"Worker Protection" vs. "Tariff Pretext" ... Forced-Labor Tariffs Divide Opinion Even in the U.S.

[Financial News] After the Donald Trump administration imposed forced-labor tariffs of 10% to 12.5% on 60 economic entities under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, it has been rolling out supportive statements from industry and labor groups to promote the policy. Democrats, meanwhile, said they agree that forced labor is a serious issue, but argued that the move is nothing more than a pretext to keep reciprocal tariffs in place after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled them unlawful.
On the 24th (local time), the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) released a statement titled, "U.S. steel workers, manufacturers and farmers welcome President Trump's forced-labor tariffs." The announcement came shortly after tariffs of 10% to 12.5% were finalized the previous day for 60 economic entities, including South Korea.
Through a statement from Kevin Dempsey, president of the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), USTR said the measure would "stop trade in goods produced with forced labor and allow U.S. industries and workers to compete fairly." The United Steelworkers (USW) also welcomed the move, saying, "American workers should not be forced to compete with products made through forced labor."
USTR also highlighted statements of support from several industry groups, including the U.S. Rice Producers Association and the American Seed Trade Association, stressing that the measure is a policy to protect U.S. manufacturing and workers.
Republicans also backed the move. Jason Smith, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, called it "an appropriate step to protect American workers from unfair competition" and argued that "not only China, but many countries, fail to meet the labor standards expected by the United States." Democrats criticized the forced-labor tariffs as a tool to replace reciprocal tariffs.
Richard Neal, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, said, "Forced labor is a real and serious problem in supply chains, but it should not be used as a pretext to justify dubious legal reasoning," adding that "this measure is far too convenient an excuse."
Representative Linda Sánchez also questioned the administration's sincerity, pointing to the Trump administration's sharp cuts to the budget of the Bureau of International Labor Affairs at the Department of Labor, which handles forced-labor issues. She said, "If it had taken the forced-labor issue seriously, it would not have imposed tariffs at effectively similar levels on Australia and China."
Earlier, USTR announced on the 23rd that it would impose forced-labor tariffs of 10% to 12.5% on 60 economic entities, including South Korea. The United States argued that its own forced-labor enforcement system is strict, while the systems in the targeted countries are inadequate, creating unfair competition. However, some say the move is also intended to replace the existing "10% global tariff" after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled reciprocal tariffs unlawful.

[email protected] Kim Kyung-min Reporter