Trafficking in Persons: International
Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for
Congress
Liana Sun Wyler
Analyst in International Crime and Narcotics
January 9, 2013
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R42497
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
Summary
Trafficking in persons, or human trafficking, refers to the subjection of men, women, and children
to exploitative conditions that can be tantamount to slavery. Reports suggest that human
trafficking is a global phenomenon, victimizing millions of people each year and contributing to a
multi-billion dollar criminal industry. It is a centuries-old problem that, despite international and
U.S. efforts to eliminate it, continues to occur in virtually every country in the world. Human
trafficking is also an international and cross-cutting policy problem that bears on a range of major
national security, human rights, criminal justice, social, economic, migration, gender, public
health, and labor issues.
The U.S. government and successive Congresses have long played a leading role in international
efforts to combat human trafficking. Key U.S. foreign policy responses include the following:
• Foreign Country Reporting to describe annual progress made by foreign
governments to combat human trafficking, child soldiers, and forced labor.
• Foreign Product Blacklisting to identify goods made with convict, forced, or
indentured labor, including forced or indentured child labor.
• Foreign Aid to support foreign countries’ efforts to combat human trafficking.
• Foreign Aid Restrictions to punish countries that are willfully noncompliant
with anti-trafficking standards.
• Conditions on Trade Preference Program Beneficiaries to offer certain
countries export privileges to the United States, provided that they adhere to
international standards against forced labor and child trafficking.
• Preventing U.S. Government Participation in Trafficking Overseas to punish
and deter trafficking-related violations among U.S. government personnel and
contractors.
Although there is widespread support among policy makers for the continuation of U.S. anti-
trafficking goals, ongoing reports of such trafficking worldwide raise questions regarding whether
sufficient progress has been made to deter and ultimately eliminate the problem, the end goal of
current U.S. anti-trafficking policies. This report explores current foreign policy issues
confronting U.S. efforts to combat human trafficking, the interrelationship among existing
polices, and the historical and current role of Congress in such efforts.
The 112th Congress has introduced and considered several bills related to human trafficking,
including bills to reauthorize the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA), the cornerstone
legislative vehicle for current U.S. policy to combat human trafficking, beyond FY2011. None
were ultimately enacted. Given recent challenges in balancing budget priorities, the 113th
Congress may choose to consider certain aspects of this issue further, including the effectiveness
of international anti-trafficking projects, interagency coordination mechanisms, and the
monitoring and enforcement of anti-trafficking regulations, particularly as they relate to the
activities of U.S. government contractors and subcontractors operating overseas. For an overview
of domestic and international provisions in the TVPA, see CRS Report RL34317, Trafficking in
Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for Congress, by Alison Siskin and Liana Sun Wyler.
Congressional Research Service
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
U.S. Foreign Policy Framework ...................................................................................................... 3
Foreign Policy Issues ....................................................................................................................... 7
Foreign Country Reporting ........................................................................................................ 9
Foreign Product Blacklisting ................................................................................................... 11
Foreign Aid and International Anti-Trafficking Projects ......................................................... 13
Foreign Aid Restrictions .......................................................................................................... 17
Conditions on Country Beneficiary Status for Trade Preference Programs ............................ 21
Preventing U.S. Government Participation in Trafficking Overseas ....................................... 22
Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 25
Figures
Figure 1. International Anti-Trafficking Obligations and Foreign Operations Budget .................. 16
Tables
Table 1. Key International Treaties Addressing Trafficking in Persons to Which the
United States Has Ratified or Acceded ......................................................................................... 6
Table 2. Summary of Foreign Country Reporting Requirements .................................................... 9
Table 3. Foreign Product Blacklisting Terms Used in Comparison ............................................... 12
Table 4. Assistance to Combat Trafficking in Persons in the State Department’s Foreign
Operations Budget ...................................................................................................................... 14
Table 5. Aid Restrictions and Waivers Pursuant to the TVPA, FY2004-FY2013 .......................... 18
Table 6. Aid Restrictions and Waivers Pursuant to the CSPA of 2008, FY2011-FY2013 ............. 19
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 27
Congressional Research Service
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
Introduction
Trafficking in persons, or human trafficking, refers to the subjection of men, women, and children
to exploitative conditions that some equate with slavery. It is a centuries-old problem that, despite
international and U.S. efforts to eliminate it, continues to occur in virtually every country in the
world. According to a 2012 U.N. report, trafficking victims comprising at least 136 nationalities
were detected by authorities, between 2007 and 2010, from 118 different countries.1 Common
forms of human trafficking include trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation and trafficking
through forced labor and debt bondage. Other forms of human trafficking also include trafficking
for domestic servitude and the use of children in armed conflict (e.g., child soldiers).
