The European Commission has strongly criticized new US tariff threats linked to alleged failures to curb trade in goods produced using forced labor, deeming them “unjustified.” The EU asserts that its own legislation is already robust and globally ambitious enough to ban such products, rejecting the premise for the proposed levies. This move by the US administration comes amidst a backdrop of a contentious trade deal struck last summer between then-US President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, known as the Turnberry agreement.

Under the terms of the Turnberry deal, the US was to maintain a 15% tariff on EU goods, while the EU committed to eliminating its duties on US industrial products. However, the US administration, on Tuesday, proposed new 10% tariffs on some trading partners, including the European Union, arguing that insufficient efforts to combat forced labor were harming US commercial interests. These proposed 10% tariffs would be imposed on top of existing most-favoured-nation duties, effectively pushing average tariff levels above the 15% ceiling outlined in the original EU-US agreement, thereby breaching its spirit.

The US administration’s latest tariff proposals are rooted in Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, a legal tool now being utilized to find an alternative basis for imposing tariffs. This follows significant setbacks for Trump's trade policy, after the US Supreme Court ruled in February that he had overstepped his authority by using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) for sweeping duties. Subsequently, the US trade court also found his 10% across-the-board tariffs unlawful, although they remain in place during an appeal. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer stated that the “failure of our most important trading partners to address the importation of goods made with forced labor is unacceptable,” creating an “unlevel playing field” for American workers. This approach allows Trump to circumvent previous court-imposed limits on his protectionist agenda, reflecting experts’ predictions that he would seek new avenues for his long-held obsession with tariffs as an economic security tool.

The European Commission, through its deputy chief spokesperson Olof Gill, affirmed that while it would “carefully analyse the preliminary findings of the investigation,” it considers “tariffs imposed on these grounds to be unjustified.” German MEP Bernd Lange (S&D), the European Parliament's chief negotiator for the Turnberry agreement, echoed this sentiment on X, calling the US administration's search for new legal grounds “desperate” after its Supreme Court defeat. Lange emphasized that accusing the EU of not doing enough against forced labor is “absurd,” given that the EU adopted a regulation in 2024 banning the sale, import, and export of products made with forced labor – a law Gill described as “one of the most ambitious instruments of its kind globally.” Gill reiterated the principle, stating, “A deal is a deal,” and added, “On the EU side, we are on track to ensure implementation of our Joint Statement tariff commitments by the end of June. We expect the US to fully respect the terms of the Joint Statement.”

The scope of these new tariff threats is extensive, targeting 60 trading partners. The proposed 10% tariffs would affect countries and blocs such as the EU, Canada, Mexico, Taiwan, and the UK. Higher 12.5% levies are proposed for China, Japan, India, South Korea, Brazil, and Switzerland, with an additional threat of 25% levies on Brazil. A 98-page report stemming from the Section 301 investigation noted that only a handful of partners, including Canada, Ecuador, the European Union, Indonesia, Mexico, and Pakistan, had not failed to impose a forced labor import prohibition. However, the White House still judged Canada as failing to enforce its laws, and despite the EU’s 2024 regulation, its across-the-board ban on imports of goods using forced labor does not fully come into force until December 2027, making both vulnerable to the proposed duties. These tariffs are not immediate and are subject to public comment and review.

Other trading partners have also reacted to the threats. The UK government stated it has already tackled the issue of forced labor through legislation, including the Modern Slavery Act. A spokesperson indicated continued engagement with the US administration, emphasizing that “The preferential access that UK businesses benefit from under our existing agreement remains in place and there is no change to the UK’s tariff rate.” The ongoing dispute highlights the growing tension in international trade relations, with the EU firmly holding to its existing agreement and expecting the US to honor its commitments amidst the evolving landscape of global trade policy and human rights concerns.