THE ADMINISTRATION of United States President Donald Trump has imposed fresh tariffs on imports from 60 trading partners, citing what it described as inadequate efforts by those economies to prevent goods made with forced labour from entering their markets, a move that has drawn swift criticism from governments across Europe, Asia and Latin America.
The new duties, which took effect as a temporary 10 per cent global tariff expired, impose rates of either 10 per cent or 12.5 per cent on imports from the affected economies, including the European Union, China and several other major US trading partners.
The tariffs mark the latest attempt by the Trump administration to rebuild its broad tariff programme after the US Supreme Court earlier this year struck down the administration’s previous “reciprocal tariffs” introduced under emergency powers.
The White House is relying instead on Section 301 of the US Trade Act of 1974, arguing that countries which fail to prohibit or effectively police imports made with forced labour create unfair competition for American businesses while allowing labour abuses to persist.
According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), investigations found that the targeted economies had not taken sufficient action to prevent the importation of goods produced with forced labour.
The tariffs cover about 99.4 per cent of US imports but exempt a range of products, including oil, natural gas, fertiliser and certain food items. Countries deemed to have stronger legal frameworks or commitments to improve enforcement were assigned the lower 10 per cent tariff, while most others face the higher 12.5 per cent rate.
Backlash
The decision immediately provoked strong reactions from many affected governments, which rejected Washington’s justification.
The European Union dismissed the allegation that it had weak labour protections. EU foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, said the bloc maintained some of the world’s strongest labour standards and rejected any suggestion that it was failing to address forced labour in supply chains.
China also criticised the US action, accusing Washington of abusing trade measures under the guise of protecting labour rights and calling for the tariffs to be withdrawn. Beijing maintained that the move violated international trade principles and would further disrupt global supply chains.
Australia described the tariffs as “completely unjustified”, with Trade Minister Don Farrell saying Canberra would continue engaging Washington to secure their removal.
Brazil condemned the duties as arbitrary and indicated it would challenge them through the World Trade Organization under its Reciprocity Law.
Mexico, however, played down the immediate impact, saying the new measures largely replaced the previous 10 per cent tariff already being applied to many exports.
Malaysia welcomed being assigned a relatively lower tariff while signalling its intention to continue negotiations with Washington.
The Philippines also defended its record against forced labour and stressed the importance of maintaining stable trade relations with the United States.
The latest action represents another chapter in Trump’s long-running use of tariffs as a central trade policy tool.
Earlier efforts to impose sweeping duties aimed at reducing America’s trade deficit were overturned by the US Supreme Court, prompting the administration to seek a new legal basis for broad import levies.
Analysts say the renewed tariff programme is likely to heighten uncertainty for businesses already grappling with geopolitical tensions and supply chain disruptions.
While financial markets showed only limited immediate reaction, economists warned that escalating trade disputes could increase costs for manufacturers, complicate global commerce and add pressure to inflation if affected countries retaliate.
For Nigeria and other export-dependent economies, the latest US trade measures underscore the increasingly fragmented global trading environment.
Although Nigeria was not among the major economies highlighted in the immediate reactions, continued tensions between the world’s largest economies could reshape supply chains, commodity demand and international trade flows, with potential implications for emerging markets.
