While technology opens the door for an American manufacturing comeback, policy is giving it a firm push. In early 2025, the White House unveiled a sweeping reciprocal tariff program. These are not token fees. For industries with global supply chains, the impact is dramatic. As of May 15, PwC estimates US industrial tariff exposure could jump from about $23 billion a year to $127 billion. And in TMT, that jump could be from $13 billion to $126 billion. Those kinds of cost surges could hit the bottom line hard. It would effectively penalize the old offshoring and may incentivize domestic industries. Whether or not trading partners officially lower their barriers long-term in this fluid environment, US companies are faced with more expensive imports.
In parallel, however, US labor costs remain substantially higher than those of many
overseas markets. Advanced automation can help offset labor costs, yet much of today's advanced automation technology –– industrial robots, AI-enabled systems –– is also sourced from regions now subject to tariffs, compounding the challenge.
While purchasing foreign automation tools may be necessary in the short term, the US should simultaneously invest in building a robust, domestic robotics industry. This dual-track approach –– importing what we need today while developing what we must own tomorrow –– is a viable path to lasting competitiveness.
The US is also aiming to sweeten the pot for local production through tax incentives. The administration has floated lowering the corporate tax rate for manufacturers as a reward for increasing domestic output. Massive federal investments have flowed into critical manufacturing-related areas –– like the CHIPS Act and certain incentives under the Inflation Reduction Act –– helping to boost critical manufacturing.
The economic case for a robotics-driven, domestic supply chain becomes clearer under these conditions. If importing key components now carries a 30% –– or potentially more –– premium, the higher upfront cost of building high-tech factories in the US might be more attractive, especially if those factories are highly automated to keep unit costs competitive. Many companies are already reevaluating their global manufacturing strategies in response to supply chain vulnerabilities and geopolitical risks. Implementing automation for even a portion of routine tasks can lead to significant efficiency gains, making domestic production more competitive.
Beyond pure cost, there are strategic benefits. Shorter supply chains mean less inventory in transit and less vulnerability to disruptions (whether a pandemic or a port closure or a geopolitical conflict). Domestic manufacturing with renewable-powered facilities cuts emissions from overseas shipping, supporting sustainability goals. An America-first strategy could help catalyze a greener approach to making goods.
Policy moves, however, can be a double-edged sword. Trading partners might retaliate with their own tariffs. Executives need to stay agile, monitoring trade policy updates and customs clarifications like forthcoming rules from US Customs and Border Protection on the new tariffs to avoid supply chain snags. The big takeaway is that the calculus for where to manufacture is changing. The total landed cost of an imported widget versus a domestically produced (but highly automated) widget is tipping in favor of the latter, making local automation development a key lever for future competitiveness. These developments are prompting companies to more quickly reassess their global operational footprint on a longer-term basis.