At the UK border, Turkish and Chinese knitwear are taxed very differently. Here's the gap, what it does to landed cost, and an honest note on where China still wins.
A Chinese-made jumper lands in the UK under the UK Global Tariff — commonly ~8–12% for knitwear (HS chapter 61). A qualifying Turkish jumper lands at 0% under the UK–Türkiye FTA, provided the goods meet the rules of origin. Same product category, very different duty. For a UK brand, that gap is often the single biggest variable separating the two sourcing options — but it is not the only one. This guide works through the full landed-cost comparison, including a worked example, and gives an honest view of where each origin wins.
| Factor | Turkey (FTA) | China (UK Global Tariff) |
|---|---|---|
| Import duty — knitwear (HS 61.10) | 0% (qualifying origin + EUR.1) | ~8–12% |
| Origin proof required | EUR.1 / origin declaration | None (full rate applies automatically) |
| Ocean transit to Felixstowe | ~10–14 days (short-sea Med) | ~4–6 weeks |
| Typical MOQ | 250 / colour | 500–1,000+ |
| Modern Slavery / supply chain visibility | Short, single-site, visitable | Often long / multi-tier / opaque |
| Supply chain concentration risk | Diversified from China | Concentrated in one jurisdiction |
Indicative — duty depends on HS code and qualifying origin. Verify current rates with your customs broker.
Unit price is only the start. Once you add duty, freight, insurance and the working capital cost of goods in transit, the comparison shifts. The example below uses indicative figures for a fine-gauge merino crewneck:
| Cost element | Turkey | China |
|---|---|---|
| FOB unit price (250 units, fine merino) | $28 | $22 |
| Ocean freight (per unit, LCL estimate) | $2.50 | $3.50 |
| Import duty | $0 (0% FTA) | $2.64 (~12% of FOB) |
| Insurance + handling | $0.50 | $0.60 |
| Estimated landed cost / unit | ~$31 | ~$28.74 |
| Transit time in working capital | ~10–14 days | ~4–6 weeks |
In this example, China still lands ~$2 cheaper per unit despite the duty gap — because the FOB price differential is larger than the duty saving. But this assumes equal quality, no reorder variability and discounts the cash-flow cost of 4–6 weeks of inventory in transit. The numbers shift as FOB prices narrow.
The 0% vs ~12% gap is most impactful when:
At a $60 FOB price, 12% duty is $7.20/unit. The Turkey vs China FOB differential for premium garments is often smaller in percentage terms — making the duty saving proportionally more decisive. A cashmere programme where Turkey's FOB price is $65 and China's is $60 produces roughly equal landed costs once duty is factored in.
Four to six weeks of goods in transit represents significant working capital tied up before revenue. For a self-funded UK DTC brand or a boutique buying on a tight cycle, Turkey's 10–14 day transit is worth money — even if the unit price is slightly higher. The cash-flow model often tells a different story to the unit-cost comparison.
A Turkey MOQ of 250 pieces vs a China MOQ of 500–1,000 changes the comparison entirely for a new range. The capital tied up in the minimum order — plus the risk of unsold stock — often outweighs a unit price advantage on a larger China run.
UK retailers increasingly require Modern Slavery Act documentation, supply chain transparency and ethical audit evidence. A single-site Turkey factory is structurally simpler to audit and document than a multi-tier Chinese supply chain. For brands selling into John Lewis, M&S, ASOS or similar channels, compliance readiness has real commercial value.
The structural arguments for Turkey have strengthened since 2024–2026. Several dynamics worth noting for UK brands currently reassessing China programmes:
US tariff increases on Chinese goods from 2025 have put pressure on Chinese factory margins and led some to redirect production to the US market, adjusting capacity allocations for European and UK buyers. This is a supply-side dynamic UK brands should factor into their 2026 sourcing decisions.
Brands that concentrated 80–100% of knitwear production in China experienced severe disruptions in 2020–2022. A Turkey programme alongside — or instead of — a China programme provides geographic diversification that many UK brands now treat as a board-level requirement rather than a sourcing preference.
The UK–Türkiye FTA was signed as a continuity agreement in 2020. It is not currently subject to renegotiation or threatened with disruption. For UK brands planning 2–3 year sourcing strategies, the regulatory environment for Turkey-origin imports is more settled than some alternatives.
As UK EPR (Extended Producer Responsibility) regulations develop and sustainability reporting requirements grow, brands with shorter, documented supply chains have a compliance advantage. Turkey's proximity, combined with OEKO-TEX certified yarns, makes a more auditable story than a multi-country Asian supply chain.
The gap is not everything, and we will not pretend otherwise. China remains the better sourcing option for UK brands in specific circumstances:
At scale, Chinese unit prices on standard-stitch acrylic or basic cotton knitwear can be low enough that the duty gap doesn't close the differential, even after freight. If you are buying 10,000 units of a basic crewneck for a private-label retailer, China may still land cheaper. Run your own numbers.
Certain yarn categories — particularly silk and some speciality performance fibres — have deeper supplier networks in China than in Turkey. If your range requires a yarn type not readily available from Turkish spinners, the supply-chain flexibility China offers may outweigh the tariff cost.
For highly complex multi-colour intarsia at very high volumes, certain Chinese provinces have deeper specialist capacity. Turkey's cluster in Gaziantep handles intarsia well at the volumes a typical UK brand needs, but the absolute scale of Chinese capacity is greater. At 50,000+ units of complex patterning, China may be relevant.
A brand with no retail-channel compliance requirement, no sustainability positioning and price-only decision criteria may find China wins on unit cost at its target volume. Turkey's advantages are largely in compliance, speed and duty — if none of those are relevant to the purchasing decision, the calculus is simpler.
Yes — many UK brands run dual-sourcing programmes. Turkey for higher-value, compliance-sensitive, fast-turn styles; China for commodity basics at volume. This is a rational split. Turkey's 250 MOQ and short lead time make it well-suited to premium capsules; China's scale suits commodity volume.
UK trade policy is set by the government and can change. As of 2026, there are no confirmed plans to increase the UK Global Tariff on Chinese garments — but the direction of travel in global trade policy is toward more friction, not less. Brands building sourcing strategies for 3–5 years should treat the current tariff gap as a floor, not a ceiling.
The honest answer: there is high-quality and low-quality production in both countries. The quality variable is factory selection, not country. A well-run Gaziantep flat-knit factory produces European-standard knitwear; a poorly run operation anywhere does not. The difference is that the short transit and lower MOQ in Turkey allow a UK brand to pilot quality on a smaller commitment before scaling.
Build the comparison as: (FOB × units) + ocean freight + duty (× FOB value) + insurance + UK clearance fees. Divide by units for landed cost per piece. Run both sides. Then factor in: MOQ risk (cost of unsold minimum), transit working capital (days in transit × value × your cost of capital), and compliance cost if applicable. The decision then makes itself.
Send your current spec and approximate volume. We'll quote ex-works so you can build your UK landed-cost model with the FTA 0% in — and compare it directly against your China programme.
Manufacturer Pages