Connect with us

Fashion

Stakeholders in T&A, retail weigh in on India’s GST 2.0 reform

Published

on

Stakeholders in T&A, retail weigh in on India’s GST 2.0 reform



The 56th meeting of the GST Council held recently has culminated in a landmark restructuring of India’s indirect tax regime, with far-reaching implications across key sectors.

The earlier five-tier GST structure—comprising 0 per cent, 5 per cent, 12 per cent, 18 per cent, and 28 per cent slabs—has been replaced by a more streamlined framework featuring just two principal rates of 5 per cent and 18 per cent, supplemented by a new “sin and luxury” rate of 40 per cent for a narrow band of goods.

The revised GST rates are scheduled to take effect from September 22.

For the apparel and textile sector, the council has fixed a uniform 5 per cent GST rate on readymade garments and made ups, excluding items under HS codes 63053200, 63053300, and 6309.

In a significant rationalisation, the GST on manmade fibres has been slashed from 18 per cent to 5 per cent, while yarns have been brought down from 12 per cent to 5 per cent. This alignment effectively corrects the long-standing inverted duty structure (IDS) across the MMF value chain—fibre, yarn, and fabric—removing a key distortion that had undermined manufacturing competitiveness and locked up working capital.

Given that a substantial portion of MMF production takes place in the MSME segment, the rate cuts are expected to alleviate cost burdens, enhance liquidity, and improve cash flow efficiency.

More importantly, the move bolsters the global price competitiveness of Indian MMF-based garments, reinforcing the country’s strategic objective of becoming a dominant hub for synthetic textiles and MMF-based apparel.

The timing of the GST overhaul is particularly crucial, offering timely relief to an industry reeling from the impact of US President Donald Trump’s steep 50 per cent tariff on Indian goods.

While the Government has maintained that the GST reform has been in the works for over a year and is not a reactionary policy move to US tariffs, the revised GST structure is nonetheless seen as a much-needed support mechanism for export-oriented industries navigating severe external shocks.

Industry stakeholders largely welcomed the reform, viewing it as a long-overdue rationalisation of what many felt was an irrational tax structure.

S.K. Sundararaman, Chairman of the Southern India Mills Association (SIMA), reportedly noted that the prior tax regime—where MMF inputs were taxed higher than outputs—effectively made affordable clothing more expensive for end consumers. The rectification is expected not only to enhance affordability but also to reduce import dependency by promoting domestic value addition.

Rakesh Mehra, Chairman of the Confederation of Indian Textile Industry, echoed similar sentiments, emphasising that the alignment of tax rates across the MMF value chain is a critical step toward resolving longstanding working capital constraints faced by thousands of spinners and weavers.

Mehra reportedly also pointed out that over 70 per cent to 80 per cent of the textile and apparel ecosystem is comprised of MSMEs, many of which operate on tight margins and limited cash reserves. For them, any measure that eases input cost burdens and streamlines refunds has a direct bearing on operational viability and market competitiveness.

Some concerns have, however, emerged centring on the move to impose an 18 per cent GST on garments priced above ₹2,500.

The Clothing Manufacturers Association of India (CMAI), while fully endorsing the revised GST rate structure and commending the Government for accepting two key industry demands—the elimination of the inverted duty structure by applying a uniform 5 per cent  GST across the entire value chain from fibre onward, and the adoption of a fibre-neutral approach by aligning MMF and cotton fibre chains—has urged the GST Council to address one anomaly: the imposition of 18 per cent GST on garments priced above ₹2,500.

CMAI stressed that this higher tax rate undermines affordability and creates an unnecessary burden on consumers, despite the broader positive intent of the reform.

The Retailers Association of India (RAI), while supportive of the move towards a simpler dual-rate GST system, also flagged the structural shortcomings of price-based tax slabs. The RAI has recommended the adoption of a uniform GST rate across product categories, cautioning that the 18 per cent GST on apparel items priced above ₹2,500 could distort consumer behaviour and suppress demand in key segments of the fashion retail market.

Some industry insiders also believe that the differential tax treatment based on price bands may inadvertently fuel the growth of the grey market, leading to an uptick in counterfeit and substandard goods as consumers seek cheaper alternatives.

Others have highlighted that apparel brands and retailers typically operate on razor-thin margins and may have no option but to pass on the higher tax burden to the consumers.

In such a scenario, the anticipated growth in domestic fashion retail could be impacted.

Notwithstanding the apprehensions, the on-ground impact of the new GST structure will become more apparent in the quarters following its implementation, most stakeholders felt, while underlining that with any policy overhaul of this magnitude, one cannot completely rule out transitional friction.

However, the broader consensus within the industry suggests that the benefits, particularly in terms of ease of doing business and improved cost efficiencies, might very well outweigh the short-term disruptions, if any.

The 56th GST Council meeting introduced a simplified regime, collapsing the earlier five-rate system into two primary slabs.
A uniform 5 per cent GST has been fixed for most garments and manmade fibres/yarns.
Some trade bodies have raised concerns over the 18 per cent GST on garments above ₹2,500; the majority, however, feel the reform will boost competitiveness and sectoral growth.

