• Government has raised import duties on selected polyester staple fibres and dyed woven cotton fabrics to 40% plus US$2.50 per kg
• The tariff review aims to correct long-standing market distortions caused by cheap imports, product misclassification, and weak enforcement, which have historically suppressed capacity utilisation and undermined domestic fabric producers
• Policy success will hinge on enforcement, particularly against smuggling and rebate abuse, as higher tariffs alone will not translate into sustainable local production without effective border and market controls

Harare - The Government has reviewed the customs duty on selected polyester staple fibres and dyed woven cotton fabrics to 40% plus US$2.50 per kilogram, according to the 2026 National Budget measures under the Cotton-to-Clothing Value Chain framework, in a move aimed at realigning trade policy with the current structure of Zimbabwe’s fabric manufacturing sector.

Previously, in 2018, a flat 30% duty was imposed on imported cotton fabrics to protect local industries.

‘’ In support of local production, I propose to review and align the customs duty rate on selected polyester staple fibres with dyed woven fabrics of cotton at a rate of 40% + US$2.50 per kg,’’ Minister of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion Mthuli Ncube said.

The intervention comes after years in which domestic fabric producers operated in a severely constrained environment, characterised by declining cotton output, chronic under-utilisation of manufacturing capacity, rising import penetration, and the gradual collapse of downstream textile linkages.

While recent investment has improved installed capacity, market absorption has remained weak, prompting authorities to shift from recovery support to protective measures.

Zimbabwe’s fabric manufacturing industry was once anchored by a vertically integrated cotton-to-clothing ecosystem, supported by robust cotton production, functioning ginneries, spinning mills, weaving plants, and garment factories.

That structure began to unravel in the late 1990s and early 2000s as macroeconomic instability, foreign currency shortages, and inconsistent industrial policy eroded competitiveness.

Cotton production  the foundation of the value chain became increasingly volatile. Farmer payments were delayed, contract financing weakened, and confidence in the crop declined.

As lint exports became a primary source of foreign currency, domestic beneficiation was deprioritised, leaving spinners and fabric manufacturers short of raw materials or forced to import yarn at prohibitive costs.

At the same time, fabric producers were hit by an influx of cheap imported textiles, often entering the country through misclassification or informal channels. This distorted pricing, drove down factory utilisation, and pushed several mills into prolonged dormancy or closure including David whitehead, Madzone Enterprise, and Cotton printers among others . By the mid-2010s, Zimbabwe’s fabric manufacturing capacity existed largely on paper, with only fragments of the industry still operational.

In recent years, investment in cotton farming, ginning, spinning, and weaving has gradually returned, lifting installed capacity to approximately 15 million metres of polyester fabrics and 25 million metres of cotton fabrics. However, this recovery occurred in a market still dominated by imports, limiting the commercial viability of local production.

Fabric manufacturers faced a structural contradiction: they were expected to invest, modernise, and operate formally, yet competed against imported fabrics that benefited from lower duties, under-invoicing, and weak border enforcement. In this context, capacity expansion did not automatically translate into sustainable production.

Government’s acknowledgement of this imbalance is central to the tariff review. By aligning customs duties on competing imports, authorities aim to correct a market failure that has long undermined domestic manufacturers.

The tariff adjustment does not stand alone, it complements earlier interventions in the cotton sector, including the 30/70% Lint 120 Agreement, which requires ginners to supply at least 30% of lint to local processors before exporting the balance. This measure was introduced in 2023 after years in which lint exports starved domestic spinners of raw material, weakening the entire value chain.

Together with tighter controls on the Clothing Manufacturers Rebate Scheme, the policy framework seeks to rebuild linkages between cotton farmers, ginners, spinners, fabric producers, and garment manufacturers. The emphasis is no longer solely on export earnings, but on domestic value retention.

For local fabric producers, the revised duty structure offers partial relief from import-driven price suppression. Through raising the cost of competing fabrics, the policy narrows the price gap that previously made local production unviable, allowing manufacturers to recover costs related to energy, labour, compliance, and maintenance.

However, the policy does not eliminate competition. Imported fabrics will still enter the market, but under conditions intended to reflect their true cost. This shifts competition toward product quality, delivery reliability, and production efficiency, areas where local manufacturers can compete if utilisation improves.

Within this broader industry backdrop, the return of David Whitehead Textiles represents a notable  but not singular  development. The company’s revival after years of inactivity reflects renewed investor confidence in Zimbabwe’s textile potential, yet its challenges mirror those faced by the sector as a whole.

Like other fabric producers, David Whitehead operates in a market shaped by import pressure, energy constraints, and informal trade. Its renewed operations do not negate the structural issues that have historically undermined fabric manufacturing; rather, they highlight why policy alignment is now considered necessary.

The company’s experience highlights a wider point, without market protection and enforcement, even well-capitalised manufacturers struggle to translate capacity into sustainable output.

Regionally, Zimbabwe’s policy direction aligns with measures taken by peer economies. South Africa, Ethiopia, and Tanzania have all combined tariff protection with localisation requirements to stabilise textile industries during recovery phases. Where enforcement has been effective, local production has gained ground. Where it has not, protection has failed.

In the short term, the policy should ease competitive pressure on formal producers. In the medium term, success will depend on enforcement against smuggling, discipline in rebate administration, and consistent supply of lint to local processors.

Equity Axis News