Australian Textile Manufacturing in Numbers: What the Data Actually Shows

Key Takeaways

• Australia’s cut and sewn textile sector generates $2.3 billion in annual revenue—a significant industry that is restructuring, not disappearing.
• TCF employment has fallen sharply from its 1989 peak, while the number of domestic textile businesses continues to decline.
• Imports now satisfy most domestic demand for cut and sewn textile products, putting sustained pressure on local manufacturers.
• The manufacturers that remain are increasingly specialised, automated, and focused on higher-value technical or compliance-driven products.
• For workwear, uniforms, PPE, and custom industrial textiles, local manufacturers retain advantages that unit-cost comparisons often miss.
• Procurement policy is shifting in favour of domestic capability, with local content, ESG, supply chain transparency, and sovereign manufacturing now carrying more weight in tenders

A data briefing on the state of textile and clothing manufacturing in Australia — where the industry stands, where it’s heading, and what the numbers mean for procurement decisions.

The conversation about Australian textile manufacturing is often carried by the sentiment: buy local, support jobs, and keep it here. That’s not wrong. But sentiment doesn’t hold up in a procurement meeting or a board presentation.

We’ve had a front-row seat to those changes at Reflective Fabrications. As a vertically integrated Australian manufacturer supplying government agencies, emergency services, and industrial operators, we live inside these market conditions, not just observe them. What that experience tells us is that the data paints a more useful, and in some ways more sobering, picture than the broad headlines suggest.

What holds up in a procurement meeting is evidence. So here it is, a breakdown of where Australian textile manufacturing actually stands, what the numbers mean for supply chain decisions, and why the case for onshore manufacturing is stronger than it’s been in years.

The Industry at a Glance

Australia’s cut and sewn textile sector generated $2.3 billion in revenue in 2023–24, covering blinds and awnings, industrial textiles, tarpaulins, sails, tents, and household goods. Zoom out to the full fashion and clothing sector, and the numbers are larger: 111,000 people, 42,000 businesses, and $12.4 billion in annual revenue. This is a serious, functioning industry. It looks different from what it did thirty years ago, but it exists.

Profit margins in the cut and sewn sector sit at around 8.3%, reflecting a hard-won industry shift toward higher-value products where imports have less of a price advantage. Manufacturers producing commodity goods largely didn’t survive. Those producing premium, technical, or specification-driven products did.

The Employment Picture: Fewer Workers, Different Capabilities 

TCF manufacturing employment peaked at over 115,000 in 1989. ABS data puts textile, leather, clothing, and footwear employment at around 40,700 in 2021, with the sector continuing to contract since. The cut-and-sewn sub-sector has also been losing businesses year on year, driven by smaller operators exiting and surviving manufacturers investing in automation to remain competitive.

That distinction matters. The industry is not simply shrinking; it is changing shape. The businesses still operating are generally producing more per worker, with greater reliance on machinery, specialised processes, and higher-value product categories.

But the human cost is real. Women make up 53% of the TCF workforce, compared with 28% across broader Australian manufacturing. When these jobs disappear, research shows that women, older workers, and workers without tertiary qualifications are more likely to leave the labour market entirely rather than move smoothly into other industries. The employment statistics understate that consequence.

Import Penetration: The Competitive Reality

Imports dominate domestic demand for cut and sewn textile products, and that share has been rising steadily. The competitive pressure is not new, but it is intensifying. IBISWorld describes import growth as the primary structural force constraining domestic industry revenue. 

Commodity vs. Technical: Two Very Different Outcomes

For commodity goods (towels, cloths, bed linen), the quality gap between offshore and domestic products has largely closed. Price is now the primary driver, and offshore manufacturers win on price. That segment of the domestic industry has been hollowed out.

For technical products (agricultural coatings, industrial tarpaulins, shade structures, and safety fabrics), the picture is different. Precise specification, compliance requirements, and application complexity limit direct import substitution. Domestic manufacturers in these segments are holding ground more effectively.

The Scale of the Challenge

The broader scale of import dependence puts both in context. TCF imports across all categories are running at over $2 billion per month, according to ABS trade data. The entire Victorian TCF sector generates approximately $930 million for the economy annually. Monthly imports exceed that figure by more than double. That is the competitive reality domestic manufacturers are operating in.

The Business Structure: A Shrinking Supply Pool

The cut and sewn sector is made up predominantly of small operators. IBISWorld data shows enterprise numbers declining year on year, with the two largest players, Hunter Douglas and Gale Pacific, accounting for only a modest share of total revenue. Most of the industry remains spread across small, independently operated businesses.

That fragmentation creates a structural weakness. Smaller manufacturers carry higher overhead costs, have less capacity to absorb contract losses or input price spikes, and are less able to fund the automation investment increasingly required to compete.

When these businesses exit, their capabilities usually do not get absorbed into larger domestic operations. The capacity, equipment knowledge, and specialist expertise often leave the market permanently. For buyers with compliance-sensitive requirements—including government uniforms, high-visibility workwear, PPE, and custom industrial textiles—the loss of domestic manufacturing capability is a practical supply risk, not an abstract economic concern. 

