The investigation, launched in March 2026, looked into situations where forced labor is used directly in manufacturing. It also examined cases where countries fail to prohibit imports made with forced labour and use them in goods exported to the United States.
Also Read: What is Section 301? Trump’s new tariff sword to hurt India and other partners?
Forced labour and Trump tariff threat
In early June, the United States Trade Representative (USTR) proposed additional tariffs on goods from India and 59 other economies after determining that they had failed to effectively enforce import bans on goods made using forced labour. The recommendation, made under a Section 301 investigation, calls for an additional 10% to 12.5% duty on imports from the affected countries and could complicate ongoing trade talks between India and the US.
“The failure of our most important trading partners to address the importation of goods made with forced labor is unacceptable. This creates a dynamic where American workers are forced to compete globally on an unlevel playing field,” Ambassador Jamieson Greer had said. “We will no longer tolerate this disparity. Some trading partners have taken initial steps to prevent the importation of forced labor goods, including through USMCA and commitments in Agreements on Reciprocal Trade. However, each of our trading partners must do more to ensure that trade does not perversely encourage and entrench forced labor globally.”
In its submission to the USTR, India had earlier rejected the basis of a separate Section 301 investigation launched on March 12 over alleged failures to address forced labour. New Delhi argued that the probe did not meet the legal conditions required for initiating such an investigation and urged the USTR to end the proceedings against India through a negative determination.
Also Read: US’ 301 probes: India denies allegations, seeks termination of both investigations
Now, industry groups, businesses and government representatives will present their arguments for or against the proposed tariffs before US trade officials. White House officials have signalled that the administration plans to use the forced labour probe and other trade investigations as the legal basis for bringing import tariffs back to the levels seen under Donald Trump’s emergency tariff regime, Bloomberg had reported. For now, the US continues to levy a temporary 10% tariff on imports from most countries, but that measure is due to lapse later this month.
The proposed tariffs have drawn mixed reactions. US steel industry groups are expected to support the move, arguing that a surge in steel imports, driven partly by weaker labour standards and the absence of effective bans on goods made using forced labour, has hurt domestic manufacturers.
Representatives from India, Pakistan, Vietnam, Mexico, Chile, Ecuador, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Peru, Jordan, South Korea, Sri Lanka, South Africa and Brazil are scheduled to participate during the three-day proceedings. Several countries are expected to defend their labour enforcement systems and challenge the USTR’s findings during the hearings.
India prohibits forced labour
India prohibits forced labour under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. However, several export sectors rely on intermediate inputs imported from China, some of which could come under scrutiny under the USTR’s methodology, according to a June report by ToI. The Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) had also said India’s reliance on Chinese inputs means some exports could still face investigations despite the country’s domestic ban on forced labour.
India and the US have been negotiating the framework for the first phase of their proposed trade agreement, with discussions taking place even at the ministerial level. However, the final tariff structure needed to put the deal into effect is expected to be settled only after the Trump administration unveils its revised tariff policy. India has also pushed to ensure it retains a competitive edge over export rivals such as China, Vietnam, Bangladesh and members of the ASEAN bloc.
What happens over the next three days?
The hearings will open on Tuesday with submissions from government representatives, including Mexico’s Ernesto Acevedo Fernández, who is expected to outline how the country enforces its forced labour import rules under the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Officials from Chile, Ecuador, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras and Peru are also scheduled to present their views before the USTR.
Later in the day, US steel industry groups, including the American Line Pipe Producers Association and the Steel Manufacturers Association, are expected to support the proposed duties. The American Petroleum Institute is set to make the case for exempting industrial inputs used by the oil and gas sector. The industry body argues that many of these products are not produced in the US or are unavailable in quantities sufficient to meet domestic demand. Former USTR official Ed Gresser is also due to testify, contending that the investigations go beyond the original purpose of Section 301 and that the proposed duties could add significant costs for American consumers.
On Wednesday, representatives from India, Jordan and Pakistan are among those scheduled to appear. Pakistan is expected to argue that the proposed action is disproportionate because there is no evidence of forced labour in its exports and because it has already introduced an import prohibition. Human rights organisations, including China Labor Watch, are also expected to testify, with calls for any preferential tariff treatment to be limited to products that can be independently verified as free from forced labour.
The final day of the hearings will feature industry associations representing the footwear, textile and cotton sectors, alongside government representatives from South Korea, Sri Lanka, South Africa and Vietnam. Vietnam is expected to contest the USTR’s conclusion that it has failed to effectively address imports linked to forced labour. Trade officials will also hear from companies across a range of industries, including cookware maker Le Creuset, trailer manufacturers, cigar producers and medical device firms, many of which are expected to seek exemptions for products they say have little or no domestic manufacturing alternative in the US.