The United States revealed fresh tariff slabs of 10 and 12.5% on numerous economies under its Section 301 on Thursday.
The United States revealed fresh tariff slabs of 10 and 12.5% on numerous economies under its Section 301 on Thursday. India has been positioned in the lower 10% tariff category. Officials advised ANI that while New Delhi was at first slated for a 12.5% tariff but it secured the lower rate following effective discussions on labour practices.
This comes as the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Thursday introduced tariffs starting from 10%. The US imposed 10% tariffs on goods purchased from India and 16 other nations over the issue of the use of forced labour in the manufacturing of such items.
US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer declared the new tariffs on 60 countries under Section 301 of the Trade Act on Friday, a day before the expiration of 10% additional levies on all nations.
The USTR assertion mentioned that Greer had taken the final action, at President Donald Trump’s direction, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 via implementing tariffs on 60 economies for their failure to impose and Successfully enforce a prohibition on the importation of goods manufactures with forced labour.
The motion will start to accurate what’s both a human rights abuse and a distortive trade practice to enhance the welfare of employees anywhere,” Greer stated in a declaration right here.
The 10% tariff rate applies to 17 nation, inclusive of India, Canada, the UK, Bangladesh and Pakistan.
Earlier, India was bracketed in nations attracting 12.5% tariffs.
A Federal Note in this regard took note of India’s adoption of a forced labour import prohibition after the announcing of the proposed tariffs in June.
On June 14, India amended its foreign trade policy to prohibit the import of goods manufactures using forced labour.
The Trump administration had started the two investigations after the United States Supreme Court, in February, dismissed last year’s “reciprocal tariffs ” using emergency powers as illegal. The administration responded by levying 10% tariffs on all nations that expire on Friday.
India has contested both the investigations initiated by the USTR and insisted that those problems can be mentioned as a part of the bilateral trade agreement that is under discussion.
The US is India’s second largest trade partner and the biggest destination for exports. In 2025, bilateral items trade as pegged at almost USD 141 billion, with India’s exports pegged at USD 87.3 billion, as per the commerce department data.nt to 12.5% on 60 economies as part of action directed by US President Donald Trump over what it defined as inadequate measures to limit the import of goods produced with “forced labour”.
As per the USTR, India is amongst 17 economies that will face the lower 10% tariff. The slab accommodates of 17 economies which feature include the United Kingdom, Canada, Indonesia, Mexico and Bangladesh.
Officials informed ANI that India had originally been considered for a 12.5% tariff but was placed in the 10% category following constructive engagement with the US on labour practices.
Ranging from 10% to 12.5%, the new duties hit major trading partners such as India, the UK, EU, Canada and Japan and take effect Friday.
The assertion was made by the Office of the United States Trade Representative on Thursday, in what it known as was Ambassador Jamieson Greer’s taking final action, at President Trump’s direction to impose tariffs on 60 economies for their “failure to impose and efficaciously enforce prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labour”.
Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 grants the US Trade Representative the authority to implement tariffs or other punitive actions against nations determined to be the using unfair trade practices.
The declaration announced two sets of tariffs- 10% and 12.5% and stated that, “10% is the perfect rate of Section 301 duties for investigated economies that (i) impose a forced labour import prohibition; (ii) have committed to impose and put in force the sort of prohibition through an Agreement on Reciprocal Trade; or (iii) have imposed a partial regime with the impact of preventing the importation of certain forced labor goods. These economies are: Argentina, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Canada, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mexico, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Trinidad and Tobago, and the UK.”
It further mentioned, “10% or 12.5%, net of Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) rate is the suitable rate of Section 301 duties for certain products of the European Union, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, and Switzerland that aren’t otherwise exempted…12.5% is the ideal rate of Section 301 duty for all other investigated economies.”
As per the Office of the Trade Representative, Ambassador Greer stated, “President Trump acknowledges that a long time of moral suasion have not eradicated forced labour from worldwide supply chains. The United States had a forced labour import ban for nearly a century, and rigorously enforces it; it is well past time for our trading partners to do the same,”
He praised the partners who had taken swift action in this regard and stated, “I am inspired by the trading partners who have moved quickly to adopt forced exertions import prohibitions, and look forward to ensuring their powerful enforcement.”
The major development comes after the USTR in March this year initiated investigations of 60 economies under Section 301(b) of the Trade Act of 1974 to decide whether the practices of these economies related to the failure of implementing a ban at the importation of goods manufactures with “forced labour”.
This was into followed with consultations with more than 45 governments
along with numerous public hearings into the investigation.
The official statement noted that the USTR received, reviewed, and analyzed over 1,600 written comments at the proposed responsive action.
This marks the latest escalation in the global trade conflict that President Trump reignited upon returning to office in January last year.
The move follows an in earlier ruling this year by the US Supreme Court that many tariffs imposed under emergency powers were unlawful, prompting the president to pursue alternative legal routes to advance his signature trade agenda.
