All articles tagged with #forced labor
A coalition of 25 Democratic-led states filed suit in the U.S. Court of International Trade to block the administration’s latest 10%–12.5% tariffs on goods from about 60 economies, arguing the use of forced-labor as a pretext for an illegal tariff scheme and noting ongoing legal challenges to related measures as the White House defends its authority.
A group of 25 Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of International Trade challenging the Trump administration’s new double-digit tariffs on about 60 trading partners, arguing the levies use a forced-labor pretext to reimpose tariffs previously ruled illegal by the Supreme Court. The White House defends the measures as a legal response to unfair practices, while critics say the authority under IEEPA/Section 301 does not justify the new tariffs, which followed expired temporary tariffs and affect a broad swath of imports.
Twenty-five US states filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, arguing that 10–12.5% tariffs on goods from about 60 trading partners—imposed under Section 301—are arbitrary and unlawful. The White House defends the measures as a lawful move to address forced-labor concerns, with the duties covering about 99.4% of US imports.
DHS blocked 43 Chinese companies from importing to the United States over alleged forced-labor practices in Xinjiang, marking the largest single-day enforcement action under the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act and targeting firms across aluminum, apparel, copper, cotton, and tomato sectors.
Trump’s latest tariff package adds broad exemptions—more than 470 products from foods and farming inputs to semiconductor testing equipment—keeping carve-outs for Canada/Mexico and other USMCA-compliant imports while pressing forward with forced-labor investigations; policymakers argue exemptions balance consumer relief with national-security aims, but business groups seek even broader relief as inflation concerns and midterm politics complicate the rollout.
The Trump administration imposed broad Section 301 tariffs on goods from more than 80 countries, citing forced-labor concerns, with the scope covering about 99.4% of U.S. trade. Two small businesses quickly sued, arguing the move preserves a broad tariff regime previously struck down by the courts. Experts say Section 301 may be unlawful as used here and could be blocked or struck down, signaling a prolonged legal fight that could affect the tariffs' fate and the administration’s trade strategy.
President Trump announced a formal U.S. probe into EU trade practices after the EU fined Google and other tech giants, while the administration moves forward with 10%–12.5% tariffs on about 60 countries as older levies expire, signaling a broad escalation in U.S. trade policy amid global tensions.
The U.S. will impose tariffs ranging from 10% to 12.5% on major trading partners to combat forced labor, replacing a temporary 10% tariff that expired after the Supreme Court derailed Trump’s earlier tariff plan, affecting about 60 countries with rates tied to whether a partner has laws against forced labor.
Under Section 301, the U.S. imposes 10% or 12.5% tariffs on 60 economies for not banning goods made with forced labor, aiming to anchor a broader anti-forced-labor regime after a Supreme Court ruling struck down emergency tariffs; responses range from Australia’s rejection of the rationale to Brazil and Chile criticizing the move, while Canada and New Zealand express willingness to engage and negotiate rather than retaliate.
The US is slapping 10% to 12.5% tariffs on roughly 60 trading partners—covering about 99.4% of imports—after determining many nations do not adequately prohibit or enforce bans on goods produced with forced labor; nations with enforceable bans face 10%, others 12.5%; the move, using Section 301 and related powers, marks another step in the Trump-era tariff strategy amid a contentious global trade environment and potential legal or retaliation pushes.
The Trump administration will begin 10% to 12.5% tariffs on about 60 trading partners, effective 12:01 a.m. ET Friday, replacing the expiring 10% global tariffs and covering roughly 99.4% of U.S. trade; the measures are tied to forced-labor concerns and imposed under Section 301 of the Trade Act, and officials say they will not stack with existing Section 232 duties.
The Trump administration plans permanent new tariffs tied to forced-labor concerns, potentially covering about 60 countries, to replace temporary measures invalidated by the Supreme Court. Using Section 301 and other authorities, the move expands the president’s tariff toolkit to boost domestic manufacturing, though critics warn it could fuel inflation and disrupt markets as investigations into overcapacity proceed.
The Trump administration is preparing to impose fresh tariffs by Friday on dozens of trading partners, aiming to preserve its tariff regime after a stopgap 10% duty lapses. The plan would likely apply 10% duties on dozens of economies (with 12.5% levies on others) under forced-labor and trade acts, with ongoing deliberations and potential adjustments from the initial proposal; some measures such as 50% tariffs on Canadian goods and 25% on Brazilian products have already been floated. Final details, hearings, and timing remain uncertain as the administration seeks to avoid a gap between the stopgap and new duties.
U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer signaled a new round of tariffs is coming, potentially up to 12.5% under Section 301 on 60 economies to address forced-labor concerns, while existing 10% Section 122 tariffs could expire Friday unless Congress acts.
The United States will impose a 25% tariff on most Brazilian imports starting July 22 under Section 301 after a yearlong review of what Washington calls unfair trade practices; exemptions will apply to beef, orange juice, aircraft and parts, and energy products. A separate forced-labor probe could add another 12.5% duty, with a decision due next week, intensifying tensions ahead of Brazil’s October presidential election. The move comes amid contentious negotiations and sharp rhetoric between Washington and Brasilia.