John Lash heads up Product Strategy at e2open. Previously, he led Product Marketing, including analyst relations, competitive intelligence, and ESG-related product initiatives. Lash has held leadership positions in environmental sustainability, high-tech, and data communications industries, with over 30 years of experience in business development, strategy, sales, marketing, and mergers and acquisitions.
The only constant is change. To this end, it’s important for companies to keep up-to-date on geopolitical issues and legislation that could impact their supply chains. The Americas Trade and Investment Act is a new bill introduced by Senators Bill Cassidy and Michael Bennet that aims to reduce trade dependency with China, strengthen relations with Western Hemisphere countries, encourage a circular apparel industry, and lessen exposure to forced labor. If passed, the Americas Act would be the latest change in the U.S.’s complicated and fluid trade relationship with China. It also presents opportunities for more ethical sourcing and a new circular domestic textiles industry. Sounds promising, but will it deliver?
To answer this question, let's wind back the clock to consider where the U.S. is at today. During the past three decades, outsourced production, containerization, and favorable trade policies ushered in an era of globalization. Low-cost goods brought tremendous benefits to people and nations alike, to the point where consumers are now a main driver of the economy. Case in point, in the U.S., roughly two-thirds of the gross domestic product (GDP) comes from consumer spending. As brands outsourced production to make low-cost goods, China emerged as the world's manufacturing powerhouse, especially in the apparel, high-tech, and semiconductor industries.
In the apparel and footwear sector, the sheer scale of Chinese manufacturing and supply chain infrastructure led to a step-change in efficiency that was irresistible for many Western brands. Reliably available low-cost items fundamentally changed consumer expectations, reset the norm, and paved the way for fast fashion.
However, this trajectory has been shadowed by mounting national security concerns, geopolitical tensions, and a drive toward greater sustainability and more ethical sourcing. These forces have given rise to initiatives like the Americas Act and are signaling a shift towards more regional and sustainable production.
Promoting reshoring and nearshoring
At its core, the Americas Act is designed to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign adversaries by promoting reshoring/nearshoring away from China and strengthening trade ties with Western Hemisphere countries. The act seeks to bring jobs, wealth, and regional stability to the Americas region, increasing the standard of living in Latin American countries and reducing the appeal of migration to the U.S. This inherent immigration aspect makes it politically appealing, even in a divided Congress. The act also intends to be cost-neutral and self-funded by closing the de minimus loophole, which currently lets cheap goods from China evade tariffs. As such, this act provides multiple wins politically.
The primary mechanism of the Americas Act is to expand eligibility for the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA) to include countries in Central and South America. It also includes $70 billion of loans, grants, tax incentives, and investments to promote reshoring/nearshoring away from China.
Is this likely to change trade dynamics with China?
When it comes to reducing dependence on China, will the Americas Act shift the needle? The simple answer is yes, but not on its own. While this type of policy is an important step in the right direction, it won't be enough.
The act will definitely promote trade between the U.S. and Western Hemisphere countries by spurring more investment in regional production and strengthening supply chains. However, even if the program eventually doubles or triples trade between the United States and Central and Southern American countries, it would have a limited impact on reducing the U.S.’s dependence on China anytime soon.
Regarding U.S. textile imports, only three of the top 15 export countries are in the Western Hemisphere, and these three countries only represent 7% of imports, compared to 74% from Asian countries. Moreover, two of those three countries, Mexico and Canada, are already part of the USMCA. While they would benefit from funding to grow operations, they would not be new country additions to the trade agreement. Honduras is the only new country in the top 15 that qualifies for entry via the Americas Act, with textile and apparel imports of roughly 4% of China.
Even if every country in the Western Hemisphere signed on and doubled their exports of goods to the U.S., it would barely dent the trade from China.
Days of easy globalization are over
While investment in reshoring/nearshoring willhelp make the U.S. less dependent on Chinese manufacturing, unwinding decades of established infrastructure and gearing up production, supply chains, and skilled workforces in new countries will take decades. Just as it took years of policy to promote coupling between China and the United States, decoupling those relationships will also take a long time. Furthermore, the decoupling process is complicated by these times of volatility and rising geopolitical tension.
Transitioning from today’s complex interdependent supply chains will require considerable policy adjustments beyond the Americas Act, including new proposals to strengthen trade with top non-Chinese Asian exporting countries, which comprise most of the U.S.’s imports.
One thing is for sure: This act is yet another telltale sign that the days of "easy" globalization are over.
