India has accused the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) of ignoring evidence and arguments presented by New Delhi in proposing a 12.5% tariff on Indian imports under a Section 301 investigation into forced labor. Dr. Brij Mohan from the Ministry of Commerce and Industry expressed disappointment that the USTR report did not adequately consider India’s submissions and engagement during the investigation. He emphasized India’s commitment to eradicating forced labor as a constitutional duty and a matter of principle.
Dr. Mohan outlined four main objections to the USTR’s findings. Firstly, he contended that the investigation did not meet the legal standards set out in Section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act. India argued that the mere absence of a specific import prohibition should not be deemed an unreasonable trade practice under Section 301. Secondly, India disagreed with the assumption that countries without explicit import bans on goods produced with forced labor were condoning such practices. Dr. Mohan highlighted that the International Labour Organization recognizes the need for multifaceted actions tailored to specific country circumstances to eliminate forced labor.
Thirdly, India criticized the proposal to impose a 12.5% tariff on almost all Indian imports, citing methodological flaws in the studies used. The methodology, according to Dr. Mohan, lacked sector-specific or product-specific evidence related to India and relied on broad trade patterns involving only a few economies. Lastly, India argued that the USTR failed to establish a direct link between India’s policies and any harm to U.S. commerce. Dr. Mohan pointed to trade data on cotton, rice, and tobacco, contradicting the report’s conclusions and indicating no adverse impact on U.S. commerce due to the absence of an import ban in India.
India also raised concerns about the methodology used in the report’s appendices, stating that they did not prove that products allegedly made with forced labor were actually included in exports from India to the United States. Dr. Mohan urged the USTR to reconsider the proposed tariff, highlighting inconsistencies in the report and the Federal Register notice. He expressed India’s willingness to engage with Washington through consultations and dialogue to address specific concerns but stressed that such matters should be resolved through bilateral trade talks rather than unilateral trade actions under the Section 301 investigation.
