“US allies hit with new tariffs object to Trump’s forced labor claims”

What actually happened

The U.S. Trade Representative imposed new tariffs of 10 to 12.5 percent on roughly 60 economies, citing failure to enforce bans on forced-labor goods, after the Supreme Court ruled earlier tariffs imposed under emergency powers illegal. The investigation is less about labor standards than about pressuring other countries to adopt Washington's ban on Chinese forced-labor goods, and about rebuilding the tariff regime the Supreme Court struck down, analysts say. Multiple governments, including Australia, New Zealand, the EU and Japan, publicly disputed that forced-labor justification.

Key facts

• Tariffs range from 10 to 12.5 percent on roughly 60 economies, per the article and corroborated by "The U.S. said Thursday it will collect duties of between 10% and 12.5% on imports from most major trading partners, following an investigation into the alleged failure of around 60 economies to prevent forced labor in their supply chains."
• "President Donald Trump's administration has sought to rebuild tariff pressure on countries around the world after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his global tariffs as illegal on February 20."
• Australia's rate rose to 12.5 percent from the prior 10 percent set after "Liberation Day," per Trade Minister Don Farrell, who called the move "completely unjustified and we will continue to lobby the United States Trade Representative to remove all tariffs on Australian goods."
• New Zealand's PM Luxon said "The US investigation did not provide meaningful evidence to support claims in relation to forced labor. Tariffs are not the way – they drive up costs and uncertainty for businesses."
• EU's Kaja Kallas told Reuters the labour-standards rationale "can't be used against the EU", comparing EU labour protections favorably to the U.S.
• Not every ally objected equally: Canada, in the lower 10 percent tier with a USMCA exemption, called the move "not unexpected," and pledged to keep engaging rather than retaliate.

What to watch for

• Watch whether the U.S. moves from Section 301 (used here) back toward another emergency-powers mechanism if this round faces legal challenge, since it's explicitly a rebuild of tariffs the Court already voided.
• Watch which countries, like Canada, negotiate exemptions versus which, like Australia and New Zealand, escalate rhetoric without retaliating.
• Watch for China's fuller response; its Foreign Ministry gave only a general statement on trade wars serving no one's interest, without addressing the forced-labor allegation directly.