US President Donald Trump’s imposition of the latest tariffs has drawn sharp criticism with governments in affected countries rejecting Washington’s claims that they failed to adequately enforce bans on goods made with forced labour.
The Trump administration announced late on Thursday additional tariffs of between 10 percent and 12.5 percent on imports from 60 economies after concluding they had not met US standards on preventing forced labour in supply chains.
The new measures took effect on Friday, replacing temporary tariffs Trump had imposed after the US Supreme Court struck down an earlier round of duties.
Governments from Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea and the European Union argued the tariffs were unjustified and lacked credible evidence.
What is Section 301 of the US Trade Act?
Section 301 of the US Trade Act of 1974 authorises the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to investigate foreign trade practices that it considers unfair or discriminatory, and that burden US commerce.
If the USTR determines a country has violated those standards, the US government can impose retaliatory measures, including tariffs or other trade restrictions, without requiring approval from Congress.
The Trump administration used Section 301 as the legal basis for the latest tariffs after conducting a four-month investigation into trading partners' enforcement of bans on goods produced with forced labour.
Countries reject forced labour allegations
Australian Trade Minister Don Farrell dismissed the accusations, saying Australia takes modern slavery seriously and that the increase in tariffs on Australian exports to 12.5 percent from 10 percent was "completely unjustified."
He said Canberra would continue lobbying the Office of the United States Trade Representative to remove all tariffs on Australian goods.
New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon described the tariffs as "extremely disappointing," saying they were unjustified and harmful to trade.
A US investigation underpinning the measures did not provide meaningful evidence to support allegations of forced labour, he said.
"Tariffs are not the way, they drive up costs and uncertainty for businesses," Luxon wrote on X.
European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas also questioned the rationale behind the measures.
"If you compare our labour laws to the ones of the United States, I mean we have paid vacations, we have very good labour conditions for our employees, so it's not really grounded," she told Channel News Asia.
Asian allies seek to limit fallout
Japan protested the 12.5 percent tariff on its exports, noting that Tokyo had previously been assured no additional duties would be imposed beyond an earlier agreement setting a 10 percent tariff.
"Our understanding is both sides are still committed to that," Chief Cabinet Secretary Minoru Kihara told reporters.
"It is regrettable that the measure imposes tariffs on the grounds of non-existence of measures banning imports of goods made by forced labour, even though Japan's industry and trade are in line with international rules," he added.
South Korea said it would continue close consultations with Washington to preserve what it called a mutual "balance of benefits."
Seoul's trade ministry said combined tariffs on South Korean exports should remain below 15 percent, although a separate Section 301 investigation into alleged excess industrial production remains ongoing.