The modern manifestation of this trafficking problem is driven by the willingness of labor and
service providers to violate anti-trafficking laws and regulations in the face of continued
international demand for cheap labor and services and gaps in the enforcement of such rules.
Ongoing demand is particularly concentrated among industries and economic sectors that are
low-skill and labor-intensive. To address the complex dynamics at issue in human trafficking,
policy responses are cross-cutting and international, bringing together diverse stakeholders in the
fields of foreign policy, human rights, international security, criminal justice, migration, refugees,
public health, child welfare, gender issues, urban planning, international trade, labor recruitment,
and government contracting and procurement.
In the United States, Congress has enacted legislation to address
aspects of the problem, including the Trafficking Victims
Further Reading
Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA, Division A of P.L. 106-386, as
For additional information on
amended); TVPA reauthorizations (TVPRAs of 2003, 2005, and
human trafficking beyond
2008); the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008 (CSPA of 2008,
selected foreign policy issues
Title IV of P.L. 110-457); and the Tariff Act of 1930 (Title III,
covered in this report, see CRS
Report RL34317, Trafficking in
Chapter 497, as amended). Other trafficking-related provisions
Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for
have also been enacted through the Trade Act of 1974 (Title V of
Congress, by Alison Siskin and
P.L. 93-618, as amended), the Trade and Development Act of 2000
Liana Sun Wyler. RL34317
(TDA, P.L. 106-200, as amended), and several additional trade
provides an expanded overview
preference programs authorized by Congress. Most recently, the
of the human trafficking
phenomenon, both as it exists in
112th Congress enacted additional measures to prevent human
the United States and abroad. It
trafficking in federal contracting through the National Defense
also describes and analyzes both
Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2013 (P.L. 112-239).
the domestic and international
provisions in the TVPA and
Although the United States has long supported international efforts
related issues for Congress,
including immigration relief for
to eliminate various forms of human trafficking, a new wave of
trafficking victims discovered in
contemporary action against international human trafficking
the United States, aid available to
galvanized in the late 1990s as news stories drew attention to the
victims in the United States, and
discovery of trafficked women and children from the former
domestic investigations of
trafficking offenses.
Soviet Union forced to participate in the commercial sex industries
in Western Europe and North America. Across the international
community, the transnational nature of the phenomenon highlighted the need for improved
international coordination and commitment to halting trafficking flows. To this end, the United
Nations (U.N.) adopted in 2000 the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in
1 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), Global Report on Trafficking in Persons, December 2012.
Congressional Research Service
1
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
Persons, Especially Women and Children (hereinafter U.N. Trafficking Protocol), a supplement to
the U.N. Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime. The U.N. Trafficking Protocol is
not the first or only multilateral mechanism to address human trafficking; it was, however, the
first to define trafficking in persons and require States Parties to criminalize such activity.2
Since the U.N. Trafficking Protocol entered into force in 2003, the international community has
seen an uptick in the number of countries enacting laws that prohibit and criminally punish
human trafficking. While observers note that continued vigilance is required to encourage the
remaining U.N. members to become States Parties to the U.N. Trafficking Protocol, emphasis
from the U.S. foreign policy perspective has also been placed on improving the implementation
and enforcement of anti-trafficking laws.3 According to a U.N. analysis, 134 countries and
territories had criminalized trafficking by 2012; yet, 16% of the countries covered had not
recorded a single trafficking conviction between 2007 and 2010.4
Continued public attention and academic research suggest that human trafficking remains an
international problem—a key rationale for the repeated reauthorization and enactment of further
legislative enhancements to the TVPA, most recently through the TVPRA of 2008 (P.L. 110-457).
