Reshoring & Automation: What It Means for Your Investment

1. What This Resource Covers & Why It Matters

Companies announced more than 244,000 reshoring and foreign direct investment jobs in 2024 alone. Cumulative reshoring totals since 2010 have passed two million positions. For manufacturing operations in the United States, this is not background noise. It is a structural shift in where production happens and what that production requires to be competitive.

This article is not about whether reshoring is good policy or good economics in the abstract. It is about the specific decisions that real companies made when they moved production back to the US, what automation investment made those decisions viable, and what lessons apply to operations considering a similar move or trying to win reshored work as a domestic supplier.

The honest message upfront: reshoring without automation rarely works at scale. The labor cost gap between the US and offshore locations has narrowed but not closed. The companies succeeding at domestic production are succeeding because they automated the cost out rather than hoping US labor rates alone would make the math work.

2. What’s Actually Happening: Real Reshoring Deployments

Newell Brands and Sharpie: Large Enterprise, $2 Billion Bet

Newell Brands moved Sharpie marker production back to the US over five years, investing $2 billion in a Tennessee facility that now produces nearly half a billion markers annually across all 37 colors. The return was not possible without automating all six manufacturing steps in the Sharpie production process. The plant required retraining the workforce and centralizing a supply chain that had been dispersed across overseas locations. The Sharpie case demonstrates the large enterprise playbook: heavy upfront capital, full process automation, and a long payback horizon measured in brand value and supply chain resilience rather than pure unit cost.

This is not a template most mid-size manufacturers can replicate directly. However, it establishes the principle: the economics worked because automation replaced the offshore labor cost advantage, not because US labor is cheap.

GE Appliances: Mid-Market Manufacturing, Louisville

GE Appliances announced the reshoring of washer and dryer production from China to its Louisville, Kentucky facility in 2025, creating 800 jobs. The company won the 2025 National Metalworking Reshoring Award for leveraging automation technology to fuel a more resilient supply chain. In practice, the Louisville plant runs a heavily automated production line. The 800 jobs created are not the same jobs that left. They are automation-era manufacturing jobs: technicians, programmers, quality engineers, and maintenance staff who run systems that would have required far more workers in a pre-automation model.

[IMAGE: Photo of a modern automated appliance manufacturing line showing robotic assembly alongside human workers performing quality and supervisory roles]

Marlin Steel: Small Manufacturer, Proof That Automation Enables Domestic Competition

Marlin Steel, a Baltimore-based wire and metal products manufacturer, has won the National Metalworking Reshoring Award multiple times for demonstrating that automation, engineering, quality, and delivery can enable reshoring even of high-volume, commoditized products. The company directly competes with overseas suppliers on products that were considered un-reschorable a decade ago, specifically because its robotic bending and forming cells produce parts at a quality level and delivery speed that offshore production cannot match.

Marlin Steel’s scale is accessible to a much broader audience than Newell or GE. The company is small by manufacturing standards, and its automation strategy centers on targeted robotic cells for high-volume forming operations, not a billion-dollar facility overhaul. The lesson is practical: domestic production of commodity parts becomes viable when automation reduces the per-part cost to near offshore parity while adding quality and delivery advantages that offshore cannot replicate.

NEDCO: Contract Manufacturer, 70% Revenue Now Reshored

NEDCO, a contract manufacturer that invested in a Studer precision grinding machine, cut labor costs by 85% on targeted operations and reduced scrap to zero. The result: 70% of their revenue now comes from reshored products that previously went offshore. The investment enabled them to compete on both low-volume and high-volume work. This is the small shop story that gets less coverage than the billion-dollar headlines but reflects the actual experience of the majority of manufacturers benefiting from reshoring momentum.

3. How the Technology Works

Why Automation Is the Enabler, Not the Obstacle

The Reshoring Initiative’s 2025 survey found that 81% of businesses planning domestic production would use automation more than human workers to make it viable. That figure reflects a simple economic reality. US manufacturing labor costs run $25 to $45 per hour loaded with benefits, compared to $4 to $8 per hour in major offshore markets. No amount of supply chain efficiency closes a gap that wide without significant automation.

However, automation changes the comparison in two ways simultaneously. First, it reduces the labor content per part, which narrows the offshore cost advantage to manageable levels. Second, it improves quality consistency, delivery speed, and production flexibility in ways that offshore production structurally cannot match regardless of labor cost. In other words, automation does not just cut cost. It enables domestic manufacturers to compete on dimensions that matter more to customers than unit price alone.

The Tariff Effect on Automation ROI

25% tariffs on Chinese imports, combined with ongoing supply chain disruption costs, have materially changed the automation ROI calculation for domestic manufacturers. An automation investment that previously needed 24 months to pay back against offshore competition now pays back in 12 to 18 months when the tariff-adjusted offshore cost is the comparison. Beyond that, supply chain disruption costs, including expedited freight, inventory buffers, and quality rework on imported parts, have become large enough to appear explicitly in capital investment decisions. Reshoring eliminates those costs entirely.

What Reshoring Requires That Automation Must Support

Reshoring production designed for overseas labor requires redesigning the process for automation, not just moving the process. Overseas production often runs long, labor-intensive production sequences that assume cheap labor at every step. Domestic production that tries to replicate that sequence with US labor at full cost fails economically. The companies that succeed redesign the process around automation from the start, identifying which steps add value and automating the rest, rather than trying to automate a process designed for a different cost structure.

