Following its March 11 announcement of a Section 301 investigation focused on structural excess capacity, on March 12 the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) initiated new investigations into 60 of the United States’ largest trading partners, examining whether those countries have failed to impose and effectively enforce bans on the importation of goods produced with forced labor.
As with other recently announced Section 301 investigations, these actions reflect the Administration’s intent to maintain a global tariff regime applicable most major U.S. trading partners following last month’s termination of IEEPA-based duties, including reciprocal tariffs.
New Section 301 Investigations: Forced Labor
According to the Federal Register Notice, USTR intends to examine whether the acts, policies, and practices of 60 of the United States’ largest trading partners in imposing and enforcing forced labor import restrictions are unreasonable or discriminatory and burden or restrict U.S. commerce within the meaning of the Trade Act. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer stated “governments have failed to impose and effectively enforce measures banning goods produced with forced labor from entering their markets,” and that these investigations will determine “whether foreign governments have taken sufficient steps to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor and how the failure to eradicate these abhorrent practices impacts U.S. workers and businesses.”
The 60 countries subject to investigation include, among others, the European Union, the United Kingdom, China, Canada, Mexico, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia, Brazil, and a number of countries across the Middle East, Africa and Southeast Asia. As required by statute, USTR stated that it has requested consultations with each government and will hold public hearings on April 28, 2026. Interested persons must submit written comments and requests to appear at the hearing by April 15, 2026.
The Federal Register Notice explains that allowing goods made with forced labor to circulate in international commerce can “threaten domestic producers who must compete with foreign goods produced with an artificial cost advantage,” and “may harm U.S. workers and citizens through distorting competition.” Further, requiring “U.S. exports … to compete with products produced wholly or in part with forced labor” can “skew conditions of competition” toward artificially low-cost imports. USTR notes U.S. leadership in preventing trade in goods made with forced labor, and its engagement with trading partners to address these concerns.
As USTR acknowledges, many of these countries have also enacted robust procedures for restricting the entry of goods made with forced labor. For example, Canada has prohibited the importation of goods produced by forced labor since July 2020, as required under the USMCA. The European Union adopted the Forced Labour Regulation in December 2024, which bans the sale, import and export of goods made using forced labor on the EU market. (We discussed comparative developments among U.S. and EU forced labor laws in more detail here.) Mexico similarly implemented a forced labor import ban pursuant to its USMCA commitments. More broadly, the trade agreements that the Trump administration has negotiated with a number of countries in recent months have included commitments by trading partners to prohibit imports of goods made with forced labor.
Precedent: The Nicaragua Section 301 Investigation
USTR has previously investigated forced labor concerns in the context of Nicaragua. In 2024, the Biden administration initiated the first-ever Section 301 investigation targeting labor rights, human rights and rule of law violations, examining widespread abuses including repression of freedom of association and collective bargaining, child labor, human trafficking and the dismantling of rule of law protections. On October 20, 2025, USTR determined that Nicaragua’s acts, policies and practices were unreasonable and burdened U.S. commerce. Due to existing tariffs on Nicaragua under other regimes, USTR structured a remedy phased in over two years on all imported Nicaraguan goods not meeting the rules of origin of the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR), starting at zero and rising to 10 percent on January 1, 2027 and 15 percent on January 1, 2028.
Although the Nicaragua case focused on that country’s own domestic labor practices, the new investigations are directed at foreign governments’ alleged failure to ban or sufficiently address imports of goods from other countries produced with forced labor.
Backdrop: IEEPA and Section 122 Tariffs
As noted in our previous update on the Section 301 investigations into structural excess capacity in industrial sectors, these new investigations should be understood against the backdrop of the Administration’s shifting reliance on different authorities to uphold a global tariff regime. On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court held, by a 6-3 majority in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the President to impose tariffs. President Trump quickly signed a proclamation imposing a replacement 10 percent global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which authorizes a “temporary import surcharge” to address “large and serious” U.S. balance-of-payments deficits. However, Section 122 tariffs are limited by statute to a maximum rate of 15 percent and a duration of 150 days, and will expire in late July. The Administration has been actively pursuing alternative statutory authorities, including Section 301, to maintain longer-term trade restrictions.
RELATED ARTICLES
USTR Launches Section 301 Investigations Into Structural Excess Capacity Across 16 Economies