Data on the global scope and severity of human trafficking continue to be lacking, due in large
part to uneven enforcement of anti-trafficking laws internationally and related challenges in
identifying victims. According to the International Labor Organization (ILO), some 20.9 million
individuals worldwide in 2012 are likely subjected to forced labor, including labor and sex
trafficking as well as state-imposed forms of forced labor.5 The sources of victims have
diversified over time, as have the industries in which such trafficking victims are found. Known
flows involve victims originating not only from Eastern and Central Europe, but also from South
and Southeast Asia, North and West Africa, and Latin America and the Caribbean. Observers,
however, debate whether existing anti-trafficking efforts worldwide have resulted in appreciable
and corresponding progress toward the global elimination of human trafficking.
Prior Congresses have been active on international human trafficking issues, particularly with
appropriations identified for anti-trafficking assistance purposes, proposed legislation related to
the TVPA and other anti-trafficking initiatives, and an active record of committee hearings. Given
current challenges in balancing budget priorities, the 113th Congress may choose to further
explore possible gaps and redundancies in international anti-trafficking projects, whether there is
2 Other key international treaties addressing human trafficking, to which the United States has ratified or acceded,
include the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and
Practices Similar to Slavery; the 2000 U.N. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale
of Children, Child Prostitution, and Child Pornography; the 2000 U.N. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the
Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict; the 1957 International Labor Organization
(ILO) Convention No. 105 on the Abolition of Forced Labour; and the 1999 ILO Convention No. 182 on the Worst
Forms of Child Labour. See also the U.N. General Assembly’s Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons
of July 2010.
3 As of January 9, 2013, there are 154 States Parties to the U.N. Trafficking Protocol, including the United States,
which signed the Protocol in December 2000 and ratified it in November 2005.
4 UNODC, Global Report on Trafficking in Persons, December 2012. According to the U.S. State Department’s 2011
Trafficking in Persons Report (TIP Report), 62 countries have yet to convict a trafficker under laws in accordance with
the U.N. Trafficking Protocol. U.S. Department of State (DOS), Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons
(J/TIP), Trafficking in Persons Report 2011, June 27, 2011. Hereinafter cited as TIP Report (2011). No further update
to this total was included in the 2012 version of the TIP Report.
5 ILO, ILO Global Estimate of Forced Labour: Results and Methodology, June 2012. ILO estimates the range of
victims to be between 19.5 million and 22.3 million, with a 68% level of confidence.
Congressional Research Service
2
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
a need for enhanced interagency coordination mechanisms for funding and programming
prioritization, and what prospects may exist to invigorate the monitoring and enforcement of anti-
trafficking laws and policies, particularly as they relate to U.S. government contractors and
subcontractors.
U.S. Foreign Policy Framework
Current U.S. foreign policy approaches for addressing human trafficking are a modern off-shoot
of anti-slavery policies that centered initially on reinforcing international prohibitions on forced
labor during the first half of the 20th century. With time, U.S. and international perspectives on the
global scope of human trafficking have expanded to cover a broader range of victims and
prohibited activities, including sex trafficking and the exploitation of children in labor, armed
conflict, and the commercial sex industry. The ultimate goal of current U.S. anti-trafficking policy
is to eliminate the problem and support international efforts to abolish human trafficking
worldwide.
The U.S. government has long played a leading role in international efforts to combat human
trafficking, with Congress in particular driving contemporary U.S. foreign policy responses.
Although the U.S. government actively participates in multilateral efforts to combat human
trafficking, U.S. responses to human trafficking often extend beyond the scope of international
commitments and are based on U.S. foreign policy legislation and executive branch guidance.
Such U.S. guidance, which initially focused on combating forced labor practices and eventually
expanded to cover broader concepts of human trafficking, has included the following (in
chronological order):
• Tariff Act of 1930. Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, prohibited
the import of all foreign “goods, wares, articles, and merchandise mined,
produced, or manufactured wholly or in part” by convict or forced or indentured
labor.6 The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) implements the
provisions of Section 307 by maintaining a public list of such prohibited goods
and barring entry of such products into the United States.7
• Trade Preference Program Eligibility. Select countries receive temporary, non-
reciprocal, duty-free U.S. market access for certain exports on condition that they
adhere to “internationally recognized worker rights,” including prohibitions on
forced labor, as well as eliminate the “worst forms of child labor,” including child
trafficking.8 Such congressionally authorized preference programs include the
Generalized System of Preferences (GSP);9 Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery
6 Section 307 of Title III, Chapter 497 (46 Stat. 689); 19 U.S.C. 1307. Unless otherwise noted, all subsequent reference
to the Tariff Act of 1930 are assumed to refer to the Act, as amended.
