HS6309 and the trade classification shaping circular textile markets
- Thomas Lundkvist
- 3 days ago
- 3 min read
Second-hand clothing is not only a question of consumption or charity, but increasingly of trade governance: who gets to define what counts as a product, what becomes waste, and which textile flows are allowed to move across borders. Right now, one of the most important bottlenecks for circular textile trade sits in something as technical as a customs number.
HS6309.
It is the global Harmonised System (HS) code used for second-hand clothing in international trade. The problem is that it effectively bundles everything into the same category: wearable garments, low-quality exports, textile waste, and even clothing intended for repair, resale, or upcycling.
The result is that circular textile flows are forced into a trade system built for linear goods.
HS codes as a blind spot in the trade infrastructure
A recent article in Vogue Business highlights how today’s HS framework lacks the resolution needed to distinguish between very different textile pathways.
A garment imported as second-hand and later exported again as a redesigned or upcycled product is often classified under the same code as when it first entered the market. Customs systems are not equipped to recognise the difference between waste, reuse, and value-creating circular products.
This is not a minor administrative issue within customs administration. It shapes investment decisions, business models, and the ability to build functioning secondary markets.
Basel, UNEP and the trade boundary between goods and waste
Reuse News has previously followed how the Basel Convention and EU waste legislation are moving toward sharper boundary-setting between “waste” and “goods” in textile trade.
What is becoming clearer now is that customs classification sits at the very centre of the same conflict. UNEP is expected to publish recommendations in the coming months on how revised HS codes could better account for circular products. At the same time, both the World Customs Organization and the Basel process are exploring potential amendments that would make it possible to better distinguish between:
– textile waste
– worn but wearable clothing
– materials destined for recycling
– products intended for reuse and resale
This shift could have far-reaching consequences, especially as the EU prepares to roll out Extended Producer Responsibility systems for textiles and tighten rules around exports.
Second-hand clothing and the geopolitics of trade classification
Trade classification is not only technical. It is political.
In countries such as Ghana and Kenya, second-hand clothing flows have already become a contested space between:
– livelihoods and local jobs
– waste pressure and “dumping” narratives
– domestic markets and global overproduction
As the EU expands textile EPR and faces increasing scrutiny over the legitimacy of exports, the way these flows are defined internationally becomes decisive.
If second-hand textiles are automatically treated as waste, circular markets risk being closed off. If everything is treated as goods, dumping practices may continue unchecked. HS6309 now sits directly inside that tension.
Why HS6309 now shapes circular textile trade
The circular economy debate is often framed around design, collection systems, and recycling infrastructure. But this is a reminder of another reality: circularity also requires a trade system capable of recognising the difference between waste and value.
With UNEP, Basel, and customs authorities beginning to move at the same time, the classification question is no longer peripheral. It is structural. And it may become one of the most consequential regulatory reforms for global reuse and resale in the years ahead.
Sources: