
Secondhand Stores are Poised to Benefit if US Tariffs Drive Up New Clothing Costs
Stores selling secondhand clothes, shoes and accessories are poised to benefit from President Donald Trump's trade war even as businesses the world over race to avert potential damage, according to industry experts.
American styles carry international influence, but nearly all of the clothing sold domestically is made elsewhere. The Yale University Budget Lab last week estimated short-term consumer price increases of 65% for clothes and 87% for leather goods, noting US tariffs "disproportionately affect' those goods.
Such price hikes may drive cost-conscious shoppers to online resale sites, consignment boutiques and thrift stores in search of bargains or a way to turn their wardrobes into cash. Used items cost less than their new equivalents and only would be subject to tariffs if they come from outside the country.
'I think resale is going to grow in a market that is declining,' said Kristen Classi-Zummo, an apparel industry analyst at market research firm Circana. 'What I think is going to continue to win in this chaotic environment are channels that bring value.'
The outlook for preowned fashion nevertheless comes with unknowns, including whether the president's tariffs will stay long enough to pinch consumers and change their behavior. It's also unclear whether secondhand purveyors will increase their own prices, either to mirror the overall market or in response to shopper demand.
A new audience courtesy of sticker shock Jan Genovese, a retired fashion executive, sells her unwanted designer clothes through customer-to-customer marketplaces like Mercari. If tariffs cause retail prices to rise, she would consider high-end secondhand sites, The Associated Press said.
'Until I see it and really have that sticker shock, I can't say exclusively that I'll be pushed into another direction,' Genovese, 75, said. 'I think that the tariff part of it is that you definitely rethink things. And maybe I will start looking at alternative venues.'
The secondhand clothing market already was flourishing before the specter of tariffs bedeviled the US fashion industry. Management consulting firm McKinsey and Co. predicted after the COVID-19 pandemic that global revenue from preowned fashion would grow 11 times faster than retail apparel sales by this year as shoppers looked to save money or spend it in a more environmentally conscious way.
While millennials and members of Generation Z were known as the primary buyers of used clothing, data from market research firm Sensor Tower shows the audience may be expanding.
The number of mobile app downloads for nine resale marketplaces the firm tracks — eBay, OfferUp, Poshmark, Mercari, Craigslist, Depop, ThredUp, TheRealReal and Vinted — increased by 3% between January and the end of March, the first quarterly gain in three years, Sensor Tower said.
The firm estimates downloads of the apps for eBay, Depop, ThredUp and The RealReal also surged compared to a year earlier for the week of March 31, which was when Trump unveiled since-paused punitive tariffs on dozens of countries.
Circana's Classi-Zummo said that while customers used to seek out collectible or unusual vintage pieces to supplement their wardrobes, she has noticed more shoppers turning to secondhand sites to replace regular fashion items.
"It's still a cheaper option' than buying new, even though retailers offer discounts, she said.
A tariff-free gold mine lurking in closets and warehouses Poshmark, a digital platform where users buy and sell preowned clothing, has yet to see sales pick up under the tariff schedule Trump unveiled but is prepared to capitalize on the moment, CEO Manish Chandra said.
Companies operating e-commerce marketplaces upgrade their technology to make it easier to find items. A visual search tool and other improvements to the Poshmark experience will 'pay long dividends in terms of disruption that happens in the market' from the tariffs, Chandra said.
Archive, a San Francisco-based technology company that builds and manages online and in-store resale programs for brands including Dr. Martens, The North Face and Lululemon, has noticed clothing labels expressing more urgency to team up, CEO Emily Gittins said.
"Tapping into all of the inventory that is already sitting in the US, either in people's closets or in warehouses not being used,' offers a revenue source while brands limit or suspend orders from foreign manufacturers, she said.
'There's a huge amount of uncertainty,' Gittins said. 'Everyone believes that this is going to be hugely damaging to consumer goods brands that sell in the US So resale is basically where everyone's head is going."
Stock analysts have predicted off-price retailers like TJ Maxx and Burlington Stores will weather tariffs more easily than regular apparel chains and department stores because they carry leftover merchandise in the US
Priced out of the previously owned market Still, resale vendors aren't immune from tariff-induced upheavals, said Rachel Kibbe, founder and CEO of Circular Services Group, a firm that advises brands and retailers on reducing the fashion industry's environmental impact.
