Several economists and industry experts believe the US may find it easier to capture a larger share of Bangladesh’s overall imports than to unseat China and India as its entrenched suppliers of apparel-industry raw materials.
The scale of the challenge is perhaps evident from the broader trade figures. In FY25, Bangladesh reportedly imported $18.19 billion worth of goods from China and $9.62 billion from India, compared with $2.72 billion from the United States. However, overall import figures do not establish which countries dominate the supply of raw materials and intermediate inputs.
The US-Bangladesh Agreement on Reciprocal Trade could give US suppliers a stronger foothold by tying zero-tariff access for some Bangladeshi apparel exports to US-made textile inputs.
Experts say China and India remain entrenched in Bangladesh’s supply chain, with China strong in fabrics and India in yarn.
Cost, proximity and delivery reliability may limit any major sourcing shift.
Bangladesh’s apparel industry depends on more than raw cotton, including manmade fibres, yarn, knitted and woven fabrics, dyes and chemicals, and China and India occupy different but significant positions across this supply chain. According to some estimates, in 2024 China accounted for about 78.46 per cent of Bangladesh’s fabric imports, while India is estimated to have supplied 53.66 per cent of its imported yarn.
The figures illustrate the countries’ distinct strengths in supplying the inputs required for garment production.
China’s advantage lies in its extensive manufacturing base, product diversity, and capacity to supply fabrics across a range of categories and specifications. India benefits from established cotton, spinning and yarn industries, as well as its geographical proximity.
Together, these capabilities give Bangladeshi apparel manufacturers access to established supplier networks and a broad range of textile inputs.
The United States, despite its strength in raw cotton, has a more limited presence across several downstream segments, reports suggest, and as industry observers point out, supplying cotton is different from supplying yarn, fabrics and processing materials needed to manufacture export-ready garments.
Cost and delivery requirements further reinforce the position of Asian suppliers. Manufacturers weigh freight, inventory requirements, quality, and reliability alongside purchase prices. Proximity and established trading networks can help Asian suppliers reduce procurement costs and delays, although actual landed costs and delivery times vary by product and shipment.
For factories operating on tight export schedules, any disruption in input supplies can affect production planning, delivery commitments, and working capital. Established sourcing relationships therefore remain an important consideration when manufacturers evaluate alternative suppliers.
The ART could nevertheless give the United States a stronger foothold in Bangladesh’s import market. Some observers believe energy, cotton, aircraft, and medical equipment offer significant opportunities for American suppliers.
The agreement’s proposed textile-input mechanism could also encourage Bangladeshi exporters to consider US-produced cotton and manmade fibre inputs where the resulting tariff benefits outweigh any additional sourcing costs. The extent of this shift will depend on implementation, the volume of exports eligible for preferential treatment and the commercial terms available to manufacturers, industry people maintained.
The United States could therefore gain ground in raw cotton and selected textile inputs without displacing China and India across the broader supply chain.
Fibre2Fashion News Desk (DR)
