South Korean Trade Group Asks U.S. to Defer or Lower Forced Labor Tariffs

By Song Sang-ho

WASHINGTON, July 6 (Yonhap) -- A South Korean trade association on Monday requested U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Jamieson Greer to defer the implementation of proposed tariffs on South Korea over forced labor concerns, or lower them, stressing that Seoul strictly prohibits forced labor through international treaties and domestic laws.

Korea International Trade Association (KITA) Chairman Yoon Jin-sik submitted the comment as the USTR recently proposed 12.5 percent tariffs on South Korea and other economies over their alleged failure to enforce import bans on products made with forced labor.

The tariff proposal came after the USTR conducted trade investigations into 60 countries, including South Korea, China and Japan, over forced labor concerns under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act, as the Trump administration seeks to replace "reciprocal" tariffs that were struck down by the Supreme Court in February.

"We request that the United States defer the implementation of any additional duties on products from Korea, providing an opportunity for both countries to discuss bilateral cooperation and regulatory alignments," Yoon wrote in the comment.

"If the implementation cannot be deferred, we request that the U.S. reduce Korea's additional duty rate to 10 percent, aligning it with the rate applied to economies that have confirmed their cooperation with U.S. efforts or have undertaken commitments regarding a forced labor import prohibition," he added.

The KITA chief also urged that certain products be excluded from any proposed tariffs, including goods with a low risk of forced labor involvement or lacking specific evidence of an association with South Korea or of causing material injury to U.S. commerce.

He underscored that although South Korea does not impose an explicit import prohibition on goods with forced labor inputs as defined by the USTR, it "strictly" prohibits forced labor by ratifying relevant international treaties and enacting and enforcing domestic laws.

"While (South Korea's) regulatory regimes may not be construed as an explicit import prohibition on goods produced with forced labor, they demonstrate that Korea proactively addresses and regulates forced labor through its legal frameworks and enforcement policies," he said.

In addition, the chairman highlighted that there is "insufficient evidence" that the absence of an explicit forced labor prohibition in South Korea imposes burdens on U.S. commerce.

"There is no clear evidence demonstrating that goods produced with forced labor directly compete with U.S. products in the Korean market. Furthermore, The USTR report does not identify specific cases where forced labor goods were transshipped to the U.S. through Korea, or where such goods distorted the U.S. market," he wrote.

"It is difficult to establish any specific cases or causal relationships indicating that certain Korean products have caused material injury to any U.S. company by utilizing inputs produced with forced labor."