President Donald Trump announced new tariffs ranging from 10% to 12.5% on imports from 60 countries that account for 99% of U.S. imports, effective as temporary 10% worldwide tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 expire at 12:01 a.m. Friday, July 25, 2026. The duties are imposed under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, grounded in findings that the targeted countries inadequately enforced bans on goods produced by forced labor (NPR).

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the justification for the tariffs is that targeted countries inadequately enforced bans on goods produced by forced labor. The USTR's office concluded in a report that the economies subject to the Section 301 investigations enable forced labor by failing to screen out forced labor goods from imports at risk of forced labor (NPR).

The tariff architecture allows for country-level adjustments. India, named as a specifically identified country, saw its tariff reduced from 12.5% to 10% after tightening forced labor enforcement. Some country-level tariff details were attributed to a senior administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity (NPR).

Certain products are exempted from the new tariffs, including oil, gas, fertilizer, and goods qualifying for duty-free status under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (NPR).

The investigations that produced these tariffs began on March 12, 2026, when USTR initiated 60 Section 301 investigations related to the failure of various economies to impose and enforce forced labor import bans. USTR received, reviewed, and analyzed over 1,600 submissions in connection with the investigations. The Section 301 Committee convened public hearings beginning July 7, 2026, in the main hearing room of the U.S. International Trade Commission. USTR announced it was taking action in the forced labor Section 301 investigations on July 6, 2026 (USTR).

Reuters reported on June 3, 2026, that USTR had proposed 10% additional duties on imports from Canada, Ecuador, the European Union, Indonesia, Mexico, Pakistan, Argentina, and Bangladesh (Reuters). The USTR stated the tariffs on the 60 economies will cover 99.4% of goods imported to the United States (Reuters).

The measures have drawn opposition from Democratic state attorneys general, who opposed the administration's plan to impose tariffs based on forced labor concerns (Reuters). Latin American countries and some steelmakers urged the Trump administration to exempt them from the proposed new U.S. tariffs of 10% to 12.5% (Reuters). Neither effort resulted in a blanket exemption, though the USMCA duty-free carveout and the India rate reduction indicate the administration structured the policy to reward specific enforcement actions.

Separately, USTR has launched an additional Section 301 probe into whether 16 countries accounting for 70% of U.S. imports have overproduced goods. That investigation proceeds independently of the forced labor tariffs now taking effect (NPR).

The timing links two distinct trade authorities. The Section 122 tariffs, which allowed the temporary 10% worldwide duties, carry a statutory ceiling of 15% and a 150-day duration. The Section 301 framework, by contrast, has no fixed expiration and can remain in place until USTR determines the underlying issue has been addressed. That structural difference means the new tariffs are not a like-for-like extension of the temporary duties; they rest on a different legal finding and carry no built-in sunset.

The use of Section 301 for forced labor enforcement builds on existing statutory tools, including Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930, which prohibits importation of goods made with forced labor. The new tariffs go further by imposing duties on countries for failing to enforce their own forced labor import bans, rather than targeting specific shipments or producers. The 99% import coverage figure places nearly the entirety of U.S. trade within the tariff's scope, with the principal exemptions covering energy inputs and USMCA-qualifying goods.

India's rate reduction from 12.5% to 10% provides a concrete data point for how the administration calibrated duties to enforcement outcomes. Whether other countries can negotiate similar adjustments through changes to their own forced labor enforcement regimes will depend on USTR's willingness to modify country-specific rates outside the formal Section 301 review process.