7 U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Convict, Forced, or
Indentured Labor Product Importations, December 10, 2009, http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/trade/trade_outreach/
convict_importations.xml.
8 The definition for “internationally recognized worker rights” was first incorporated into U.S. statute through Section
507, Title V (Trade Act of 1974), of the Trade Reform Act (P.L. 93-618), as added by Section 1952(a), Title I (GSP
Renewal Act of 1996) of the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-188). The definition for “worst
forms of child labor” was first incorporated into U.S. statutes through Section 412(b), Title IV of the Trade and
Development Act of 2000 (TDA, P.L. 106-200). Both terms are codified at 19 U.S.C. 2467.
9 Title V (Trade Act of 1974) of the Trade Reform Act (P.L. 93-618), as amended; 19 U.S.C. 2462-2467.
Congressional Research Service
3
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
Act (CBERA), as amended and extended through the U.S. Caribbean Basin Trade
Partnership Act (CBTPA);10 Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA), as amended
and extended through the Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act
(ATPDEA);11 and African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).12
• Executive Memorandum on Steps to Combat Violence Against Women and
Trafficking in Women and Girls. In March 1998, President William J. Clinton
identified trafficking in women and girls as an international problem with
domestic implications in the United States. In the memorandum, President
Clinton established the goals of increasing human trafficking awareness,
providing protection to victims, and enhancing the “capacity of law enforcement
worldwide to prevent women and girls from being trafficked” to ensure that
traffickers are punished.
• Executive Order 13126. On June 12, 1999, President William J. Clinton issued
Executive Order 13126, the Prohibition of Acquisition of Products Produced by
Forced or Indentured Child Labor (EO 13126). This executive order prohibited
U.S. government contractors from using or procuring “goods, wares, articles, and
merchandise mined, produced, or manufactured wholly or in part by forced or
indentured child labor.” The U.S. Department of Labor, with consultation from
DHS and the State Department, implements the provisions of EO 13126 by
maintaining a public list of offending products, as well as a list of the countries
from which such products originate.13
• Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000. The cornerstone legislative vehicle
for current U.S. policy on combating international human trafficking is the
Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA), as amended and
reauthorized (TVPRAs).14 Among other provisions, the TVPA formalized the
overall U.S. approach to anti-trafficking through an emphasis on prevention of
severe forms of human trafficking, prosecution of traffickers, and protection of
victims (the three Ps) both domestically and internationally. It established
minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and specific criteria to
10 CBERA was first enacted through the Title II of P.L. 98-67 (“An act to promote economic revitalization and
facilitate expansion of economic opportunities in the Caribbean Basin region, to provide for backup withholding of tax
from interest and dividends, and for other purposes”), and subsequently amended. CBTPA was first enacted through
Title II of the TDA (P.L. 106-200), and subsequently amended. Both provisions are codified at 19 U.S.C. 2701-2707.
11 ATPA was first enacted through Title II (Trade Preference for the Andean Region) of the Andean Trade Preference
Act (P.L. 102-182) and subsequently amended. ATPDEA was first enacted through Division C, Title XXXI of the
Trade Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-210), and subsequently amended. Both provisions are codified at 19 U.S.C. 3201-3206.
12 Title I (Extension of Certain Trade Benefits to Sub-Saharan Africa) of the TDA (P.L. 106-200); 19 U.S.C. 3701-
3706 and 19 U.S.C. 2466a-b.
13 U.S. Department of Labor, International Labor Affairs Bureau (ILAB), Executive Order 13126, http://www.dol.gov/
ILAB/regs/eo13126/main.htm.
14 The TVPA has been amended and reauthorized through the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of
2003 (TVPRA of 2003), P.L. 109-162; the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (TVPRA of
2005), P.L. 109-164; and the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008
(TVPRA of 2008), P.L. 110-457. Additional provisions, amending the TVPA are also located at Section 682 of
Division A (Department of State Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2003), Title VI, Subtitle G of the Foreign Relations
Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2003 (P.L. 107-228); and Section 804 of Title VIII, Subtitle A of the Violence Against
Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-162). The TVPA is codified at 22 U.S.C.
7101-7112. Unless otherwise noted, all subsequent references to the TVPA are assumed to refer to the TVPA, as
amended.
Congressional Research Service
4
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
assess whether such standards have been met. The TVPA also established several
key elements in the U.S. foreign policy response to human trafficking, including
the State Department Office to Combat and Monitor Trafficking in Persons;
interagency entities to coordinate anti-trafficking policies across U.S. agencies,
such as the Senior Policy Operating Group (SPOG) and President’s Interagency
Task Force (PITF); several reporting requirements to Congress; authorities to
provide anti-trafficking foreign aid; and mechanisms to withhold U.S. aid to
countries that fail to achieve progress in combating human trafficking.
• National Security Presidential Directive 22. Highlighting the impact of human
trafficking on U.S. national security, President George W. Bush in December
2002 issued National Security Presidential Directive 22 on Combating
Trafficking in Persons (NSPD-22).15 NSPD-22 was “based on an abolitionist
approach to trafficking in persons” and established as a U.S. government-wide
goal the eradication of international trafficking in persons, including a zero
tolerance policy among U.S. government employees and contractors.16 NSPD-22
also notably identified prostitution and several related activities as “contributing
to the phenomenon of trafficking in persons”—and thus to be opposed as a matter
of U.S. government policy.
• Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008. Addressing the specific issue of
children in armed conflict, the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008 (CSPA of
2008) mandated the U.S. Department of State to annually publish a list of
countries in violation of international standards to condemn the conscription,
recruitment, and use of children in armed conflict and punish such countries by
prohibiting the provision of certain types of U.S. military assistance.
• Executive Order 13627. On September 25, 2012, President Barack Obama
issued Executive Order 13627, Strengthening Protections Against Trafficking in
Persons in Federal Contracts. This executive order mandates that the Federal
Acquisition Regulatory (FAR) Council revise existing contractor guidelines for
preventing human trafficking to include prohibitions on misleading or fraudulent
recruitment practices; charging employees recruitment fees; and destroying or
confiscating employee identity documents, such as passports and driver’s
licenses. Among other provisions, it also requires certain contractors and
subcontractors performing services abroad to establish compliance plans to
prevent trafficking-related activities.17
Key U.S. entities involved in combating international trafficking in persons include the
Department of State, Department of Labor, Agency for International Development (USAID),
Department of Defense (DOD), and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). These
departments and agencies are among the participants in interagency coordination mechanisms to
combat international human trafficking through the SPOG and the PITF and may also issue
15 President George W. Bush, National Security Presidential Directive 22 (NSPD-22), Combating Trafficking in
Persons, December 16, 2002, partially declassified for publication as “Appendix C” in U.S. Department of Defense
(DOD), Office of the Inspector General (OIG), Inspections and Evaluations: Evaluation of DOD Efforts to Combat
Trafficking in Persons, Report No. IE-2007-002, November 21, 2006.
16 Ibid.
17 President Barack Obama, “Executive Order 13627 of September 25, 2012: Strengthening Protections Against
Trafficking in Persons in Federal Contracts,” Federal Register, Vol. 77, No. 191, October 2, 2012, pp. 60029-60033.
Congressional Research Service
5
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
agency-specific guidelines against human trafficking that implement enacted laws, federal
regulations, and presidential determinations, directives, and executive orders. For example,
USAID issued in February 2012 the USAID Counter-Trafficking in Persons Policy.
The U.S. government also participates in multilateral and regional anti-trafficking efforts
conducted by the international community, including through organizations such as the United
Nations, the International Labor Organization (ILO), the International Organization for Migration
(IOM), and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), among many
others. Such activities seek to bolster U.S. interests in the issue at the multilateral and regional
levels. See Table 1 for a list of multilateral treaties related to human trafficking in which the U.S.
government participates.
Table 1. Key International Treaties Addressing Trafficking in Persons to Which the
United States Has Ratified or Acceded
Date of U.S.
Accession, Signing, or
Entry into
Ratification
Name of Convention or Protocol
Force
December 6, 1967
1956 U.N. Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the
April 30,
(accession)
Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery
1957
December 13, 2000
2000 U.N. Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in
December
(signed)
Persons, Especial y Women and Children, Supplementing the U.N.
25, 2003
November 3, 2005
Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime
(ratified)
July 5, 2000 (signed)
2000 U.N. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the
January 18,
December 23, 2002
Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child
2002
(ratified)
Pornography
July 5, 2000 (signed)
2000 U.N. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the
February 12,
December 23, 2002
Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict
2002
(ratified)
September 25, 1991
1957 ILO Convention No. 105 on the Abolition of Force Labor
January 17,
(ratified)
1959
February 12, 1999
1999 ILO Convention No. 182 on the Worst Forms of Child Labor
November
(ratified)
19, 2000
Sources: CRS presentation of data contained in the U.N. Treaty Col ection, Status of Treaties,
http://treaties.un.org/Home.aspx?lang=en, and ILO Database of International Labor Standards, http://www.ilo.org/
ilolex/english/newratframeE.htm.
Key Trafficking Terms in U.S. Foreign Policy Context
As various terms are defined and used in international treaties as well as domestic statutes, choice in the application
of these terms may trigger different policy consequences. The fol owing section identifies and compares several terms
frequently used in the context of foreign policy discussions related to human trafficking.
Human Trafficking
“Human trafficking” is a generic term to describe what the U.N. Trafficking Protocol defines as “trafficking in persons”
and the TVPA in U.S. statute defines as “severe forms of trafficking in persons.” The U.N. and U.S. terms share
similarities, but are applied in different policy contexts. They are both precedent-setting, as two of the earliest official
definitions broadly conceived to describe human trafficking as a combination of prohibited acts (e.g., recruitment,
Congressional Research Service
6
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
harboring, or transportation of victims) and prohibited methods or means of procuring commercial sex and other
labor or services (e.g., force, fraud, or coercion). Both afford enhanced protections for children against victimization
in the commercial sex industry, as well as protections against their subjection to work under conditions of involuntary
servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery. Neither the U.S. nor the U.N. definition requires trafficking victims to
be physically moved across international borders.
In general, the U.S. term defined in the TVPA is considered more restrictive than the U.N. definition, resulting in a
less expansive basis for the concept of human trafficking and a more narrowly defined scope for U.S. foreign policy
activities to combat human trafficking. The intended foreign policy purposes of the definitions also differ. The U.N.
term was created to facilitate international cooperation for legal and technical assistance. The U.S. term is intended to
be used to measure and rank foreign countries’ progress in combating trafficking.18 It can trigger unilateral U.S.
government restrictions on foreign aid to countries with a record of poor performance to combat severe forms of
human trafficking. Additionally, it can also affect federal contracting and procurement policies. Domestically, the U.S.
term also has implications for the criminal justice system and immigration status categories.
Forced Labor
The U.N. Trafficking Protocol does not define forced labor. Instead, the primary international definition of forced
labor can be found in ILO Convention No. 29, the Forced Labour Convention of 1930, which defines “forced or
compulsory labour” as “al work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and
for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily.” The TVPRA of 2008 (P.L. 110-457) amends the U.S.
Criminal Code and indirectly defines “forced labor” by describing the circumstances under which an individual could be
punished for knowingly providing or obtaining the labor or services of a person.19
The ILO term for forced labor is broader than both the U.N. and U.S. definitions of human trafficking. The ILO term
is relevant in the U.S. anti-trafficking policy context, as it is the governing definition for the U.S. import ban on foreign
goods produced with convict, forced, or indentured labor (§307 of the Tariff Act of 1930). The ILO definition also
applies to U.S. decisions to apply or revoke trade preference beneficiary status to select foreign countries (e.g., GSP,
CBERA/CBTPA, ATPA/ATPDEA, and AGOA). The U.S. Department of Labor also applies the international definition
in its preparation of two additional mandates: (1) a list of foreign goods produced with exploitative child labor that
may not be used in federal contractor supply chains (EO 13126), and (2) a list of foreign goods produced by forced
labor or child labor (TVPRA of 2005; P.L. 109-164).
Worst Forms of Child Labor
ILO Convention No. 182, the Worst Forms of Child Labor Convention of 1999, defines “the worst forms of child
labour” to include child slavery and prostitution, as well as use of children in illicit activities, such as drug trafficking,
and other work, which by its nature, is likely to harm the health, safety, or morals of children. This term is used in the
U.S. foreign policy context in decisions to apply or revoke trade preference beneficiary status to foreign countries. It
is also the governing definition used by the Labor Department for its annual report on Findings of the Worst Forms of
Child Labor (hereinafter Worst Forms of Child Labor Report). However, not all of the ILO-specified worst forms of child
labor necessarily constitute human trafficking, as defined by either the U.N. or the TVPA. This term is to be
distinguished from other terms used in U.S. foreign policy contexts, including “forced and indentured child labor” (as
is used by EO 13126) and “child labor” (as is used to develop a list of foreign goods produced by forced or child
labor, pursuant to the TVPRA of 2005).
