Two legendary American baseball brands are now part of a corporate empire led by Chinese sportswear giant Anta Sports, a company that previously challenged the NBA over its response to pro-democracy demonstrations in Hong Kong.
The relationship has also attracted scrutiny over alleged connections to forced labor in China’s Xinjiang region.
And while President Donald Trump has moved to strengthen restrictions on Chinese investment in sensitive American industries, the ownership arrangement involving these historic sporting goods companies remains in place.
How Two American Baseball Icons Ended Up Under Chinese Influence
Louisville Slugger’s story began in the 1880s, when the Hillerich family established what would become one of baseball’s most recognizable equipment manufacturers.
For more than a century, the family maintained ownership as its wooden bats became fixtures of professional and amateur baseball.
That tradition ended in 2015.
Facing increasing competition and changing conditions in the sporting goods industry, the family sold the Louisville Slugger brand to Wilson Sporting Goods.
Wilson, another American institution with roots dating to 1913, had already become part of an international corporate structure.
Finnish sporting goods company Amer Sports acquired Wilson in 1989.
Three decades later, another major transaction dramatically changed the ownership picture.
In 2019, an investor group led by China’s Anta Sports completed a roughly $5.2 billion acquisition of Amer Sports.
The transaction brought Wilson and Louisville Slugger into a business empire heavily influenced by Chinese investors.
Anta held a controlling interest in the acquisition consortium, with Chinese technology conglomerate Tencent also participating.
The acquisition closed during Trump’s first presidency. Former President Joe Biden’s administration subsequently took no publicly announced action to reverse the transaction.
Amer Sports later returned to public markets, complicating the ownership structure. Anta remains a major shareholder, but describing Wilson and Louisville Slugger as directly owned by the Chinese Communist Party goes beyond what the publicly described corporate structure establishes.
Nevertheless, the Chinese company’s influence over iconic American sporting brands has become a legitimate subject of debate.
Anta’s Hong Kong Controversy Exposed Its Political Priorities
Anta’s involvement in American sports extends beyond baseball equipment.
The company became embroiled in one of the NBA’s most explosive international controversies in 2019.
That year, Houston Rockets general manager Daryl Morey publicly expressed support for protesters demanding greater political freedoms in Hong Kong.
His remarks triggered an immediate backlash from Chinese businesses and government-aligned media.
Anta responded by suspending contract negotiations with the NBA.
The dispute quickly exposed the enormous commercial pressure facing American sports organizations operating in China.
NBA executives, players and corporate partners found themselves navigating competing demands from American supporters of free expression and a Chinese market increasingly sensitive to political criticism.
Los Angeles Lakers superstar LeBron James also entered the controversy, criticizing Morey’s understanding of the situation.
For critics, the episode illustrated how financial interests in China could influence the behavior of prominent American sports figures.
Tencent, another participant in the Amer Sports acquisition, was also involved in the broader Chinese backlash against the NBA.
The controversy raised a troubling question: How much influence should companies willing to punish political speech abroad have over major American sports businesses?
Forced Labor Allegations Bring New Scrutiny to Anta
Anta’s political controversies are not limited to Hong Kong.
The company has faced scrutiny over its business activities and supply chains connected to Xinjiang, the Chinese region where Beijing has been accused of widespread human rights abuses against Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim ethnic minorities.
Investigations published in August 2025 by The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, The New York Times and Der Spiegel examined business relationships involving Anta and production facilities associated with alleged forced labor.
Those findings intensified questions about the company’s manufacturing operations and sourcing practices.
Anta previously made its position on Chinese cotton sourcing unmistakably clear.
“We have always bought and used cotton produced in China, including Xinjiang cotton, and in the future we will continue to do so.”
That statement attracted particular attention because of allegations surrounding labor practices in Xinjiang.
The bipartisan Congressional-Executive Commission on China has also urged scrutiny of the NBA’s commercial relationships with Anta.
However, allegations concerning specific suppliers or production facilities should not automatically be interpreted as proof that Wilson or Louisville Slugger products are manufactured using forced labor.
The distinction matters, particularly as American lawmakers consider how to hold international corporations accountable for potentially abusive supply chains.
China’s Growing Sports Empire Raises Bigger Questions
Anta’s rise from a domestic Chinese footwear company to an international sporting goods powerhouse reflects a much larger transformation in global manufacturing.
Founded in 1991, the business expanded aggressively through domestic growth, brand partnerships and international acquisitions.
Over time, the company developed a portfolio reaching far beyond its original Chinese market.
Its influence now extends into sports equipment, outdoor apparel, footwear and other consumer products sold around the world.
That expansion has coincided with mounting concerns in Washington about Chinese companies acquiring valuable Western intellectual property, established brands and international distribution networks.
Critics argue that China’s industrial policies, manufacturing advantages and state-supported economic environment can create competitive challenges for American businesses.
Others point out that international acquisitions are common throughout the global economy and that Chinese corporate ownership does not automatically establish direct government control.
The distinction is important.
Anta is a Chinese company operating within Beijing’s political and regulatory system, but that fact alone does not prove that every corporate decision is dictated by the Chinese Communist Party.
Still, its past response to the Hong Kong controversy has given American policymakers and consumers reason to examine how political pressures might influence its commercial decisions.
Trump’s New Investment Policy Puts Chinese Acquisitions Under the Microscope
President Trump has made restricting certain Chinese investments a central part of his broader economic and national security agenda.
In February 2025, he issued a national security presidential memorandum directing greater scrutiny of foreign investment, particularly transactions involving strategic industries and potential national security risks.
The policy emphasized stronger use of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, commonly known as CFIUS.
The administration called for the use of “all necessary legal instruments” to address transactions presenting unacceptable security concerns.
The initiative reflected growing bipartisan anxiety about foreign access to sensitive American technology, infrastructure and industrial capabilities.
But the Amer Sports transaction presents a different challenge.
The acquisition was completed years before the memorandum, and sporting goods brands do not automatically fall into the same national security category as semiconductor manufacturers, military suppliers or critical infrastructure operators.
Trump’s directive does not, by itself, require the government to unwind the earlier acquisition.
Nor has the administration publicly established that the Amer Sports transaction meets the legal standards necessary for such intervention.
That leaves policymakers confronting a difficult question about where to draw the line between ordinary international commerce and foreign influence over culturally significant American businesses.
America’s Baseball Heritage Is Now Part of a Global Political Debate
The controversy surrounding Anta illustrates how dramatically the ownership of familiar American companies has changed.
Louisville Slugger began as a family enterprise serving America’s national pastime.
Wilson built its reputation supplying equipment to generations of athletes.
Today, both operate within a publicly traded international company whose largest shareholders include a powerful Chinese sportswear corporation.
For American consumers, that connection may come as a surprise.
For lawmakers concerned about China’s economic reach, it provides another example of how international acquisitions can extend foreign corporate influence into industries deeply associated with American culture.
And for critics of Beijing’s human rights record, Anta’s past statements and business relationships deserve continued examination.
The central issue is no longer simply where America’s baseball equipment is manufactured. It is who exercises influence over the companies that make it, how those businesses respond to political pressure, and whether American consumers understand the ownership structures behind the brands they trust.
Trump’s investment restrictions may influence future acquisitions.
But the history of Wilson and Louisville Slugger shows how complicated it can be to address transactions that have already reshaped the global sporting goods industry.
The names on the bats and gloves remain unmistakably American.
The corporate interests behind them tell a much more international story.