Fibre2Fashion News Desk (DR)



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Fashion

US cotton acreage seen falling to decade low in 2026: CoBank

Published

on

US cotton acreage seen falling to decade low in 2026: CoBank



US cotton planted area is projected to decline for a second consecutive year in 2026, with acreage expected to fall to 9 million acres, down 3 per cent year on year and marking the lowest level in more than a decade, according to CoBank analysis. The outlook reflects subdued price competitiveness relative to alternative crops and shifting producer economics ahead of spring planting decisions.

Regional adjustments are anticipated to drive the contraction. Cotton acreage across the southern United States is expected to transition towards soybeans amid improved profitability prospects, while irrigated cotton areas in the Plains are likely to shift towards corn production as producers rebalance crop rotations and manage input cost pressures, CoBank said in an article by Tanner Ehmke and Emmie Noyes.

Slower US cotton export momentum to China, intensifying competition from Brazil and Australia in global markets, and continued substitution by manmade fibres have collectively restrained price recovery, limiting growers’ willingness to expand cotton area.

US cotton planted area is forecast to decline for a second straight year to about 9 million acres in 2026, down 3 per cent year on year, reflecting weak price competitiveness.
Acreage shifts towards soybeans and corn, slower exports to China, rising competition and fibre substitution are weighing on plantings.
Meanwhile, farm support payments are expected to stabilise the overall acreage decline.

Despite the projected decline, policy mechanisms are expected to provide a degree of support. Base acreage payments under farm support programmes are likely to cushion the adjustment, helping stabilise cotton plantings and preventing a sharper contraction in the 2026 season.

Fibre2Fashion News Desk (SG)



Source link

Continue Reading

Fashion

Create Garment Trading Adjudicator: Researchers tell UK govt

Published

on

Create Garment Trading Adjudicator: Researchers tell UK govt



Researchers have called on the UK government to establish a Garment Trading Adjudicator to tackle unfair purchasing practices in the fashion supply chain, following new evidence of widespread malpractice in garment manufacturing.

The recommendation follows a survey analysed by researchers from the University of Nottingham and the University of Leicester in collaboration with trade justice charity Transform Trade, which found systemic late payments, last-minute order changes without compensation and post-contract price reductions. Manufacturers reported that such practices shift financial risk from brands and retailers onto suppliers and ultimately workers.

Among respondents, 31 per cent reported order cancellations, while 78 per cent said brands failed to cover costs of last-minute changes to confirmed orders. A further 75 per cent stated prices were not adjusted to reflect minimum wage increases. Additionally, 67 per cent experienced order volumes being reduced without corresponding revisions to unit costs, and 44 per cent faced repeated payment extension requests. Ten per cent reported payments delayed by more than three months beyond agreed terms.

Researchers are urging the UK government to establish a Garment Trading Adjudicator after a survey by the University of Nottingham, University of Leicester and Transform Trade found widespread unfair purchasing practices in UK garment manufacturing.
The study highlights systemic late payments, cancellations and cost pressures affecting manufacturers and workers.

Manufacturers said these pressures had direct workforce consequences, including increased overtime to meet sudden order spikes for 73 per cent of workers, reduced hours following cancellations for 58 per cent, and job terminations for 29 per cent.

The survey also revealed limited confidence in formal dispute mechanisms. Only 22 per cent viewed the legal system as a viable route for redress, and none considered government or multistakeholder initiatives effective. Respondents cited financial and legal barriers, stating that pursuing action against brands was often unaffordable.

Dr Sabina Lawreniuk of the University of Nottingham’s School of Geography said, “Our research shows that current brand purchasing practices directly impact workers, resulting in precarious and insecure work across UK factories. Voluntary codes have proven insufficient. If we are serious about protecting workers and supporting a sustainable UK fashion industry, we need a Garment Trading Adjudicator to enforce fair practices across the sector.”

She added that the findings emphasise the need to rebalance relationships between brands and fashion manufacturers in the UK to support domestic manufacturing, sustainable business models, investment strategies, and to strengthen work and employment in the sector.

Professor Nikolaus Hammer of the University of Leicester also highlighted the importance of rebalancing these relationships to ensure sustainable UK production.

The researchers and Transform Trade said a sector regulator, like the Groceries Code Adjudicator, could help curb unfair purchasing practices and create greater accountability across fashion supply chains.

Fibre2Fashion News Desk (CG)



Source link

Continue Reading

Fashion

New Zealand’s apparel imports ease down to $101 mn in Jan 2026

Published

on

New Zealand’s apparel imports ease down to 1 mn in Jan 2026



New Zealand’s apparel imports (HS ** and ** combined) declined to NZ$***.** million (~$***.* million) in January **** from NZ$***.** million in January ****, representing a *.* per cent year-on-year decrease. In volume terms, shipments fell to **.** million units from **.** million units, reflecting softer sourcing activity and continued inventory discipline among retailers.

Knitted apparel (HS **) imports declined to NZ$**.** million (~$**.* million) in January **** from NZ$**.** million in January ****, down *.* per cent year on year. Volumes also fell to **.** million units from **.** million units, suggesting weaker replenishment demand and continued emphasis on controlled inventory cycles across the retail segment.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending