COSTABILE / EDITORIAL COSTABILE / APPROFONDIMENTI

Perspectives Prospettive

Analysis and perspectives on the economic and commercial forces shaping international markets — from consumer trends and trade policy to distribution, partnerships and long-term growth. Analisi e prospettive sulle dinamiche economiche e commerciali che influenzano i mercati internazionali: consumi, politiche commerciali, distribuzione, partnership e crescita.

Valerio Costabile 27/10/2026 Valerio Costabile 27/10/2026

Entering the US: Growth Is Not a Market-Entry Strategy

America offers European brands access to an enormous consumer market. But changing tariffs, shifting retail networks and the financial difficulties of established retailers have made the distinction between winning distribution and building a profitable business harder to ignore.

COSTABILE | PERSPECTIVES

International Growth

A large market is not necessarily a good market

In February 2025, Saks Global informed suppliers that new orders would be paid 90 days after receipt. Overdue balances would be repaid in twelve monthly instalments, beginning in July.

Eleven months later, the group behind Saks Fifth Avenue, Neiman Marcus and Bergdorf Goodman filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Its 30 largest unsecured creditors were owed approximately $712 million.

For European brands that regarded a listing with America's leading luxury retailers as a measure of international success, the episode exposed a less attractive side of the market.

The economic opportunity remains considerable. The OECD's Interim Economic Outlook, published on 23 September 2026, forecasts US GDP growth of 2.2% this year and 2.1% in 2027, compared with 1.0% in both years across the euro area.

Bain and Altagamma's June assessment identified the Americas as a principal source of growth for personal luxury goods in 2026, with the global category projected to expand by 2–4% to €365–373 billion.

But national growth is not a forecast of an individual company's profitability.

A brand sells particular products, to particular customers, through distribution channels with their own costs and contractual obligations. Higher consumer spending does not guarantee favourable margins, reliable payment or sustainable demand.

The distinction matters especially for European businesses entering America for the first time. An encouraging initial order can require substantial investment in production, inventory and logistics before any cash is collected.

The commercial question is therefore more demanding than whether American consumers will buy the product. It is whether the business can reach them profitably, through partners capable of delivering repeat sales, without assuming risks disproportionate to its resources.

01 — There is no single American market

The United States is one country but not one distribution market.

Consumer demographics, purchasing power, retail structures and competitive conditions vary between regions. A premium jewellery brand selling through independent retailers in Florida may require a different assortment, pricing structure and commercial approach from one targeting specialist accounts in New York.

The distinction between categories is equally significant.

Jewellery retailers hold valuable inventory, often for extended periods, and make purchasing decisions based on product differentiation, demand and capital availability. Beauty retailers place greater emphasis on repeat purchases, marketing support and replenishment. Fashion wholesale operates around seasonal commitments and carries substantial markdown exposure.

The available retail infrastructure is also changing.

Under its Bold New Chapter strategy, Macy's announced plans to close approximately 150 underperforming namesake stores by the end of 2026, concentrating investment on roughly 350 remaining locations while expanding Bloomingdale's and Bluemercury.

In jewellery, the Jewelers Board of Trade counted 16,620 US retail jewellers at the end of June 2026, down 1.5% from a year earlier. The decline was slowing, but the number of retail businesses continued to contract.

These figures do not indicate that American retail is uniformly shrinking. They show why established assumptions about market access deserve scrutiny. Retailers are restructuring their networks, while some specialist categories are becoming more concentrated.

A national department-store agreement can provide valuable visibility and substantial sales. It can also involve large inventory commitments, promotional allowances and a high concentration of receivables with one customer.

Independent retailers present a different proposition: smaller orders, more fragmented account management and potentially greater control over distribution. They can also require considerable sales effort relative to the revenue generated.

The correct route depends on the product, its positioning, the investment required and the economics of each channel. National scale can be an advantage, but only where the business is equipped to support it.

Store count is a poor substitute for understanding where a brand can sell profitably.

02 — Start with the margin, not the sales forecast

Consider a product retailing in America for $200, excluding sales tax.

A retailer requiring a 50% gross margin purchases it for $100. If a distributor sits between the brand and retailer and requires a 30% gross margin on its resale price, the distributor purchases the product for $70.

Transaction	Illustrative amount
Consumer retail price	$200
Retailer purchase price	$100
Distributor purchase price	$70
Revenue invoiced by the brand	$70

Illustrative economics only. Actual margins and commercial structures vary by category and account.

The brand receives $70 before deducting its own product costs and any freight, customs duties, warehousing, commercial allowances or other expenses for which it is responsible.

It must also finance the period between paying its suppliers and collecting payment from its customer.

For a company accustomed to selling directly, this reduction in revenue per unit can be substantial. A product that performs profitably in domestic retail may not support an additional wholesale intermediary without changes to its pricing or cost structure.

The example also illustrates why the choice of commercial partner matters. A distributor that buys inventory, manages logistics and carries retailer credit risk provides a different service from an agent paid to generate orders. Their economic value cannot be assessed solely by comparing their fees.

Import responsibilities further affect the calculation.

Under Delivered Duty Paid (DDP) terms, the seller assumes import clearance and duty-payment obligations. Under other arrangements, the buyer may carry those responsibilities. The commercial model must establish who pays for each element of the transaction.

Direct-to-consumer sales do not eliminate the issue.

On 29 August 2025, the United States suspended duty-free de minimis treatment for qualifying low-value imports from all countries. Previously, eligible shipments valued at $800 or less could benefit from duty-free entry.

A European brand shipping individual ecommerce orders must therefore incorporate the applicable import duties and customs procedures into its fulfilment economics. DTC may offer greater control over retail pricing and customer relationships, but it also requires the brand to fund customer acquisition, returns and fulfilment.

The starting point should be a product-level financial model covering the full cost of supplying the intended channel.

Some products will support conventional wholesale. Others may require direct retailer relationships, a different pricing structure or a narrower distribution strategy.

A larger sales forecast does not resolve a margin problem.

03 — Tariffs have become a commercial risk, not just a customs cost

The American tariff environment has changed repeatedly since 2025.

In February 2026, the US Supreme Court ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not authorise the tariffs imposed under that legislation.

A temporary global surcharge under Section 122 of the Trade Act followed. When that measure expired on 24 July 2026, the administration introduced duties under Section 301, following an investigation concerning the enforcement of forced-labour import prohibitions.

For most EU-origin products covered by the new measure, the Section 301 mechanism adds enough duty to bring the combined ordinary customs duty and Section 301 charge to 10%, where the ordinary duty is below that level. Products with higher ordinary duties, specific exemptions or other applicable measures require separate assessment.

This is distinct from the 15% ceiling contemplated by the 2025 EU–US trade framework.

As French Customs' guidance updated on 20 October 2026 makes clear, the rate payable depends on the product's customs classification, origin and applicable trade measures.

A European brand must also distinguish its corporate nationality from the customs origin of its merchandise. An Italian company manufacturing in Asia cannot assume that its products qualify for treatment applicable to EU-origin goods.

These distinctions have immediate consequences for pricing and contractual commitments.

A seller that agrees fixed wholesale prices and accepts responsibility for import duties can see its contribution deteriorate before goods reach the retailer. The risk is greater when manufacturing lead times are long or commercial agreements extend across several seasons.

There is also a potential financial recovery that some exporters should examine.

Following the Supreme Court's ruling, US Customs and Border Protection introduced the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) system on 20 April 2026 to facilitate refunds of eligible IEEPA duties.

The process is not automatic. Importers of record, or their authorised customs brokers, must submit eligible entries through the applicable procedures. The programme has been implemented in phases, with eligibility depending on the status of the entries concerned.

European businesses that imported under arrangements making them the importer of record should establish whether they have refundable duties. Where an American customer acted as importer, the contractual treatment of those duties and any related refunds should be reviewed.

For businesses that imported substantial volumes during 2025 and early 2026, the amounts involved may justify a detailed review with their customs advisers.

The broader commercial response is straightforward: establish customs classification and origin, allocate import responsibilities clearly and test profitability under alternative duty and exchange-rate scenarios.

Tariff policy can change faster than a brand's production cycle. Its contracts and margins need to withstand that difference.

04 — Prestige is not a credit assessment

The Saks Global bankruptcy deserves attention because the financial deterioration was visible well before the filing.

The group completed its acquisition of Neiman Marcus in December 2024. In February 2025, suppliers were informed of revised payment arrangements, including 90-day terms for new orders and an instalment schedule for overdue balances.

According to credit research published by Octus in May 2025, Saks' days payable outstanding had reached 180 days for the 26 weeks ended August 2024, compared with approximately 110 days in an earlier reporting period. Neiman Marcus' comparable figure was approximately 30 days.

Days payable outstanding is not identical to contractual payment terms. It does, however, indicate how long a business is taking to settle supplier obligations relative to its purchases.

The eventual bankruptcy filing in January 2026 exposed substantial unpaid claims.

Reuters reported that Chanel was owed approximately $136 million and Kering approximately $60 million. The 30 largest unsecured creditors had claims totalling roughly $712 million.

These were creditor claims, not confirmed losses. Recovery depends on the legal position of each creditor and the outcome of the restructuring.

For smaller brands, the consequences were more immediate.

In January 2026, Modern Retail reported the experience of Elisamama, an independent apparel brand for which Saks had accounted for an estimated 50–60% of business.

Founder Fisayo Che described delayed payments and a six-figure outstanding balance. The relationship had helped the business establish credibility and expand into new categories, but its financial exposure had become difficult to absorb.

The case illustrates a familiar problem in wholesale distribution: a customer responsible for a substantial share of revenue can also represent a substantial concentration of financial risk.

The issue is not unique to Saks, nor does it justify avoiding major retailers.

Large American accounts can offer valuable access to consumers and support substantial international growth. But their creditworthiness, payment behaviour and contractual conditions must be assessed independently of their reputation.

Before committing significant inventory, a supplier should understand the customer's financial condition, payment history, purchasing concentration and contractual rights to make deductions or return merchandise.

Credit limits, deposits, trade-credit insurance and other protections may be appropriate, depending on the relationship.

Consignment agreements require particular scrutiny. Retaining title to inventory does not automatically protect the supplier if a retailer enters bankruptcy; enforceable rights can depend on the contractual structure and compliance with applicable US commercial law.

The financial exposure should also be considered in relation to the supplier's own resources. A payment delay that a multinational group can absorb may create a liquidity crisis for a smaller manufacturer.

A lengthening payment term is a credit signal, not an inconvenience.

05 — Choose the distribution partner before granting the territory

A local distributor can be an efficient way for a European brand to enter the American market.

An established operator may already possess the retailer relationships, sales organisation, warehousing infrastructure and import capabilities that the brand would otherwise need to develop.

But the value of a distributor cannot be measured solely by its customer list.

Its existing portfolio may contain competing products. Salespeople may naturally favour brands offering better margins or faster turnover. Its strongest relationships may be concentrated in channels inappropriate for a premium proposition.

The assessment should begin with the partner's actual capabilities and the work it will undertake.

An agent introducing potential customers performs a different function from a distributor that buys inventory, manages logistics, finances stock and assumes customer credit risk. Their compensation, contractual responsibilities and commercial incentives should reflect those differences.

Before entering an agreement, management needs clarity on several questions:

Who manages retailer relationships, and what customer information will the brand receive?
Who imports the goods, finances inventory and carries payment risk?
What sell-through and replenishment reporting will be available?
Who determines pricing and promotional strategy, within applicable competition law?
How will performance be measured, and what happens if agreed targets are missed?
What happens to customers, inventory and outstanding obligations when the agreement ends?

Exclusivity requires particular care.

A distributor asked to invest heavily in sales personnel, stock and market development may reasonably seek territorial protection. But granting nationwide rights without measurable commitments can prevent a brand from pursuing direct retail opportunities or appointing better-performing partners.

Exclusivity should therefore correspond to the investment promised and be supported by performance commitments, review mechanisms and clear contractual remedies.

A brand entering a new country may be tempted to treat any established local relationship as a solution to its lack of market knowledge.

The danger is becoming dependent on a partner for both sales and information about the market.

A distributor reporting strong shipments to retailers has not necessarily demonstrated strong consumer demand. Without visibility over sell-through, returns and replenishment, the brand may mistake inventory accumulation for sustainable growth.

The business should retain sufficient commercial oversight to understand which customers are performing, what products are selling and where future opportunities exist.

A capable partner should extend the brand's commercial reach without unnecessarily restricting its future choices.

06 — Compliance belongs in the commercial plan

European product compliance does not automatically establish compliance with US requirements.

The differences can affect formulation, labelling, packaging, importation and the claims used to market a product.

For beauty and fragrance, the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act introduced obligations covering matters including facility registration, product listing and safety substantiation, with exemptions for certain businesses and products. Marketing claims may also determine whether a product is regulated as a cosmetic or a drug.

For fashion and accessories, businesses must assess applicable textile labelling, country-of-origin marking, care instructions and product safety requirements.

For jewellery and watches, the Federal Trade Commission's Jewelry Guides address representations relating to precious metals, gemstones and other materials. Additional product safety or substance restrictions may apply depending on the product and state.

Supply-chain documentation is another consideration across categories, particularly under US forced-labour import enforcement.