4. The Business Case

The reshoring opportunity for automation-equipped domestic manufacturers is direct: new customers who previously sourced offshore are actively looking for domestic suppliers who can meet their quality, delivery, and traceability requirements. The 2025 Reshoring Initiative survey found that 59% of shops have reshored work or are actively quoting reshored work. That demand signal is real and growing.

For an existing domestic manufacturer, winning reshored work typically requires demonstrating two things: delivery reliability that offshore cannot match, and quality documentation that satisfies the traceability requirements of customers in aerospace, defense, medical devices, and automotive. Both of those requirements favor automated production over manual production. Automated cells produce consistent quality with documented process parameters. Manual production introduces variability that becomes expensive to audit and certify.

The honest cost caveat is that reshoring adds 10 to 30% to production costs versus offshore in most documented comparisons. Automation narrows that gap. It rarely eliminates it entirely. The competitive advantage comes from the combination of total cost including tariffs and logistics, delivery speed, quality reliability, and the relationship proximity that domestic production provides.

5. Limitations and Honest Caveats

Reshoring is not viable for every product or every company. Products with very high labor content and minimal automation opportunities, think complex hand assembly, fine garment manufacturing, or intricate handcrafted goods, remain structurally difficult to reshore at competitive cost even with significant automation investment. Automation multiplies the productivity of every labor dollar. It cannot eliminate labor from processes that are inherently manual.

Capital access is a real constraint for small manufacturers. The automation investments that make reshoring viable, precision machining centers, robotic forming cells, automated inspection systems, run $150,000 to $500,000 per cell. Equipment financing is available and makes the investment manageable, but it requires a creditworthy balance sheet and a credible customer pipeline to justify. Reshoring on the assumption that customers will come is higher risk than reshoring to a specific customer commitment.

Finally, workforce availability deserves honest treatment. The 800 jobs GE created in Louisville and the jobs Marlin Steel supports in Baltimore are real. However, they are not the same jobs that left. They require different skills, specifically automation operation, programming, and maintenance. The workforce development investment that supports those roles is a real cost that belongs in the reshoring business case, not a footnote.

6. When It’s a Good Fit vs. Bad Fit

Good fit when:

Reshoring with automation investment fits manufacturers supplying industries where delivery speed, quality documentation, and supply chain traceability matter enough to customers that domestic production commands a price premium. Aerospace, defense, medical devices, and automotive electronics all fit this profile. In those sectors, customers actively pay a premium for domestic, auditable supply chains. The automation investment to produce competitively at domestic labor rates is justified by that premium and by the growing volume of customers actively seeking domestic alternatives.

High risk when:

The investment becomes high risk when the reshoring decision is driven primarily by tariff avoidance rather than structural market demand. Tariff policy changes. A facility investment built entirely on the assumption that current tariffs remain in force carries policy risk that a 10-year capital investment cannot absorb cleanly. The strongest reshoring cases rest on customer demand and supply chain resilience, not tariff arbitrage.

Usually the wrong tool when:

Reshoring is the wrong move for operations that lack the automation capability to compete on unit cost with domestic labor. Bringing production back without an automation plan that closes the labor cost gap typically produces an uncompetitive operation that lasts one or two contract cycles before the customer finds a cheaper domestic or near-shore alternative. The automation investment and the reshoring decision need to be made together, not sequentially.

7. Key Questions Before Committing

Which specific customers or customer segments are actively seeking domestic supply, and have those customers indicated a willingness to pay a price that covers the domestic production cost including automation amortization?
What is the automation investment required to produce the target part family at a per-part cost that is competitive with tariff-adjusted offshore pricing, and does that investment produce acceptable ROI at realistic volume levels?
Which steps in the current production process add the most labor content, and have those steps been evaluated for automation feasibility before the reshoring business case is built?
What workforce training investment does the domestic production model require, and has that cost been included in the total reshoring investment calculation?
Is the reshoring decision justified by customer demand and supply chain resilience, or primarily by current tariff levels, and how does the business case perform if tariff policy changes within the investment’s payback window?

8. How RBTX Learn Recommends Using This Information

RBTX Learn evaluates reshoring opportunities by starting with the customer, not the facility. Before any capital decision, identify which customers are actively seeking domestic supply and what they are willing to pay. That customer conversation determines whether the reshoring economics are viable for the specific operation. Reshoring to a committed customer with a price that works is a sound investment. Reshoring speculatively to a general market that might reward it is a significantly higher-risk bet.

For operations already equipped with automation considering whether to pursue reshored work, axis recommends treating the first reshored customer as a qualification exercise. What quality documentation do they require and what delivery performance do they expect? Answering those questions with a specific customer builds the operational capability that wins the next reshored customer faster. The learning compounds.

The automation investment that enables reshoring is not separate from the everyday automation investment that improves domestic competitiveness. Every cell that reduces per-part cost and improves quality makes the operation a stronger domestic supplier regardless of reshoring momentum. RBTX Learn recommends making automation investment decisions on their own merits first and then evaluating reshoring opportunity as an additional return on that investment rather than as the primary justification for it.