This story is a free excerpt from our FREE supply chain report. Make sure you download the full report here and get an insight into the biggest movements shaping fashion retail.
What do Showpo, White Fox and LSKD have in common?
In 2025, they all rolled out local fulfilment solutions in the United States. That is despite the wild rollercoaster of tariffs and the scrapping of de minimis exemptions over the last year, dished out by President Donald Trump.
Showpo announced the opening of a new warehouse in Texas via Instagram, which allows for same-day delivery on some orders, according to its website.
White Fox launched its own US-based warehouse in August this year and signed on an American logistics services company to help power it. This shifted the hoodie brand’s Australia-to-US fulfilment strategy, which historically would have cost more and taken longer to manage.
In a promotional post on the company’s website, White Fox head of digital Rebecca Babic said she and her team managed to lean into the recent uncertain times and launch the US-based warehouse in under four weeks.
“I am incredibly proud of our team and what we pulled together in the timeframe; most businesses wouldn’t be able to do this, and it speaks volumes of the iconic Australian brand and people we have working at White Fox Boutique,” Babic said.
As for LSKD, they opened a distribution hub that spans more than 3,300 square metres and employs up to 180 people. The current warehouse leadership team is around 10, with a permanent core team of about 50 and an additional 50 casuals.
LSKD founder and CEO Jason Daniel says the US warehouse has been in the works for over twelve months.
“We’ve seen strong and growing demand from our American community, and this move is about improving their experience – faster shipping, easier returns and a more sustainable supply chain overall,” Daniel says. “The US has become one of our fastest-growing markets outside Australia, and launching a local warehouse allows us to better serve our community while continuing to expand our global footprint.”
When asked whether this was a reactive decision to the tariff and de minimis changes, Daniel says this expansion has always been part of LSKD’s long-term growth plan rather than a response to trade policy changes.
“Like most global apparel brands, we’re continually monitoring and adapting to changes in trade policy and supply chain conditions. The US market remains incredibly strong and viable for us, and we’ve built a loyal community there.
“The new warehouse helps mitigate the impact of tariffs by allowing us to import and distribute locally within the US, reducing shipping times, duties and overall costs for our community. We’re focused on staying agile, sustainable and community-first through every part of this process.”
But RMIT professor Vinh Thai, who specialises in supply chains and logistics, says fashion brands that are shifting fulfilment to the US market should be strategic in how they hedge that bet.
In the short term, he says brands should not consider committing their resources to having their own local stores or privately owned warehouses in the US.
“Given the unpredictability of Trump’s trade policies, including tariffs, such a commitment may imply a very high initial set-up investment,” Thai says. “It may be advisable to consider short-term measures such as using public or contracted warehouses, or employing bundling or piggybacking strategies for fulfilment.
“In addition, brands also need to do due diligence in terms of compliance, mapping all possible cost implications related to import duties, as well as variances when trading in different states of the US.”
For those looking at ramping up reach in the US, Thai says brands should first re-evaluate their product portfolio and determine which products should continue with their current fulfilment strategies (shipping from Australia to the US), and which ones should be distributed locally using local warehouses or sold via local stores.
He also says brands should check whether it’s possible to shift sourcing from manufacturing regions that are not yet impacted, or have lesser impact, from US tariffs.
Another key strategy is strengthening relationships with existing suppliers to neutralise unexpected costs. Plus-size fashion brand City Chic worked through this exact strategy, which helped boost the retailer’s own-brand sales by 25.6 per cent.
Speaking with Ragtrader in early October, City Chic CEO Phil Ryan says he and the team believe they will see an eight to 10 per cent price increase with the current 30 per cent tariff on China. His hope is that the China tariff doesn’t lift, especially not to the historical peak of 147.6 per cent in April 2025, as a majority of City Chic’s products are made in China.
In the US, the plus-size retailer sells via an online website and has stockist deals with the likes of Macy’s, Nordstrom and Target, and is keen to grow its wholesale arm in 2026. These channels are bolstered by a local warehouse, which has since been relocated to Dallas, Texas. Ryan says the new location has a much better and variable cost base, and is strategically located in the central US.
He also admits that he reduced the American team to around four part-timers.
In FY25, City Chic’s total US sales were $28.9 million, with management reporting that the American market is trading profitably despite all the bumps.
Returning to Thai, he says that cheap fast fashion brands are predominantly more affected by tariffs and the de minimis slashing, given that their supply chains are highly complex and that their manufacturers are in countries like China, Vietnam and Bangladesh that are subject to high tariffs.
“These products rely on low and fast production thanks to low labour costs in these countries, and any disruption to trade in these countries because of tariffs will have a ripple effect on distribution in the US,” he says.
He also notes that smaller and medium brands, or those exporting from countries like China and Vietnam via online platforms, will face more compliance costs and documentation, leading to increased landed costs and longer delivery times for parcels.
“Those who have already been operating stores in the US may be less affected by this new trade policy; however, their competitive advantage versus those exporting via online platforms may not be enhanced too significantly once those online exporters adapt their strategies – such as using local bonded warehouses to delay duty payment or consolidating shipments to reduce parcel unit costs.
“Larger players, in general, will be less affected than small and mid-tier brands, given the scale of their operations and sales, which take place in more diversified locations and markets.”
For 2026, Thai says strategy shifts are set to continue for brands selling into the US. Some may alter their local last-mile systems, while others may withdraw altogether.
“What that means is that from the supply perspective, there may be a reduction in supplier quantity in the market, especially those sourced from low-cost countries,” Thai says. “From the demand side, consumers who often buy fast fashion products will now need to pay more.
“However, for brands that establish supply chain facilities in the US, although their cost structures may increase in the short run, their competitive edge can be leveraged by promoting a ‘made in America’ image to higher-end segments.
“For those brands that can flexibly deploy supply chain strategies such as near-shoring, in-shoring, enhancing vendor relationships and piggybacking, there are opportunities to reach higher-end market segments that may pay off in the long run.
“Nevertheless, for small and medium brands, the main challenge will be navigating between tariff uncertainty and investment costs, especially over the long term.”