With just two weeks left until his self-imposed deadline for determining new furniture-specific tariffs, President Donald Trump has not said a word on the subject since his promised launch of an “investigation” in August.
What’s more, key figures in the furniture business, speaking on deep background, tell Business of Home they’ve not heard a word about what may happen, much less been contacted for any sort of investigation. Another curveball: Given the pending Supreme Court decision on the validity of most of Trump’s tariffs—oral arguments are scheduled for early November—it seems unlikely that any policies regarding furniture specifically would be enacted until that is decided.
Then again, given the president’s often mercurial approach to decision-making, we could get an answer on all of this at the drop of a social media post, with little or no advance warning.
In the meantime, as the clock ticks down to next month’s High Point Market, everyone in the industry is on the edge of their credenzas trying to navigate the convoluted state of tariffs and what could potentially happen to further upheave the furniture business if additional duties are slapped on imported products.
The saga began on August 22, when Trump posted on Truth Social that he was launching “a major Tariff Investigation” into whether the American furniture industry needed protection from imported products. A majority of the furniture sold in the U.S. is made outside the country, so there’s no question that placing more duties on these imports would have a huge impact on the business here. The president did not say how large these potential rates would be, only stating imports would be “Tariffed at a Rate yet to be determined.”
Immediately, those in and around the U.S. furniture industry pushed back, questioning the rationale for the investigation, and pointing out that the resurrection of furniture production in America was unlikely given the necessary costs and time.
“It is unclear what the impetus behind President Trump’s newfound focus on the furniture industry was,” Phillip Blee, a research analyst at investment and wealth consultancy William Blair, said in an email to Supply Chain Dive. “Clearly the national security concern around foreign furniture production is a stretch.” (The proposed tariffs would be enacted under Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act, which allows the president to impose duties on imports that constitute a threat to national security.)
Rick Lovegrove, vice president of upholstery at Universal Furniture, recently voiced his concerns to Business of Home: “The common question was: If the goal is to bring more business to U.S. factories, why are we now paying more for everything we need to make furniture—lumber, textiles, staples, mechanisms? And that’s on top of an already serious labor shortage. When you add it all up, these tariffs are significantly increasing our costs and making us less competitive in the global market.”
Fast-forward to today, and there is no evidence that the administration has been talking directly with the industry. Reaching out to a range of manufacturing and retail executives, BOH was unable to reach a single one who had been contacted by the administration—or even heard of such a dialogue. The subject even came up on RH’s most recent earnings call, with chairman and CEO Gary Friedman issuing an open request to anyone at the White House who might be listening: “Call me.”
The head of one major furniture supplier that both produces domestically and imports from Asia put it bluntly: “I have not heard anything.” If the tariffs are implemented, like many, he’s not optimistic the policy change will spur U.S. production. “Bringing furniture manufacturing back to the U.S., where we have no plants, no equipment, no skilled labor, or anyone who even wants to work in a furniture plant is just not realistic,” he said.
Another executive with a major furniture brand on the retail side that imports as well as making some upholstery in the States said he also had not been contacted as part of the investigation. In conversation with others in the business—some of whom might be proactively lobbying the administration themselves—his peers noted that “certain categories, like wood solid and veneers, will not come back to the U.S. under any tariff … and [regardless], we likely do not want those jobs of rough mill, assembly and finishing.”
That executive does believe upholstered-furniture manufacturing could be expanded if tariffs were enacted. But he doesn’t know anyone with the inside track on what may happen—nor do his international counterparts. Based on conversations with his Asian suppliers, he said, “They had no clue beyond a guess.”
The president’s 50-day deadline is entirely self-imposed; Section 232 allows the government 270 days to complete an investigation before it makes a final decision on tariffs. In other words: There’s wiggle room here, and Trump may use it. But if the initial timeline holds up, a decision on furniture tariffs could come the second week of October … just two weeks before High Point.
____________
Warren Shoulberg is the former editor in chief for several leading B2B publications. He has been a guest lecturer at the Columbia University Graduate School of Business; received honors from the International Furnishings and Design Association and the Fashion Institute of Technology; and been cited by The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN and other media as a leading industry expert. His Retail Watch columns offer deep industry insights on major markets and product categories.