US sellers that import secondhand inventory from European Union countries would have to pay a 20% duty if Trump moves forward with instituting 'reciprocal' tariffs on most trading partners and eliminates an import tax exception for parcels worth less than $800, Kibbe said.
A circular fashion coalition she leads is seeking a tariff exemption for used and recycled goods that will be offered for resale, Kibbe said. Trump already ended the duty-free provision for low-value parcels from China, a move that may benefit sellers of secondhand clothing by making low-priced Chinese fashions pricier, she said.
James Reinhart, co-founder and CEO of the online consignment marketplace ThredUp, said the removal of the 'de minimis' provision and the 145% tariff Trump put on products made in China would benefit businesses like his. He doubts creating resale channels would make a big difference for individual brands.
'Brands will explore this and they may do more, but I don't see them massively changing their operations,' Reinhart said. 'I think they're going to be figuring out how to survive. And I don't think resale helps you survive.'
Rebag, an online marketplace and retail chain that sells used designer handbags priced from $500 to tens of thousands of dollars, expects tariffs to help drive new customers and plans to open more physical stores, CEO Charles Gorra said.
Gorra said the company would analyze prices for new luxury goods and adjust what Rebag charges accordingly. The two historically rose in tandem, but Rebag could not match Chanel's 10% price increase last year because of lower resale demand, Gorra said.
'That has nothing to do with the tariffs,' he said. 'Consumers are feeling priced out.'
Norah Brotman, 22, a senior at the University of Minnesota, buys most of her own clothes on eBay. She also thrifts fashions from the 1990s and early 2000s at Goodwill stores and resells them on Depop.
If tariffs upend the economics of fast fashion and discourage mindless consumption, Brotman would count that as a plus.
'I would love if this would steer people in a different direction,' she said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Asharq Al-Awsat
14 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
US Sanctions on Syria: From Hafez al-Assad to al-Sharaa
Syrians have lived under the shadow of US sanctions for 46 years, spanning generations who know no other reality. These sanctions have become woven into every aspect of daily life, from banking and international aviation to construction and food supplies. Their burden has fallen hardest on ordinary people, rather than on the symbols of the ousted Assad regime. While lifting sanctions now would undoubtedly unlock planning and reconstruction efforts, political and security concerns persist, and Syria's dilapidated infrastructure may impede private-sector investment. Most importantly, we must ask whether US President Donald Trump's move to begin lifting sanctions was as improvised as his 2018 announcement to withdraw militarily from Syria, or whether it marks a pivotal shift in US foreign policy toward Syria. On May 13, during his visit to Saudi Arabia, Trump announced the lifting of US sanctions on Syria. This triggered a period of confusion and internal reviews before his administration outlined an initial mechanism that balanced implementing his announcement with addressing his advisors' worries over unfettered engagement with the new Syrian leadership. Before assessing this current phase of easing sanctions, we need a historical overview of them, their context, underlying rationale, implementation methods, and what their potential impact might be for Syria and its people. Sanctions on Syria can be divided into three eras: under Hafez al-Assad, under his son Bashar, and now under interim President Ahmed al‑Sharaa. Shift toward Iran (1979–2000) US sanctions on Syria began in 1979, following the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel and the rise of Iran's revolution. With the end of the strategic alliance between Cairo and Damascus, Hafez al-Assad viewed Iran's emerging regime as a counterweight to Iraq and Israel. Washington designated Syria a state sponsor of terrorism in 1979 due to its role in Lebanon and its support for fighters opposed to Israel. Consequently, the US imposed restrictions on foreign aid, defense exports, and the transfer of dual‑use goods. In November 1986, President Ronald Reagan barred Syrian planes from landing in the US. The Iraq War (2001–2010) Sanctions entered a new phase as US policy shifted after the September 11, 2001 attacks and the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, coinciding with Bashar al‑Assad's arrival to power in July 2000. In his 2002 State of the Union, President George W. Bush labeled Iran, Iraq under Saddam Hussein, and North Korea the 'Axis of Evil', prompting Iran to form a 'Resistance Axis' that included Syria and Hezbollah. With these strains came stricter measures: the Syria Accountability and Lebanon Sovereignty Act of 2003, enforced by OFAC at the US Treasury in 2004 under Executive Order 13338, targeted Syria's role in Lebanon and its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, as well as its opposition to the US-led occupation of Iraq. On May 7, 2025, the Trump administration signed a notice extending the national emergency concerning