The Men’s and Boys’ Wear Sector: A Different Story

Men’s and boys’ wear manufacturing (suits, work and school uniforms, shirts, and outerwear) follows the same broad pattern: import pressure, declining enterprise numbers, and a workforce under structural stress. IBISWorld’s May 2025 analysis describes surviving Australian manufacturers as navigating that pressure by pivoting toward premium products. 

Where Workwear Holds Its Ground

The distinction worth noting is in the workwear and uniform segment. Compliance requirements, institutional buyer relationships, and customisation needs make direct price comparison to imported alternatives difficult. A government agency or emergency services organisation procuring workwear isn’t shopping on price alone, and increasingly, procurement frameworks don’t allow them to.

As local content evaluation, ESG scoring, and supply chain disclosure become standard tender requirements, the case for a domestic manufacturer becomes easier to document, verify, and defend.

The Broader Economic Footprint

The Multiplier Effect

Every dollar of Australian manufacturing output generates approximately $1.30 to $1.50 in broader economic activity through supplier payments, wages, and associated services (Ai Group Economics Research, supported by ABS Input-Output Tables). Each direct manufacturing job supports an average of 2.5 additional jobs elsewhere in the economy, in logistics, professional services, retail, and the supply chain (UNIDO Industrial Development Report 2024). The economic footprint of this sector extends well beyond the factory floor.

Victorian TCF: A Sector With Growth Potential

At the state level, the Victorian TCF sector generated over $930 million for the economy in 2023, with exports worth $334 million, outperforming the state’s wine exports by close to $200 million. With strategic investment, economic modelling projects that figure reaching $1.09 billion by 2030, adding 1,500 jobs, and increasing wages by $133 million annually.

This is not a sector in terminal decline. It is a sector under structural pressure that still carries substantial economic weight and, in specific segments, has genuine growth ahead of it.

Automation and Productivity: The Path Forward

The manufacturers that have survived import pressure tend to share a common pattern: they have moved away from commodity production and toward automation, specialisation, and higher-value work.

Across Australian manufacturing broadly, labour productivity grew 58% between the mid-1990s and 2024, against 17% in construction over the same period. More recent ABS turnover data also shows that Australian manufacturing remains economically active, reinforcing that the sector is changing rather than disappearing. 

In textiles, the productivity story is concentrated in businesses that combine automation with technical capability: products where speed, quality control, compliance, and specification accuracy matter more than labour cost alone. That is where domestic manufacturers can still compete.

Tariffs, Policy Support, and the Procurement Opportunity

How We Got Here

Industry assistance for the cut-and-sewn textile sector has been declining as the federal government pursued free trade policies. Duty rates for clothing and certain finished textiles were reduced from 10% to 5% on 1 January 2015, increasing import exposure for domestic manufacturers. 

The Policy Shift Underway

The direction has been changing. The Future Made in Australia Act (2024) commits the federal government to stimulating domestic manufacturing investment and safeguarding supply chain sovereignty. The Victorian Local Jobs First Policy and Queensland Procurement Policy (10–20% local benefits weighting) are building domestic preference into government purchasing in a more structured way. Policy white papers are actively pushing for mandates targeting government uniforms, workwear, and PPE contracts specifically. 

What This Means for Procurement

ESG considerations are now embedded in major tender evaluations. Organisations that have already built transparent, locally made supply chains able to demonstrate compliance with Australian labour law, Modern Slavery Act alignment, and documented domestic economic contribution are better positioned to meet these requirements than those that haven’t. 

Reading the Numbers as a Buyer

The Supply Pool Is Shrinking

The pool of capable domestic manufacturers is contracting. Enterprise numbers are declining, meaning the businesses disappearing are often the smallest and most specialised. That matters if your procurement requirements are bespoke.

Not All Categories Are Equal

Import penetration is high and rising, but it is not uniform. Technical, compliance-driven, and customised product segments retain meaningful domestic manufacturing capability. The challenge is knowing which side of that line your procurement sits on.

The Full Cost Comparison

The economic case for locally manufactured products is real and measurable, but it requires looking beyond unit price. When the output multiplier, the job multiplier, the supply chain risk premium, and the compliance positioning value are factored in, the comparison between domestic and offshore procurement looks different from what it does on a per-garment basis.

The Summary

Australian textile manufacturing is under genuine structural pressure. Employment is declining, businesses are exiting, and import penetration is rising. Read in isolation, the data is not encouraging.

But the sector is not contracting uniformly. It is reorganising around segments where domestic production offers real advantages: technical products, compliance-driven categories, customisation, quality control, and supply chain transparency. The businesses that made it through the past decade are more specialised and more operationally efficient than the aggregate numbers suggest.

For procurement teams managing compliance, continuity, ESG obligations, local-content requirements, and supply risk, the case for Australian-made supply deserves serious consideration. If your organisation is reviewing workwear, uniforms, PPE, or custom industrial textile supply, contact our team to discuss how our local manufacturing can support your procurement objectives.