Several Latin American nations have formally contested a U.S. proposal to impose new tariffs on imports tied to forced labor concerns, arguing the measures would penalize lawful exporters rather than effectively combat abusive practices. Mexico, Peru, Guatemala, and Ecuador jointly expressed their objections during a hearing held by the United States International Trade Commission in Washington.
The tariff plan under scrutiny originated from a Section 301 investigation initiated by the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), which found that numerous countries—such as Mexico, Canada, Ecuador, and others—had failed to adequately prevent goods made with forced labor from entering the U.S. market. The proposed tariffs would impose an additional 10% duty on imports from Mexico and 12.5% on products from other identified economies, with limited exceptions for certain apparel and textile imports under a special mechanism.
Mexican officials underscored their ongoing efforts to eliminate forced labor, arguing that their existing regulatory framework and enforcement mechanisms render the tariffs unnecessary and unjust. The Peruvian delegation similarly questioned the evidentiary basis for the U.S. findings, stating that the legal requirements under Section 301 had not been met and pointing to the absence of demonstrated harm to American commerce. Representatives from Guatemala and Ecuador also echoed these concerns, highlighting the broad regional opposition to the U.S. approach.
USTR’s findings have sparked debate over whether forced labor enforcement is being used primarily as a human rights tool or as a means to implement broader trade restrictions that may disrupt supply chains and increase costs for U.S. manufacturers and consumers. The case is further complicated by criticism from Democratic state attorneys general who view the tariff proposal as a misuse of Section 301 authority, indicating potential legal challenges may follow.