The U.S. defense procurement's domestic sourcing requirement for textiles is shifting from principle to strict enforcement. In June 2026, the House Armed Services Committee passed the FY2027 National Defense Authorization Act, which includes new reporting requirements for Berry Amendment compliance. This mandates detailed oversight of the entire supply chain from fiber to finished sewn products. For Chinese fabric suppliers long reliant on U.S. military uniform orders, this is not a warning but an imminent barrier.
Core Changes and Industry Context
The Berry Amendment itself is not new—it has required the Department of Defense to prioritize domestically produced textiles since 1941. However, enforcement has been flexible, with some military items bypassing restrictions through fabric imports or overseas assembly. The new NDAA provisions compel the DoD to submit annual compliance data to Congress, including the domestic sourcing ratio for each textile category and the number and reasons for waiver requests.
The National Council of Textile Organizations welcomed this as a critical step to restore the Berry Amendment's deterrent effect. From an industry perspective, the move directly addresses anxiety over declining U.S. textile capacity. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics data, U.S. textile employment fell about 12% between 2020 and 2025, while military textile imports rose nearly 8%. The legislation essentially uses regulatory tools to support domestic capacity.
Impact on Chinese Textile Exports
China is a key indirect supplier of U.S. military textiles. Although finished uniforms are often labeled "Made in USA," intermediate goods like fabrics, zippers, and buttons are heavily sourced from China, Vietnam, and Bangladesh. The new requirement to report "each tier of supplier origin" means Chinese fabrics, even if shipped to Mexico or Central America for sewing, can still be traced back when they reach U.S. military warehouses.
This tiered oversight will have three effects:
- First, compliance costs will spike. Exporters must provide full origin documentation from spinning to dyeing, with third-party certification.
- Second, order shifting will accelerate. U.S. military buyers may preemptively move fabric orders to NATO members like Turkey or Portugal to avoid compliance risks.
- Third, transshipment routes will narrow. The model of routing through Southeast Asia or Central America into U.S. military supply chains faces stricter scrutiny.
New Trends in Global Textile Supply Chains
This event is not isolated. It reflects a global shift from "efficiency-first" to "security-first" in textile supply chains. Since 2025, the EU's Sustainable Textiles Strategy has required importers to provide supply chain due diligence reports, and Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry has launched a fiber industry supply chain strengthening plan. The U.S. NDAA provisions embed national security logic directly into civilian procurement systems.
For Chinese textile firms, this means the risk of relying on large single-market orders is accumulating. Over the past decade, military and workwear orders, with their large volumes and stable cycles, have been profit anchors for many exporters. But these orders are now becoming geopolitical bargaining chips. Companies should reassess their customer portfolios to avoid tying more than 30% of capacity to a single politically sensitive market.