Incentives for circularity and ethical trade
In addition to the political aspects, the act directs $14 billion—one-fifth of the proposed funding—toward promoting circularity in domestic textiles, apparel, and footwear industries. Circularity, also known as reuse and recycling, is an important means to reduce the high levels of landfill waste, emissions, and freshwater consumption associated with the industry.
Additionally, to foster ethical supply chains, the act includes $750 million in funding over five years to strengthen U.S. Customs and Border Protection's power to crack down on goods made by forced labor in Chinese factories through the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act.
New opportunity for a circular apparel economy
Circular policies that support reuse and recycling offer undeniable economic benefits, regardless of trade politics. It reduces raw materials and extraction/processing costs per unit, letting you make more with less. In an era of supply constraints and limited materials, making smarter decisions about using and reusing resources is important to ensure we can provide housing, clothing, and food for more people at lower costs.
Regarding apparel and footwear, reusing textile fibers also reduces emissions, water use, deforestation, and biodiversity loss. It's a win-win all around: lowering costs and promoting growth, helping brands realize net-zero goals, and offering consumers more sustainable options.
Policy and incentives to promote circularity in textiles, like those in the act, will be instrumental in establishing reuse and recycling programs. However, results won't happen overnight. It will take time for the industry to ramp up at scale and even more time to change consumer behavior. For example, when did you last bring an old shirt or sock with a hole to a fiber recycling bin? Many consumers likely don't know where to find a fiber bin, let alone are actively using one.
Net-positive change
Despite these complexities, the Americas Act offers tangible benefits to the U.S., Western Hemisphere nations, and the apparel industry at large. It's part of a larger shift underway toward a more regional type of globalization than in prior decades, with more sustainable and circular practices and a more ethical supply chain free of forced labor—one in which apparel plays center stage.
Long story short, if passed, the Americas Act is an important step in the right direction. The one caveat is not to count on it as a silver bullet but rather one of several deliberate actions to create a meaningful and positive change.
ReposiTrak, a global food traceability network operator, will partner with Upshop, a provider of store operations technology for food retailers, to create an end-to-end grocery traceability solution that reaches from the supply chain to the retail store, the firms said today.
The partnership creates a data connection between suppliers and the retail store. It works by integrating Salt Lake City-based ReposiTrak’s network of thousands of suppliers and their traceability shipment data with Austin, Texas-based Upshop’s network of more than 450 retailers and their retail stores.
That accomplishment is important because it will allow food sector trading partners to meet the U.S. FDA’s Food Safety Modernization Act Section 204d (FSMA 204) requirements that they must create and store complete traceability records for certain foods.
And according to ReposiTrak and Upshop, the traceability solution may also unlock potential business benefits. It could do that by creating margin and growth opportunities in stores by connecting supply chain data with store data, thus allowing users to optimize inventory, labor, and customer experience management automation.
"Traceability requires data from the supply chain and – importantly – confirmation at the retail store that the proper and accurate lot code data from each shipment has been captured when the product is received. The missing piece for us has been the supply chain data. ReposiTrak is the leader in capturing and managing supply chain data, starting at the suppliers. Together, we can deliver a single, comprehensive traceability solution," Mark Hawthorne, chief innovation and strategy officer at Upshop, said in a release.
"Once the data is flowing the benefits are compounding. Traceability data can be used to improve food safety, reduce invoice discrepancies, and identify ways to reduce waste and improve efficiencies throughout the store,” Hawthorne said.
Under FSMA 204, retailers are required by law to track Key Data Elements (KDEs) to the store-level for every shipment containing high-risk food items from the Food Traceability List (FTL). ReposiTrak and Upshop say that major industry retailers have made public commitments to traceability, announcing programs that require more traceability data for all food product on a faster timeline. The efforts of those retailers have activated the industry, motivating others to institute traceability programs now, ahead of the FDA’s enforcement deadline of January 20, 2026.
Inclusive procurement practices can fuel economic growth and create jobs worldwide through increased partnerships with small and diverse suppliers, according to a study from the Illinois firm Supplier.io.
The firm’s “2024 Supplier Diversity Economic Impact Report” found that $168 billion spent directly with those suppliers generated a total economic impact of $303 billion. That analysis can help supplier diversity managers and chief procurement officers implement programs that grow diversity spend, improve supply chain competitiveness, and increase brand value, the firm said.