Syria until May 7, 2026, encompassing executive orders from 2003 to 2012. The Syrian uprising and Caesar Act Following Syria's uprising in March 2011, the US imposed a wave of sanctions targeting violence and human rights abuses. President Barack Obama's April 29, 2011 executive order froze Assad regime assets, followed by an August 2011 ban on oil, asset freezes, and broad trade prohibitions, excluding food and medicine. However, the defining moment came with the Caesar Civilian Protection Act of 2019, signed by Trump in December 2019 and implemented in June 2020. Targeting infrastructure, military maintenance, energy, and those funding the Assad regime, it also banned foreign investment in Syria's reconstruction. This legislation aimed to check both Russian and Iranian influence and serve as leverage for negotiations with Moscow, permitting temporary waivers if productive talks occurred. Though enacted long after the internal conflict began, the Act functioned less as a response to internal dynamics and more as an economic restraint on reconstruction efforts. Al‑Sharaa after Assad By late 2024, with Bashar al-Assad's regime fallen and Trump back in power, Syria had not been a US priority, with internal debate over how to engage the new al‑Sharaa administration. That shifted after Trump spoke with Türkiye's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on March 16, signaling alignment with Turkish‑Saudi policy against the hardline Israeli stance. In Saudi Arabia, Trump began rolling back sanctions on Syria, but the fate of the Caesar Act remains uncertain, currently suspended in 180‑day increments, extendable. Although it was briefly lifted for humanitarian relief during the Feb 2023 Türkiye-Syria earthquakes and in areas controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), its full repeal remains on hold. Mechanisms and challenges Trump's administration has implemented three key executive measures: Treasury's 'GL‑25' on May 23, enabling sweeping economic coverage; a 180‑day suspension of Caesar sanctions; and a specific waiver for the Commercial Bank of Syria via the US Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, allowing re‑establishment of correspondent banking relationships. GL‑25 has no set expiry and can be revoked anytime, while Caesar waivers renew every six months. An earlier GL‑24 waiver, issued in January, allowed limited official and energy sector transactions and personal transfers, but US banks have remained cautious. The permit covers four sectors: finance, oil‑gas, maritime shipping, and aviation. US persons remain barred from transactions that may benefit Russia, Iran, or North Korea, meaning rigorous due diligence is necessary. The original executive orders remain in force, although press reports suggest possible cancellations. Procedurally, Syria remains on the State Sponsors of Terrorism list, as removal would require Congress to be notified by the US State Department. The Department of Commerce and State's defense trade regulators have yet to remove export controls, which means that Syria still falls under International Traffic in Arms Regulations, necessitating export licenses for most goods, excluding basic food and medicine. Furthermore, Hayat Tahrir al‑Sham is still designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization. Even after al‑Sharaa met Trump, the Treasury's waiver excludes HTS leader Abu Mohammed al‑Golani, al-Sharaa's former nom de guerre, who remains sanctioned under UN Security Council Resolution 1267, supported by a likely Russian veto of any attempt to remove HTS from global blacklists. Arms embargoes and surveillance‑tech restrictions will also persist. The Caesar Act itself was renewed by Congress in January 2025 for five years, lasting until January 2030 unless overturned legislatively and its suspension may be extended in November 2025. But these continue as temporary waivers, not full repeals. US politics and Congressional dynamics Legislative repeal would require Act passage in Congress. Ironically, Trump's allies in this are Democrats, as many Republicans, especially senators, remain wary. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Jim Risch remarked that Trump lifted sanctions a bit more than what was expected, but cautioned that the sanctions could come back. US energy firms, together with Syrian‑American groups, have lobbied Trump to ease sanctions, while pro‑Israel lobby AIPAC insists any relief must hinge on demonstrable positive behavior from the new Syrian government. Impact on economy and society In 2018, the UN estimated at least $250 billion would be required to rebuild Syria fully, far beyond what domestic resources can furnish. Serious barriers remain: destroyed roads, hospitals, and power networks hinder basic services. Reviving industry needs massive investment; millions displaced internally or abroad need rehousing; food, fuel, medical gear, and decent jobs are in short supply. Even a partial lifting marks a seismic shift: essential imports like food, medicine, and technology could flow more freely; reconstruction of schools, hospitals, and roads becomes feasible; frozen international assets might be unfrozen, inviting foreign companies back to construction, energy, and trade. The most immediate relief will come from reconnecting Syrian banks to global payment systems, especially