Browse all

Will fashion start courting Trump too?

Large U.S. corporations have already begun to do so

Will fashion start courting Trump too? Large U.S. corporations have already begun to do so

According to a Barclays report published two days ago by WWD, the United States will be the main driver of growth in the luxury market in 2025, as Chinese consumer spending might continue to decline. The report states that Americans currently account for about 25% of global luxury market revenues, and their spending in this category is expected to grow by 6% over the year. This growth is predicted to stem from improved consumer confidence and, more notably, from the proposals of tax cuts and deregulation by Donald Trump, which are expected to stimulate economic activity, encourage greater discretionary spending among American consumers, and make the wealthy (historically the most lucrative segment for luxury brand sales) even wealthier. Analyzing the financial reports of LVMH, for instance, the group’s American consumer segment has faced some challenges in recent quarters but has shown signs of steady improvement in its Fashion & Leather Goods division, leading many to believe that a potential recovery could occur in the coming months. Although aspirational customers remain absent in the U.S. and globally, possibly due to pricing, the American market shows promise, and many fashion brands are focusing their attention there: Prada purchased an entire building in New York and Armani inaugurated a new mega-flagship last fall, among many other examples. However, without China fueling the outsized sales of the past, the luxury world will increasingly depend on America. There’s just one problem: in the United States, many things are about to change, and brands will have to reconcile their progressive and liberal narratives with a political climate that is becoming more conservative by the day.

@fashioncricket Giorgio Armani inaugura a New York in Madison Avenue il building che ospita le sue boutique, un ristorante e le lussuose dimore Giorgio Armani Residences. #GiorgioArmani #Armani #NY #NewYork #moda #fashion suono originale - Fashion cricket

The change in the air is visible worldwide. On the eve of Trump’s inauguration, the entire Silicon Valley, along with social media oligarchs, has kowtowed to the new government: without even mentioning Elon Musk and X, who practically made the election possible with relentless social media efforts, in recent days, we’ve seen Meta/Facebook eliminate its fact-checkers and end its diversity and inclusion programs known as DEI; Amazon will livestream Trump’s inauguration, for which it donated $1 million, and will produce a documentary on Melania Trump, produced by the First Lady herself, with exclusive rights costing $40 million. The CEOs of Apple and Google and Zuckerberg each pledged $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund. Besides discontinuing DEI, Meta also appointed Dana White, a Trump loyalist and head of the Ultimate Fighting Championship, to its board of directors. Similarly, financial institutions and Wall Street banks are pulling back from environmental and diversity goals: BlackRock, for example, withdrew from the Net Zero Asset Managers initiative; speaking to the Financial Times, David Solomon, CEO of Goldman Sachs, praised Trump’s “growth-y playbook” a month after the bank exited the Net-Zero Banking Alliance; Walmart and McDonald’s canceled DEI efforts, withdrew funding from the Center for Racial Equity (created with a $100 million commitment after George Floyd’s murder), and abandoned percentage goals for female and BIPOC executives.

On paper, these shifts are framed as a “realignment with customer and societal preferences,” but it’s clear that over the next four years, for companies, it will be far better to align with Trump than to oppose him. Moreover, the violent conservative backlash on social media against the progressive wave of recent years had been brewing for some time: Bud Light suffered significantly in April 2023 after a campaign featuring trans woman Dylan Mulvaney caused a boycott, resulting in a 20% drop in the parent company’s stock value and costing the brand its top-seller status in America, held for 20 years. After that incident and particularly after the chaos surrounding Balenciaga triggered by American conservatives (though similar events occurred globally on the “redpilled” side of the internet), many companies, including fashion brands, have significantly toned down their messaging, adopting a more neutral storytelling approach, presumably to avoid international boycotts. The first sign was the disappearance of plus-size models from fashion shows, widely documented; another example could be seen in Calvin Klein campaigns, where alternative body types and LGBTQ minority representation gave way to the chiseled physique of Jeremy Allen White, a less politically charged figure; finally, even Victoria’s Secret returned (though not in great form) to its classic models last October. Meanwhile, with the dispersion of the streetwear generation of designers nurtured by Virgil Abloh and Kanye, discussions on intersectionality, representation, and multiculturalism have quietly been sidelined.

In short, it seemed like idealism, but it was marketing. By 2023, Vogue Business noted, for example, that the DEI initiatives launched by brands after the progressive spring of 2020—Black Lives Matter and #MeToo—had begun to lose momentum. Consulted by the magazine, Daniel Peters, founder of the London consultancy Fashion Minority Report, spoke of growing fatigue with the topic, polarization over what inclusive practices should entail, and a lack of clear understanding of the commercial value of such initiatives. Regardless of perspectives on their utility, despite studies showing inclusive companies perform better in the market, DEI efforts are typically the first to go during budget cuts. And although it may be difficult, for optics reasons, for European or American fashion brands to backtrack on inclusion and representation or sustainability during the Trump administration, it remains to be seen what the future holds for progressive ideals in corporate fashion. Specifically, brands will be scrutinized simultaneously by the country’s more conservative side, including its government, and by the more open-minded social media audience—and the current luxury crisis and increased dependence on the U.S. market, with fears of new tariffs, could make brands extremely cautious in avoiding boycotts or reprisals. This might also prompt some designers or companies to cozy up to the new administration. The Arnault family, for instance, has a great relationship with Trump, who helped them open a Louis Vuitton factory in Texas. Bernard’s son Alexandre was spotted at rallies and celebrations during the recent elections, and the family has extensively funded Republicans, alongside various luxury groups (except Kering), as shown by the Financial Times. The real question, however, is which brands will try to win Trump and Musk over without compromising their reputation as “champions of change”: Will Anna Wintour still attend White House state dinners? And what might happen to a designer who visits Mar-a-Lago?

One could imagine a scenario where brands and designers maintain their ideological stances while the groups they belong to conduct business behind the scenes—it has always been that way. But the issue of association with Trump arises, quite simply, on a styling level. If fashion brands and personalities aligned with Obama and Biden without issue, things went differently with Trump during his first term. As WWD recalls, in 2017, designers such as Marc Jacobs, Tom Ford, and Phillip Lim openly declared they had no intention of dressing Melania Trump, should the occasion arise. Hervé Pierre, the First Lady’s stylist, didn’t request looks from brands but instead purchased them directly in stores. As Pierre told WWD, however, there were instances where American brands refused to let him buy their products in stores—something that didn’t happen with European brands. The political (but not economic) affiliations of the U.S. fashion industry with the Democratic Party further complicate the matter, as the prospect of dressing the Trumps (now a veritable clan with daughters, nieces, and daughters-in-law) remains a polarizing issue with potential sales impact. Taking a neutral stance, Ralph Lauren dressed both Melania Trump and Jill Biden, showing that a middle ground is possible. Other designers, however, have taken more explicit stances: Prabal Gurung, Tory Burch, Diane von Furstenberg, and Gabriela Hearst collaborated with Kamala Harris on campaign merch—a change in direction might seem inconsistent. In any case, over the next four years, the entire industry will need to navigate between maintaining brand values and the growing polarization of American society. It will be fascinating to see how each brand chooses to act: Will they jump on the winner’s bandwagon, or will they try to stand in their way?