The companies featured in Supplier.io’s report collectively supported more than 710,000 direct jobs and contributed $60 billion in direct wages through their investments in small and diverse suppliers. According to the analysis, those purchases created a ripple effect, supporting over 1.4 million jobs and driving $105 billion in total income when factoring in direct, indirect, and induced economic impacts.
“At Supplier.io, we believe that empowering businesses with advanced supplier intelligence not only enhances their operational resilience but also significantly mitigates risks,” Aylin Basom, CEO of Supplier.io, said in a release. “Our platform provides critical insights that drive efficiency and innovation, enabling companies to find and invest in small and diverse suppliers. This approach helps build stronger, more reliable supply chains.”
As U.S. small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) face an uncertain business landscape in 2025, a substantial majority (67%) expect positive growth in the new year compared to 2024, according to a survey from DHL.
However, the survey also showed that businesses could face a rocky road to reach that goal, as they navigate a complex environment of regulatory/policy shifts and global market volatility. Both those issues were cited as top challenges by 36% of respondents, followed by staffing/talent retention (11%) and digital threats and cyber attacks (2%).
Against that backdrop, SMEs said that the biggest opportunity for growth in 2025 lies in expanding into new markets (40%), followed by economic improvements (31%) and implementing new technologies (14%).
As the U.S. prepares for a broad shift in political leadership in Washington after a contentious election, the SMEs in DHL’s survey were likely split evenly on their opinion about the impact of regulatory and policy changes. A plurality of 40% were on the fence (uncertain, still evaluating), followed by 24% who believe regulatory changes could negatively impact growth, 20% who see these changes as having a positive impact, and 16% predicting no impact on growth at all.
That uncertainty also triggered a split when respondents were asked how they planned to adjust their strategy in 2025 in response to changes in the policy or regulatory landscape. The largest portion (38%) of SMEs said they remained uncertain or still evaluating, followed by 30% who will make minor adjustments, 19% will maintain their current approach, and 13% who were willing to significantly adjust their approach.
Specifically, the two sides remain at odds over provisions related to the deployment of semi-automated technologies like rail-mounted gantry cranes, according to an analysis by the Kansas-based 3PL Noatum Logistics. The ILA has strongly opposed further automation, arguing it threatens dockworker protections, while the USMX contends that automation enhances productivity and can create long-term opportunities for labor.
In fact, U.S. importers are already taking action to prevent the impact of such a strike, “pulling forward” their container shipments by rushing imports to earlier dates on the calendar, according to analysis by supply chain visibility provider Project44. That strategy can help companies to build enough safety stock to dampen the damage of events like the strike and like the steep tariffs being threatened by the incoming Trump administration.
Likewise, some ocean carriers have already instituted January surcharges in pre-emption of possible labor action, which could support inbound ocean rates if a strike occurs, according to freight market analysts with TD Cowen. In the meantime, the outcome of the new negotiations are seen with “significant uncertainty,” due to the contentious history of the discussion and to the timing of the talks that overlap with a transition between two White House regimes, analysts said.
That percentage is even greater than the 13.21% of total retail sales that were returned. Measured in dollars, returns (including both legitimate and fraudulent) last year reached $685 billion out of the $5.19 trillion in total retail sales.
“It’s clear why retailers want to limit bad actors that exhibit fraudulent and abusive returns behavior, but the reality is that they are finding stricter returns policies are not reducing the returns fraud they face,” Michael Osborne, CEO of Appriss Retail, said in a release.
Specifically, the report lists the leading types of returns fraud and abuse reported by retailers in 2024, including findings that:
60% of retailers surveyed reported incidents of “wardrobing,” or the act of consumers buying an item, using the merchandise, and then returning it.
55% cited cases of returning an item obtained through fraudulent or stolen tender, such as stolen credit cards, counterfeit bills, gift cards obtained through fraudulent means or fraudulent checks.
48% of retailers faced occurrences of returning stolen merchandise.
Together, those statistics show that the problem remains prevalent despite growing efforts by retailers to curb retail returns fraud through stricter returns policies, while still offering a sufficiently open returns policy to keep customers loyal, they said.
“Returns are a significant cost for retailers, and the rise of online shopping could increase this trend,” Kevin Mahoney, managing director, retail, Deloitte Consulting LLP, said. “As retailers implement policies to address this issue, they should avoid negatively affecting customer loyalty and retention. Effective policies should reduce losses for the retailer while minimally impacting the customer experience. This approach can be crucial for long-term success.”