Hyperglobalization vs. Resilient Supply Chains

As most Americans learned during COVID—and U.S. military analysts warned years earlier—it is not tenable for the United States to be so reliant on only a few nations to produce the goods necessary for our safety, health, and defense. Resilience, which would be served by creating more domestic production capacity and diversifying our import sources, should be the goal as we strive to replace trade and investment models that have caused concentration of production and long, brittle global supply chains.

From 1998 to 2023, the United States lost more than 70,000 manufacturing facilities, which used to produce a diverse array of goods. These losses resulted from U.S. trade deficits that began in 1975 and expanded enormously with corporate-rigged trade policies that made it easier and less risky to move production overseas, a lack of discipline against currency misalignments, and a merger mania enabled by a lack of competition policy.

U.S. businesses were further harmed by the de minimis trade loophole exploited by e-commerce giants to ship commercial goods directly to consumers while evading tariffs, taxes, inspection, and other normal Customs requirements. This loophole was finally closed in July 2025 following a pressure campaign from domestic manufacturers and local retailers, law enforcement and families affected by fentanyl entering via de minimis, unions, and civil society organizations including Rethink Trade. E-commerce companies can no longer bypass inspections that restrict unsafe, counterfeit, or forced-labor-linked goods from entering the market.