SWIFT, dismantling the economic collapse born of widespread distrust. Yet Syria remains on the FATF grey list, deterring banks and obstructing liquidity, so regulatory frameworks must be built. Future prospects Ambitious domestic and regional projects have surfaced under al‑Sharaa, with some contracts bypassing competitive bids. The UAE has been granted an $800 million concession at the Port of Tartus, via a Dubai Ports World MoU, to develop multi-purpose terminals, industrial zones, dry ports, and logistics hubs. Meanwhile, a 30‑year deal with French CMA CGM was signed to develop Latakia Port. China's VDL company secured rights to 300,000 m² in the Adra Free Zone outside Damascus for 20 years to build industrial and commercial facilities with tax breaks, labor flexibility, and repatriable profits. A Qatari-US-Turkish energy consortium plans a $7 billion, 5,000 MW power project. All are seen as steps to lure foreign capital and reshape Syria's foreign policy by leveraging international corporate interests. Uncertain transition The sanctions regime hinges on three pillars: Syria's State Sponsor designation (since 1979), the Syria Accountability Act (2003), and the Caesar Act (2019). Only the first may soon shift, pending a State Department and Congressional review; the others remain entrenched. While Syria will not likely see a flood of US investment tomorrow, the first visible presence would probably involve Turkish and Gulf investors, as the US must first verify the stability and reliability of the new Syrian leadership before enabling wider investors to return. Damascus does not fully control its territory or armed factions, and fresh sanctions may target entities linked to coastal violence in recent months. Thus, Caesar's intent has transitioned from coercing the Assad regime to ensuring al‑Sharaa's good behavior. But its six‑month renewals offer limited investor certainty, making regional neighbors the marginal beneficiaries. Al‑Sharaa's teams may aim to woo Trump with bold reconstruction plans akin to a Marshall Plan. But Trump isn't easily swayed. He has yet to appoint an ambassador to Damascus; instead, US Ambassador to Türkiye Tom Barrack was named envoy to Syria, indicating Syria remains an extension of Turkish policy. Trump is unpredictable and could reverse course swiftly, but current signs still point to provisional waivers rather than a full repeal of sanctions.


Arab News
a day ago
- Arab News
Elon Musk is leaving the Trump administration after criticizing president's ‘big beautiful bill'
WASHINGTON: Elon Musk is leaving his government role as a top adviser to President Donald Trump after spearheading efforts to reduce and overhaul the federal bureaucracy. The billionaire entrepreneur posted Wednesday about his decision on X, his social media website. 'As my scheduled time as a Special Government Employee comes to an end, I would like to thank President @realDonaldTrump for the opportunity to reduce wasteful spending,' he wrote. 'The @DOGE mission will only strengthen over time as it becomes a way of life throughout the government.' A White House official, who requested anonymity to talk about the change, confirmed that Musk was leaving. Musk's departure comes one day after he criticized the centerpiece of Trump's legislative agenda, saying he was 'disappointed' by what the president calls his 'big beautiful bill.' The legislation includes a mix of tax cuts and enhanced immigration enforcement. While speaking to CBS, Musk described it as a 'massive spending bill' that increases the federal deficit and 'undermines the work' of his Department of Government Efficiency, known as DOGE. 'I think a bill can be big or it could be beautiful,' Musk said. 'But I don't know if it could be both.' His CBS interview came out Tuesday night. Trump, speaking in the Oval Office on Wednesday, defended his agenda by talking about the delicate politics involved with negotiating the legislation. 'I'm not happy about certain aspects of it, but I'm thrilled by other aspects of it,' he said. Trump also suggested that more changes could be made. 'We're going to see what happens,' he said. 'It's got a way to go.' Republicans recently pushed the measure through the House and are debating it in the Senate. Musk's concerns are shared by some Republican lawmakers. 'I sympathize with Elon being discouraged,' said Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson. Speaking at a Milwaukee Press Club event on Wednesday, Johnson added that he was 'pretty confident' there was enough opposition 'to slow this process down until the president, our leadership, gets serious' about reducing spending. He said there was no amount of pressure Trump could put on him to change his position. Speaker Mike Johnson has asked senators to make as few changes to the legislation as possible, saying that House Republicans reached a 'very delicate balance' that could be upended with major changes. The narrowly divided House will have to vote again on final passage once the Senate alters the bill. On Wednesday, Johnson thanked Musk for his work and promised to pursue more spending cuts in the future, saying 'the House is eager and ready to act on DOGE's findings.' The White House is sending some proposed rescissions, a mechanism used to cancel previously authorized spending, to Capitol Hill to solidify some of DOGE's cuts. A spokesperson for the Office of Management and Budget said the package will include $1.1 billion from the Corporation of Public Broadcasting, which funds NPR and PBS, and $8.3 billion in foreign assistance. Musk's criticism come as he steps back from his government work, rededicating himself to companies like the electric automaker Tesla and rocket manufacturer SpaceX. He's also said he'll reduce his political spending, because 'I think I've done enough.' At times, he's seemed chastened by his experience working in government. Although he hoped that DOGE would generate $1 trillion in spending cuts, he's fallen far short of that target. 