A crack is closing in the US military textile market. In June 2026, the House Armed Services Committee passed the FY2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), adding mandatory reporting requirements for Berry Amendment enforcement. The Defense Department must now explain each waiver for domestic sourcing and disclose the share of foreign suppliers in military textiles. This is no symbolic revision; it is a de facto supply chain firewall.
Background
The Berry Amendment, enacted in 1941, mandates that all US military purchases of clothing, fabrics, and yarns be 100% American-made. For decades, the DoD bypassed this requirement through 'commercial product exceptions,' allowing Chinese, Vietnamese, and Bangladeshi suppliers to enter the logistics chain via subcontracting. In 2025, about 18% of military uniform raw materials or finished goods came from abroad, with Chinese cotton yarn and polyester filament accounting for the largest shares.
The new bill requires the DoD to submit a comprehensive report by March 2027, listing all waivers from the past three years, including justifications, alternative supplier assessments, and country distribution of foreign suppliers. Every path around domestic sourcing will now be under congressional scrutiny. The National Council of Textile Organizations (NCTO) welcomed this as 'a critical step to restore the legislative intent of the Berry Amendment.'
Industry Impact
For Chinese cotton and chemical fiber exporters, this is a clear bearish signal. China is the world's largest producer of cotton yarn and polyester staple fiber, and an invisible upstream supplier to US military procurement—exporting fabrics to processing plants in Mexico and Central America, which then feed into US military orders. The new waiver review mechanism will significantly raise compliance costs for this route.
The deeper impact lies in the demonstration effect. The US federal government spends approximately $4–5 billion annually on military textiles. While the absolute volume is modest, it sets the benchmark for 'Made in USA' policy. If the military strictly enforces domestic sourcing, other agencies—such as the Department of Veterans Affairs and Homeland Security—may follow, extending localization to workwear and protective gear.
From a supply chain perspective, upstream chemical fiber companies will feel the pressure first. US domestic polyester capacity is concentrated in a few East Coast plants, with annual output of about 1.2 million tons, meeting only 60% of domestic demand. If the military mandates domestic polyester filament, a supply gap will emerge in the civilian market, pushing up chemical fiber prices. This could be a short-term boon for Chinese polyester mills—civilian orders may rise, but military premium margins will shrink.