Sponsored by InterpowerReviewed by Olivia FrostApr 17 2026
The November 2022 edition of Connections highlighted a think tank’s strategy to decouple manufacturing from China. Subsequently, the April 2023 edition of InfoPower explored the concept of American reshoring.
There is no specific year when American manufacturers began reshoring from China back to America. However, when Americans suddenly found themselves without access to everyday household items and foods as the COVID-19 pandemic began, enthusiasm toward reshoring increased. It was not just America’s supply chain that was stretched to its limit: other countries also found themselves severely affected.
With the domestic and global supply chains facing huge difficulties, American companies accelerated the reshoring process as large numbers of Chinese ports were forced to shut down due to quarantine protocols. The world was also facing the problem of shipping container hoarding, as well as increasing wages in China: these factors pushed the great American reshore into hyperdrive.
Companies of various sizes and industries pursued reshoring for different reasons, seeking to reduce their dependence on China. One common denominator drove this choice – the stability of the American economic system, including access to its supply chain and workforce to keep things running. The American GDP was around $30.57 trillion, compared to China’s $19.23 trillion. This difference was significant enough to have a serious impact, especially when faced with turbulent and unprecedented economic times.
After 1990, one significant factor that first led companies to offshore to China was access to a giant pool of low-wage labor. Tech giants like Apple were able to pay Chinese workers between two and three dollars an hour.
Chinese policy expert, Emily de La Bruyere, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), and founder of Horizon Advisory, has suggested that the relatively high percentage of Chinese ownership in foreign companies typically means a slower decoupling strategy when foreign companies need to break away from China. While her prediction has proven mostly accurate, from 2022–2024, there was an acceleration in decoupling strategies that went beyond expert predictions.
One of de La Bruyere's primary case studies of decoupling on a large scale was the European aerospace company, Airbus. Approximately 23 % of the company’s revenue derives from China, with last year’s total revenue reaching $75 billion. The company has traded science and technology (including avionics) for its significant share of the Chinese market.
De La Bruyere claims that Airbus’s share of the Chinese market may decline as a result of China’s domestic expansion: its economy continues to grow following large trade deals with America, Europe, and the wider global marketplace. In fact, Airbus may have no share at all as China may eventually create its own version of Airbus.
Another knock-on effect of reshoring is that, during a potential supply chain collapse, the most dynamic supply chain wins. If ports are forced to close during quarantine, the product will not move; when the product is left sitting in warehouses waiting for the government’s green light, business operations come to a standstill. Even with the higher labor costs in America, being able to quickly obtain raw materials, deliver faster manufacturing lead times, and offer quick shipping may prove to be the best value.
During September of 2023, Boston Consulting Group (BCG) published a piece with the headline, ‘Reshoring: More than 90 % of companies in North America have relocated their production processes and supply chain in the last five years’. Around the same time, Deloitte’s ‘Future of Freight’ report claimed that by 2030, a major reshoring shift could reduce the share of Asian imports to the U.S. by around 40 %.
Though there may be vagaries in the first report, such as suggesting that 90 % represents “partial” reshoring, and the prediction of 40 % by 2030 may not fully materialize, such reports coincide with the recent rush of American manufacturing commitments in 2025. It is not completely clear whether BCG’s ‘90 %’ claim refers to a combination of reshoring and near-shoring, since both are cited. However, the numbers in 2025 showed clear indicators that reshoring was underway.
In 2025, the U.S. committed $13 trillion to the American economy alone, which is close to last year’s total Chinese GDP ($19.2 trillion). This shows that companies are returning to US shores. While American manufacturing may not ever achieve 53 % of the total GDP again, there is something of a manufacturing ‘renaissance’, judging by the company names and amounts that are being invested into the economy.
Businesses must also face cyclic upturns and downturns for various reasons, including strikes. It’s possible that some CEOs foresaw the Chinese worker strikes of April and May 2025 based on previous strike trends in China.
It remains unclear as to whether the strikes continue, as only a couple of unfamiliar outlets have mentioned the strikes across the entire web. Most links mentioned much earlier Chinese strikes, which were mostly irrelevant to those of 2025. This can be one of the limitations of governments that limit access to the free press.
The most recent Chinese worker strikes were believed to be driven by an increase in worker wages. When China joined the World Trade Organization on December 11th, 2001, the average American took home approximately $31,000, while the average Chinese worker made just $1127.
By 2011, the average wage for a Chinese worker had risen to around $6120 annually, while the average American made $40,000, showing how the gap was closing between the two. According to Forbes, the gap continues to shrink: in 2021, the average Chinese worker made $16,153 compared to the average American salary of around $60,000.
The trend becomes clear as Chinese wages are catching up. This has intensified the push to reshore American manufacturing. The final result could be one that benefits Americans in the process.
This information has been sourced, reviewed, and adapted from materials provided by Interpower.
For more information on this source, please visit Interpower.