Many customers are not buying the new Made in Rwanda clothing products and Chinese clothing imports, which have replaced second-hand clothes, saying they offer limited choice in quality, price and uniqueness.

The government has been progressively phasing out second-hand clothes since 2016 when it increased import tariffs from Rwf173 ($0.20) to Rwf2,170 ($2.50) per kilogramme for second-hand clothes, while import tariffs on footwear increased from Rwf433 ($0.50) to Rwf4,336 ($5) per kg.

“I like second-hand clothes better because you get more options. The Made in Rwanda and Chinese products look the same,” said James Musonera, a driver in Kigali.

The government has been encouraging the development of locally-made products, including garments, under the campaign “Made in Rwanda” in an effort to advance the economy to the lower middle-income category by 2020 — especially by improving the trade balance and creating productive employment.

The rationale for phasing out second-hand clothes was to protect and revive the local textile and garment industry, but the move has been criticised for being sudden and not taking into consideration whether or not the market can provide clothing options especially for low-income earners.

Second-hand clothes cater for people of all economic classes so a second-hand t-shirt can cost as low as Rwf1,000. With the new tariffs, it is difficult to find one for less than Rwf3,000.

Since the ban on second-hand clothes, many low income households have been struggling to get affordable clothing options.

Solange Ingabire who works as a security guard in Kigali said she now buys fewer clothes because of the high cost of locally available clothing options.

“Made in Rwanda clothes are more expensive than second-hand clothes, but even the prices of second-hand clothes have increased,” she said.

Geoffrey Karangwa runs a clothing shop in Remera, which imports fabrics from Europe and also sells locally-made garments. He said the increase in import tariffs on second-hand garments should not have been implemented so soon.

“The clothing ban was good, but it wasn’t done at the right time. It would have been better to have locally-made products and also have the option of buying second-hand clothes while giving the local industry much needed training on improving the quality of the garments,” he said.

In March, the Office of the United States Trade Representative said that Rwanda would lose some benefits under AGOA in 60 days after it increased tariffs on second-hand clothes.

Washington claims the increased import tariffs are a trade barrier between the two countries.