In all the talk about bringing footwear manufacturing back to the United States, maybe it’s time we consider some basic but critical questions: How many employees would be needed? What would these products cost? What should we actually be making here? And how do we incentivize companies to do it?
People Power
The United States imports around 2.5 billion pairs of shoes every year. In a highly efficient factory, one worker can make about 1,000 pairs annually. To manufacture all of those shoes domestically, we’d need 2.5 million Americans working full-time on the line — doing some of the hardest and lowest-paid work in the entire supply chain. That’s comparable to the number of employees working in chain restaurants or federal government positions or in direct farm labor. Does anyone in the footwear industry — or in elected office — truly believe we’re going to convince this immense workforce to sign up for shoe factory jobs?
The Cost Doesn’t Add Up Either
The average pair of shoes labeled “Made in the USA” requires a price of $150, starkly contrasted with the average price of a shoe sold in the U.S. of about $35. This $115 difference translates to an astonishing $310 billion annual financial burden on American consumers if all footwear were manufactured domestically. For context, Americans collectively spend about $760 billion annually on cars.
As CEO of Shoes for Crews, a leading shoe brand for workers in restaurants, hospitals, and other jobs requiring slip-resistant footwear, I was approached by a single mother who expressed concerns about the price of quality shoes. We dedicated extensive resources to develop a high-quality work shoe at a price point of $29.99, which I felt was an incredible achievement given the challenges of manufacturing affordable footwear. Yet, her words struck me: “Why do they have to cost so much? I can’t afford shoes this nice. I go to Walmart and pay $19.99.” It was a sobering moment that highlighted a harsh reality — many Americans simply cannot afford to pay $150 for shoes, no matter how well-made they are.
While some brands, and a select group of consumers, may willingly invest in high-quality, premium footwear priced between $150 and $500, it is simply untenable to expect the entire U.S. consumer base to shoulder such an exorbitant price hike. This stark reality underscores a fundamental truth: even with steep tariffs imposed at any level — U.S. footwear production cannot compete on price. This disparity reveals the harsh truth behind the revival of large-scale domestic footwear manufacturing: not only is it impractical, but it may also be detrimental to the American economy. It’s time we confront these realities head-on.
Smarter Policy, Better Outcomes
Rather than punishing companies for importing affordable, high-quality shoes, let’s reward them for making products here that are viable and responsible.
Here’s one idea: If you sell running shoes in the U.S., require the brand to produce recovery slides or some casual footwear domestically. Give them realistic targets. In exchange, reduce tariffs — many of which were already high before Trump and Biden raised them further.
Then, implement a two-dollar-per-pair waste deposit on imported shoes. Brands can earn that money back by making new shoes or consumer products from their old product. If you want to get rid of trash, make it valuable to clean up. Exempt shoes made from circular content from sales tax. That creates a win for brands, consumers, retailers, and the environment — while helping to keep old shoes out of landfills.
Is it really possible to make footwear economically in the U.S.?
It’s not about making everything here. It’s about making the right things here.
Long held pre-conceptions about footwear circularity are now misconceptions. It is possible to manufacture in the U.S. — but only with purpose. We need to focus on the kinds of products that make sense to build here: insoles, slides, sandals, and recovery footwear. These are products that can be made using recycled waste foam and even the foam from old running shoes. Contrary to common industry beliefs, this technology already exists and is scalable.
Circular — or even semi-circular — footwear must be made locally. You can’t run a closed-loop system if your loop stretches across three continents. If we’re serious about sustainability, then some of this work must happen close to home.
The industry should not simply be chasing a “Made in USA” marketing line. We need to focus on re-thinking materials, reinventing processes, and making circularity a reality. We can build world-class products that people need — at prices they can afford.
Let’s make the right stuff here. And let’s make it attractive for both big and small brands to get involved. When we do that right, the consumer wins, the environment wins, and the economy wins.
Sometimes the smart move isn’t just swinging the hammer — it’s knowing what to build, and , and where. The time to act is now, and the choice is ours: let’s make the smart move for a better tomorrow.
Stuart Jenkins founded the Blumaka insole company, is the former executive VP of Innovation and Product Development at Deckers, and the former CEO for Shoes for Crews.