'The federal bureaucracy situation is much worse than I realized,' he told The Washington Post. 'I thought there were problems, but it sure is an uphill battle trying to improve things in D.C., to say the least.' Musk had previously been energized by the opportunity to reshape Washington. He wore campaign hats in the White House, held his own campaign rallies, and talked about excessive spending as an existential crisis. He often tended to be effusive in his praise of Trump. 'The more I've gotten to know President Trump, the more I like the guy,' Musk said in February. 'Frankly, I love him.' Trump repaid the favor, describing Musk as 'a truly great American.' When Tesla faced declining sales, he turned the White House driveway into a makeshift showroom to illustrate his support. It's unclear what, if any, impact that Musk's comments about the bill would have on the legislative debate. During the transition period, he helped whip up opposition to a spending measure as the country stood on the brink of a federal government shutdown. His latest criticism could embolden Republicans who want bigger spending cuts. Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee reposted a Fox News story about Musk's interview while also adding his own take on the measure, saying there was 'still time to fix it.' 'The Senate version will be more aggressive,' Lee said. 'It can, it must, and it will be. Or it won't pass.' Only two Republicans — Reps. Warren Davidson of Ohio and Thomas Massie of Kentucky — voted against the bill when the House took up the measure last week. Davidson took note of Musk's comments on social media. 'Hopefully, the Senate will succeed with the Big Beautiful Bill where the House missed the moment,' he wrote. 'Don't hope someone else will cut deficits someday, know it has been done this Congress.' The Congressional Budget Office, in a preliminary estimate, said the tax provisions would increase federal deficits by $3.8 trillion over the decade, while the changes to Medicaid, food stamps and other services would reduce spending by slightly more than $1 trillion over the same period. House Republican leaders say increased economic growth would allow the bill to be deficit-neutral or deficit-reducing, but outside watchdogs are skeptical. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates the bill would add $3 trillion to the debt, including interest, over the next decade.


Leaders
a day ago
- Leaders
Israel's Strike on Iran 'Could Very Well Happen': Trump
The US President, Donald Trump, on Thursday said that Israel's attack on Iran looks very close, although he favors a deal with Tehran if it compromises, reported AFP. Israeli Attack Asked about Israel's potential attack on Iran, Trump replied: 'I don't want to say imminent, but it looks like it's something that could very well happen.' The US President also said that the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was considering a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, which he said could spark a 'massive conflict.' He urged Israel not to attack Iran, as Washington and Tehran are edging closer to a new nuclear deal. 'We are fairly close to a pretty good agreement,' he said. 'I don't want them going in, because I think it would blow it,' he added. Nuclear Deal Close Trump said he prefers negotiations with Iran to avoid conflict. However, he added that Tehran has to cede more ground in its negotiations with Washington to avoid conflict. 'I'd love to avoid the conflict. Iran's going to have to negotiate a little bit tougher – meaning they're going to have to give us some things that they're not willing to give us right now,' he told reporters. IAEA Resolution Trump's remarks came after the IAEA's Board of Governors announced that Iran is in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in 20 years. In response, Iran called the resolution 'political' and announced countermeasures, including establishing a third enrichment facility in a 'secure location,' and upgrading its centrifuges for advanced ones at Fordo, which will significantly boost Iran's production of enriched materials. Pulling US Personnel Amid escalating tensions, the US arranged the departure of non-essential personnel from locations around the Middle East, citing heightened security risks in the region. Moreover, the US Embassy in Israel issued a security alert instructing American government employees and their families to remain in the Tel Aviv area over security concerns. Trump said that Washington was pulling American personnel out of the region because 'it could be a dangerous place,' stressing that he would not allow Tehran to develop a nuclear weapon. Short link : Post Views: 1