The commercial consequences can be considerable. A product requiring reformulation, additional testing or different packaging may no longer support the margin originally presented to a buyer.

Compliance must therefore be examined before prices, launch dates and purchasing commitments are finalised.

A European business does not necessarily need to establish a US subsidiary before exporting. Depending on the arrangement, import and distribution responsibilities can be managed through appropriate external structures.

But those structures do not eliminate accountability.

The business must understand which obligations belong to the manufacturer, brand owner, importer and local commercial partner, and obtain specialist advice where necessary.

The objective is not to build an unnecessarily complex compliance operation. It is to establish whether the products can be sold legally, at what cost and with responsibilities clearly assigned.

07 — Prove the business before financing its expansion

A selective American launch can reduce financial exposure while establishing whether the commercial model works.

For a brand without established US distribution, a defined group of qualified accounts can provide evidence on pricing, product selection, retailer demand and operational performance before substantial resources are committed to national expansion.

Opening orders alone are insufficient.

A retailer may purchase an initial assortment because the product is interesting or the commercial terms are attractive. That does not establish repeat consumer demand.

The measures that matter are more demanding:

Sell-through: Are consumers purchasing the product?
Replenishment: Are retailers placing repeat orders?
Contribution: What remains after product, distribution and channel costs?
Cash collection: Are customers paying according to agreed terms?
Inventory: How much working capital remains committed to unsold stock?
Commercial control: Can the brand expand into additional channels without contractual restrictions?

These measures should be assessed together.

A smaller retailer that reorders consistently, pays within terms and supports the brand's positioning may be more valuable than a larger account generating substantial opening orders but weak replenishment.

Equally, a profitable account is not necessarily a scalable one. Servicing numerous small retailers can become expensive if order values are low, logistics are fragmented or each account requires disproportionate commercial attention.

A controlled launch should therefore test both customer demand and the cost of serving that demand.

The decision to expand should follow evidence of repeat sales, acceptable contribution and reliable execution. Where those conditions are established, greater investment in distribution, marketing or local infrastructure becomes easier to justify.

There are exceptions.

Some categories require meaningful distribution density or marketing expenditure before consumers recognise the brand. In those cases, a very small pilot may produce misleading results.

The appropriate scale of entry depends on the economics of the category and the resources of the business.

What matters is defining in advance what success would look like, how much capital can reasonably be committed and what evidence would justify further investment.

A disappointing pilot can still be valuable if it reveals a pricing, assortment or distribution problem before that problem is replicated nationally.

Expansion should accelerate when the evidence supports it, not simply when the first customers have been secured.

The COSTABILE perspective

The United States remains one of the most important markets for European brands with international ambitions.

Its economic strength, consumer scale and established retail infrastructure offer opportunities that many businesses cannot replicate in their domestic markets.

But market attractiveness and commercial readiness are different assessments.

An established European brand may have a strong product, a loyal domestic customer base and considerable international potential. None of these advantages removes the need to establish how its products will reach American consumers, what the distribution structure will cost and which parties will carry the financial risk.

The experience of Saks Global demonstrates the consequences of evaluating customers principally through reputation and commercial reach. Recent changes to tariffs and import procedures show how external costs can alter the economics of agreements already negotiated.

Both are reminders that international expansion introduces obligations as well as opportunities.

Four decisions deserve particular attention.

First, establish the economics at product and channel level before agreeing prices or revenue targets.

Second, assess prospective customers and commercial partners on their financial condition, capabilities and contractual obligations, not simply their market presence.

Third, retain sufficient control over distribution, customer information and future commercial rights to adapt as the business develops.

Finally, distinguish between securing an opening order and establishing a repeatable business that generates acceptable returns and converts sales into cash.

A national launch may be justified for a brand with the resources, demand and operating capabilities to support it. For another, a carefully selected group of accounts may offer a more effective route into the market.

Neither approach is inherently superior.

The quality of a market-entry strategy is determined by whether the commercial structure fits the business, protects its financial position and creates a credible basis for further growth.

Entering America is an opportunity. Building a profitable American business is the achievement.

Sources and further reading

Economic outlook and luxury market

US retail and distribution

Tariffs, customs and trade

Retailer credit and financial risk

Product compliance

This article reflects commercial analysis and information available as of 27 October 2026. Trade measures, customs treatment and regulatory obligations are subject to change. The analysis is provided for general information and does not constitute legal, tax or customs advice. Product-specific specialist advice should be obtained before implementation.