Shandong's textile and garment firms are shifting from reactive burden to proactive defense. On July 27, a specialized training on international trade friction was held in Wenshang, Jinan, organized by the Shandong Textile and Garment Industry Association and co-organized by the Wenshang Garment Accessories Chamber of Commerce, attracting over 50 local textile firms. This training was not an isolated policy briefing but a tailored risk prevention course for export-intensive regions, amid persistently high global anti-China trade remedy filings since 2020.
New Normal of Trade Friction: Combined Barriers and High Incidence
China Customs data shows that since 2020, global trade remedy filings against China have remained at historic highs, spanning chemicals, steel, and textiles. Shandong, a major textile export province, is particularly affected. Data from the training revealed that major filing countries—India, the US, the EU, and Brazil—have evolved from single anti-dumping measures to combined trade restrictions including anti-subsidy, safeguard, and anti-circumvention investigations. This means firms face not single risks but a layered barrier network.
For Jinan textile firms, this change directly impacts export order stability. One participant noted that previously, they only needed to monitor customer credit and product quality; now, they must constantly watch for sudden investigations or tariff changes in destination countries. The training outlined the evolution of the 2025 US-China tariff war and the latest legal developments after the 2026 IEEPA tariff was ruled illegal, providing critical information for firms exporting to the US to identify policy windows and seek tariff refunds.
From Contract Review to Overseas Investment: Seven Risk Categories
The first session was led by Qiu Xueda, a lawyer from Shandong Zhongcheng Qingtai (Jinan) Law Firm, who holds dual US-China legal licenses. He broke down risks for firms going overseas into seven categories: commercial, legal, political, trade, and relief measures, focusing on practical steps like credit and performance capacity review, contract signing entity confirmation, customer credit investigation, and overseas due diligence. These basic steps are often the source of disputes.
A typical scenario for textile firms: after receiving a large overseas order, failing to verify the counterparty's qualifications or having vague contract terms leads to payment delays or quality disputes. The training used case studies to show how these risks can be avoided through upfront review. More importantly, the lawyer reminded firms that risk prevention must extend beyond contract signing to the full lifecycle of overseas investments, including local legal environment assessment and political risk hedging.
Upgrading Response Awareness: From Reactive to Proactive
The second session was led by Wang Tao, senior partner at Beijing Ruiyin Law Firm, who systematically reviewed global trade remedy filing data from 2020 to the first half of 2026. He analyzed the operating logic of multi-layered trade barriers, particularly for the textile sector. He pointed out that as China's exports expand, containment has shifted from single measures to combined comprehensive trade restrictions, urging firms to raise their response awareness and move from reactive to proactive prevention.
This means firms should not wait for investigation questionnaires or filing notices but build compliance systems in daily operations, including export pricing strategies, origin documentation management, and accounting bookkeeping. Wang emphasized that proactive prevention involves early planning: assessing trade remedy risks in target markets before export, preparing response plans, and actively defending rather than abandoning markets when investigated. This mindset shift is crucial for Jinan textile firms long reliant on traditional trade models.