The U.S. presidential election in November will be like no other in American history in more ways than one.
Incumbent President Joseph Biden and former President Donald Trump, at age 81 and 78, respectively, are the oldest candidates to ever run for the office. According to the New York Times’ Election 2024 Polls, averages show the two presumptive party candidates in a very close race nationally, as well as in the key battleground states.
On Thursday night, the two face off in Atlanta for a debate. According to UBS chief economist Paul Donovan, intense focus on the candidates normally doesn’t occur until after the respective political party conventions when there is a better sense of the differences in the party platforms.
“On this occasion, however, a large part of the campaign has been focused on the suitability of the two candidates for office, rather than the attractions of their policy offerings,” Donovan said, adding that with suitability a key issue, the upcoming debate might actually matter.
Unlike four years ago, this year’s rematch includes the backdrop of Trump as a candidate who happens to be a former president who now is also a convicted felon. It’s hard to say what impact that might have if he were to be re-elected. According to the World Population Review, there are countries that deny up front entry for convicted felons, while others have differing restrictions. There’s no consensus on whether he could still visit as a head of state. Could he still vote in November’s election? Maybe, but that will depend on whether he gets prison time, which won’t be known until his sentencing in Manhattan on July 11.
Biden isn’t free and clear from legal issues, either. Chairman James Comer (R-Ky 1st District) and House Oversight Committee Republicans are probing Biden and his family’s business dealings here and abroad to determine whether there’s been any compromise of U.S. interests as well as national security matters.
Related Stories
Biden, like his predecessor, will face scrutiny on some key platform issues that include climate change, immigration, tariffs and trade, and taxes. Other key matters include the economy and inflation.
The 2024 election is also unique because it’s the first time in history where the candidates both have held the highest office, giving voters a chance to go beyond campaign promises and conduct a deep dive comparing the two administrations. In that vein, Sourcing Journal asked consultants and experts one question: If Pres. Trump were to get re-elected, what policy change(s) would you like to see occur from his past administration, and if Pres. Biden wins the election, what policy change(s) would you like to see over the next four years? Respondents were given wide latitude for their responses, including the possibility for a central core issue—one example is tariffs and trade—regardless of who becomes the next U.S. president.
Below are their answers. Some responses have been edited due to length and space constraints.
Julia Klyashtorny, founder, owner, and president of Apparel Solutions, a women’s apparel manufacturer:
“If President Trump were to be re-elected, the tariffs on import of Chinese goods should be re-evaluated.
“Additional tariffs on soft goods/textiles/apparel should be bifurcated between large corporations and small businesses under 50 million in annual revenues. Manufacturing in China has been the backbone of the smaller apparel companies, and additional tariffs imposed by Trump’s administration were detrimental to the survival of those businesses, which cannot afford the increased costs of imports as their margins are already paper thin with all the increases in supply chain costs.
“The tariffs should be imposed on larger companies, as well as differentiated between the product categories. Any products that could be competitively manufactured in the U.S.— the better and bridge apparel categories due to the inherent higher cost structure for American wages and cost of domestic manufacturing—could be subject to higher tariffs from China to help rebuild the American apparel manufacturing base. The product categories in the lower costs segments—those [for] mass retail and discounters that can’t be produced in the US [due to] financial non-viability—should not be subject to additional duties as it would hurt the smaller apparel companies that don’t have the option of higher cost manufacturing domestically and would be forced to shut down as a result of the increased tariffs.
“If President Biden were to be re-elected, I would suggest he re-examine his administration’s approach to illegal immigration, the management of the inflow of illegal immigrants, and the effect of it on lots of industries, [including] apparel….
“The playing field should be leveled and make the legal pathways to immigration vastly advantageous both in terms of speed and ease of navigation [to better] facilitate the inflow of educated and skilled workforce that is vetted via proper means. [This] could augment the existing workforce to help re-build traditional industries in this country that were moved off-shore in the past 30 years.”
Joshua Teitelbaum, senior counsel, international trade policy at Akin, and former deputy assistant secretary for textiles, consumer goods, and materials at the U.S. Department of Commerce:
“Well, in a dream world, I’d like to see the next President return to negotiating comprehensive free trade agreements that provide us with new market access, but that’s long ago and far away. So, whether it’s led by President Biden or former President Trump, I’d like to see the next administration look at more modest proposals to modernize the GSP (Generalized System of Preferences) program to allow for apparel eligibility, which would support moving sourcing out of China to lesser developed countries.
“And, I’d like the next administration to ensure that customs enforcement doesn’t unfairly restrict the adoption of apparel with recycled fiber so that we can really scale a circular apparel supply chain quickly.”
