With tariffs often shifting with the wind, companies may dismiss the latest round of forced labor Section 301’s as another administration whim. But the 43 additions to the UFLPA Entity List underscore how seriously the administration is taking, and expanding, the issue.
“These 301s definitely have more staying power,” said Josh Kagan, international trade attorney, Kelley Dry in the webinar “Forced Labor and Tariffs: Section 301 & the Updated UFLPA List.”
He noted that while IEEPA tariffs were struck down by the Supreme Court, they were newer and didn’t even mention the word tariff in the statute. Forced labor prohibitions, however, date back to 1930, and the UFLPA has been a bipartisan focus of U.S. trade and customs policy since 2022.
“I think this is going to be a part of U.S. trade policy for the foreseeable future,” he said. “Plus, USTR doesn’t want to lose again in the courts and have these tariffs overturned.”
The forced labor 301s apply across 60 economies representing approximately 99.4% of U.S. imports. Countries that have no forced labor prohibition in place face a 12.5% tariff, while those who fail to enforce their prohibition face 10%—stacked on top of other Section 301 duties and trade actions. Certain ceilings remain for the EU, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea and Switzerland with MFN treatment.
While the 2.5% differential might seem minor, it now gives countries an economic incentive to tweak their existing behavior toward forced labor.
“Even a relatively small tariff differential can create a competitive advantage between countries competing against each other for U.S. market access,” said Kagan, who anticipates a proliferation of forced-labor import regimes around the world.
The UFLPA Entity List now tallies 187, the largest expansion in the law’s history. Prior, forced-labor discussions around UFLPA traditionally focused on Xinjiang-linked cotton, textiles, solar products and polysilicon. The latest additions extend into pharmaceuticals, food products, electronics components, metals and minerals, among other sectors.
Geography also expanded. Nearly half of the new entities are located outside Xinjiang, including companies in provinces such as Shandong, Jiangsu and Henan.
Trust No One
Any finished garment stems from a tangled and often murky web of suppliers, ownership relationships, undisclosed sourcing relationships and sub-contractors across the world. And a company appearing on an enforcement list may have ties to more tiers and geographies than an importer knows.
This puts importers at heightened exposure risk, even down to a relatively small component several tiers removed.
“This really underscores the importance of reviewing ownership data in addition to trade data,” said Liz Johnson, senior solutions consultant, Sayari, a risk management platform that uses AI-driven tools to map supply chains and hidden economic networks.
She noted that of the 43 new additions to the UFLPA Entity List, Sayari had previously identified 39 for forced labor risk, using trade and registry data from primary sources like government registries, customs records, and official filings. These relationships can also flag risk before an entity is formally added to a government enforcement list.
Ultimately, the onus is on importers to monitor underlying risk signals and ask the right questions.
For example: Instead of asking, Is my supplier on a government list? Organizations must ask: Who owns my supplier? Who does my supplier buy from? What companies sit several tiers upstream? Where are critical raw materials and components coming from? Are there geographic, ownership or corporate relationships that create potential risk? Can we substantiate our conclusions with primary-source documentation?
Companies with early visibility into such connections have more options to change suppliers, adjust sourcing strategies, remediate risks or prepare evidence before goods reach the border.
Convergence of Issues
Whether regulations, tariffs or entity lists shift, companies still need to be able to prove what’s in their supply chains. This is particularly important as forced-labor enforcement converges with other trade measures where country of origin is crucial.
After all, a shipment admissible from a forced-labor perspective can still face other tariff exposures.
The forced labor crackdown also impacts the common practice of re-exporting goods rejected from the U.S. and sending them to countries with less stringent practices.
“If many other jurisdictions now have forced labor import prohibitions using the International Labor Organization’s (ILO) definition, and the U.S. says something is made with forced labor, it would be awfully hard for another country to say they disagree,” said Kagan. “Especially in the current environment where the U.S. is generating this economic pressure.”
USTR seems to be giving pretty broad discretion to each of these economies to implement its own version of a forced labor import prohibition. “I don’t think I have seen one to date where USTR came back and said no, that wasn’t good enough. Try again,” he said.
“There have been various models where apparently just the commitment to implement a forced labor import prohibition gets you that 2.5% [reduction]. But I will be paying very careful attention to what enforcement looks like of these prohibitions that is sufficient to get a further tariff reduction,” he said. “Once we start seeing that, that’s when I expect the dam to break and to see a lot more shipments getting detained.”
But there’s the question of enforcement, and how enforcement is enough to change the tariff?
“Does a country have to stop one shipment, two shipments, 100 shipments? These are two data points that I’m watching, but the upshot will be strong economic incentives for 60 economies in the world to not only pass a forced labor import prohibition or implement it in law, but to stop shipments and enforce it,” he said.
At the end of the day, companies that thought UFLPA and other forced labor issues were being de-prioritized by the Administration are realizing that 43 additional entities on the list could be just the beginning. And supply chain traceability is more crucial than ever.
“If folks thought, ‘Hey, this is only about cotton and solar,’ it’s not. Pay attention to those enforcement trends and pay attention to the entity list editions because that’s giving you information,” said Kagan.
