and agricultural items. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD According to customs and trade databases, the following were among the top imports in 2024: Fertilisers (urea, potassium chloride, and others) – $1.3 billion Precious metals (palladium, platinum, etc.) – $878 million Inorganic chemicals, including radioactive materials – $695.7 million Uranium hexafluoride for nuclear fuel – $624 million Aircraft parts and components – $75 million Wood and wood products – $89.4 million Machinery and reactors – $80.8 million Animal feed, residues from food processing – $39.9 million Base metals and cermets – $37.3 million Iron and steel products – $13.1 million Edible vegetables, fruits, and preparations – multiple categories totalling over $15 million Rubbers, plastics, and chemicals – Over $10 million Pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and essential oils – Over $2 million Footwear, textiles, toys, and watches – Combined total over $10 million Aluminum, copper, and nickel – Over $28 million combined Other miscellaneous imports – From raw hides to printed books and even live animals Despite claims that the United States and Russia conduct minimal business today, the facts reveal that trade persists in key areas. Also Watch: Fertiliser imports from Russia are also on the rise. Between January and May 2025 alone, the US brought in $806 million worth — 60 per cent more than during the same period in 2021. Uranium imports, too, were 147 per cent higher compared to early 2021, showing no signs of being phased out. 'Russia and the USA do almost no business together,' Trump had claimed. But the numbers tell a different story: trade has narrowed in scope, not vanished. While American imports of Russian crude oil — once valued at over $17 billion in 2021 — have nearly ceased, other categories like fish, nickel, and lead have also dwindled or stopped. Nevertheless, around 90 per cent of what the US still imports from Russia consists of just three categories: fertilizers, palladium, and uranium. With inputs from agencies