Rick Helfenbein, consultant and former chairman, president and CEO of the American Apparel and Footwear Association:
“Former President Trump preferred tariffs as a way to balance America’s trade deficit. In his 2024 campaign, he continues to talk tariffs—ranging anywhere from 10 percent to 60 percent—[as a replacement for the] income tax. One would hope that, if re-elected, the former President would have some retail economists on board to push back or make adjustments to these pending issues.
“If President Biden is re-elected, perhaps he could direct the mission of the U.S. Trade Representative’s office to be more progressive on international trade. Under the Biden Administration, there has been little movement on international trade with no renewal of GSP, MTB (Miscellaneous Tariff Bill) or early renewal of AGOA (African Growth and Opportunity Act)/Haiti. Instead of eliminating some of the tariffs, new tariffs have been added. It would be great to have a retail economist on board (in a new administration) to see that needs of the retail industry are addressed.”
Kim Glas, president and CEO, National Council of Textile Organizations:
“We are urging the closure of the de minimis loophole and overall stepped-up textile and apparel customs enforcement, regardless of the outcome of the presidential election.
“Under the de minimis mechanism in U.S. trade law, more than 4 million packages valued at less than $800 bypass federal scrutiny and duties in the U.S. every day. This rule is being exploited by bad actors abroad to facilitate the importation of slave-labor-made consumer goods, toxic products, and illicit fentanyl straight to American doorsteps.
Since the vast majority of de minimis imports are uninspected by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, this mechanism allows China and others to ship goods with impunity directly to U.S. consumers that violate our slave labor prohibitions and skirt consumer safety standards.
And the consequences have been devastating: U.S. textile manufacturers have shuttered 18 plants over the past several months and laid off hundreds of workers, while our Western Hemisphere trade partners have also shuttered plants and laid off tens of thousands of workers.
The executive branch has existing authorities to close the de minimis loophole and we urge immediate action to utilize those authorities to the fullest extent possible.
“In addition, we need increased customs textile and apparel enforcement of textile fraud. We applaud the Department of Homeland Security for implementing a textile and apparel enforcement plan to combat this fraud and we will continue working with the current administration to increase enforcement to help mitigate the economic harm caused by China’s predatory trade practices and to maximize civil and criminal penalties.”
Blake Harden, vice president, international trade, at the Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA):
“Regardless of who wins the White House, retailers want to see the U.S. government focus on smart trade policy that opens new markets, reduces tariff and non-tariff barriers, and addresses unfair trade practices without unnecessary collateral damage to American businesses and consumers.
“Both Biden and Trump have relied on broad-based tariffs as a tool to achieve policy goals, but punitive tariffs on consumer goods serve no strategic purpose in addressing China’s unfair trade practices related to forced technology transfer and intellectual property theft. RILA strongly opposes the use of broad-based tariffs, and over the next four years we hope to see implementation of a more strategic approach that does not further tax American consumers.”
Damon Pike, principal and technical practice leader of the National Tax Office of assurance, tax, and financial advisory services firm BDO:
“Customs and trade policy will be an important area of focus for the incoming President, regardless of who is in office, because of its ability to shape domestic industry and the economy….
“Trade and tariff policy continues to be an important issue for U.S. businesses and an area to watch in the upcoming election. The Biden administration recently proposed raising tariffs on products imported from China [and this] expansion builds on tariffs enacted under the Trump administration and supports the Biden administration’s efforts to develop domestic manufacturing in sectors such as renewable energy. These tariffs present challenges for industries that rely on these imported products, but they are likely not going to go away, regardless of which party controls the Presidency or Congress.
“To support domestic manufacturing, both parties are likely to pursue a combination of incentives, such as the tax credits introduced by the Inflation Reduction Act, and trade remedy measures, including the Section 301 ‘China’ tariffs, Section 232 ‘national security’ tariffs, and Section 201 ‘safeguard’ tariffs.”
Ram Ben Tzion, cofounder and CEO of digital vetting platform Publican:
“The next administration, regardless of who wins the elections, will face an unprecedented challenge on trade, and more specifically trade with China. Semi-conductors, AI technology, quantum and other high-performance computing, automotive, aviation, electronics, fashion, even e-commerce, all will be part of the raging trade war.
“As regulations, trade barriers, and special enforcement measures pile up, the most important policy change will be in the domain of data disclosure. No effective enforcement can be achieved in the absence of full, accurate and reliable data on all actors along the supply chain. Every Chinese company who wants to do business in the U.S. must provide appropriate visibility to its structure, ownerships, and production and trade practices.”