Foreign Policy Issues
Overall, U.S. foreign policy to address and eliminate international human trafficking includes
several dimensions that are not mutually exclusive. They are summarized below, and key issues
associated with each line of activity are discussed in the subsequent sections.
18 According to the State Department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG), the Secretary of State approved in 2011 an
interpretation of the human trafficking term, to be used when drafting the annual TIP Report, which includes forced
labor. See DOS and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), OIG, Office of Inspections, Inspection of the Office
to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, report no. ISP-I-12-37, June 2012.
19 18 U.S.C. 1589.
Congressional Research Service
7
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
• Foreign Country Reporting. Congress requires the U.S. Departments of State
and Labor to report annually on foreign country efforts against human
trafficking, child soldiers, and the worst forms of child labor, as well as country
efforts to support human rights, including prohibitions on forced and compulsory
labor and child trafficking.
• Foreign Product Blacklisting. Congress mandates the U.S. Departments of
Labor and Homeland Security to maintain, respectively, a list of foreign goods
produced with child or forced labor and a list of foreign products made with
convict, forced, or indentured labor to be barred entry at U.S. ports. Additionally,
the President, through EO 13126, requires the Department of Labor to maintain a
list of foreign goods made with forced or indentured child labor prohibited from
use in federal procurement supply chains.
• Foreign Assistance and Related Projects to Support Anti-Trafficking Efforts
Abroad. Congress authorizes and appropriates to the U.S. Department of State,
USAID, and the U.S. Department of Labor funds to support foreign countries’
efforts to combat human trafficking. Between FY2005 and FY2010, these
departments and agencies obligated a total of $493 million for international anti-
trafficking activities, including assistance to foreign governments, NGOs, and
civil society organizations, as well as researchers.
• Restrictions on Foreign Assistance to Poor-Performing Countries. Congress
requires that non-humanitarian, nontrade-related foreign aid be denied to
countries that are willfully noncompliant with anti-trafficking standards.
Separately, Congress also requires that certain types of U.S. military assistance
be denied to countries that harbor or recruit child soldiers.
• Conditions on Foreign Country Trade Preference Beneficiary Status for
Anti-Trafficking Purposes. Through several legislative vehicles, Congress
authorizes certain countries to export to the United States specified products
duty-free. Eligibility for this privilege, however, is conditioned on whether such
countries are committed to certain foreign policy goals, including internationally
recognized worker rights, such as prohibiting forced labor, and the elimination of
the worst forms of child labor, such as child trafficking.
• Prevention of Trafficking in U.S. Operations Overseas. Congress and the
White House have issued several policies and regulations emphasizing
prohibitions on trafficking-related activities among U.S. military personnel,
contractors, peacekeepers, and post-conflict and humanitarian aid workers. For
U.S. contractors operating overseas, for example, anti-trafficking laws and
regulations bar not only “severe forms of human trafficking,” as defined by the
TVPA, but also procurement of commercial sex (e.g., prostitution) while
contracted with the U.S. government, the use of forced labor in the performance
of the contract, as well as one or more of several specified acts that directly
support or advance trafficking in persons. 20
20 Such specified acts include the withholding employee identity or immigration documents; refusing to provide or pay
for return transportation for foreign national employees, if requested, under certain circumstances; soliciting
prospective employees by means of materially false or fraudulent pretenses; charging recruited employees
unreasonable placement or recruitment fees; and providing housing that fails to meet host country housing and safety
standards.
Congressional Research Service
8
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
These lines of activity reflect a long-standing and broad-based set of U.S. policy commitments to
eliminate international human trafficking. The problem of human trafficking, however, continues
to persist—challenging policy makers to modify and improve existing U.S. foreign policy
responses to the problem. Persistent reports of human trafficking worldwide may also challenge
policy makers to evaluate whether anti-trafficking programs can achieve current U.S. foreign
policy goals within a realistic time frame.
Foreign Country Reporting
One line of U.S. foreign policy activity to combat human trafficking is through foreign country
reporting. Congress has mandated that the Departments of State and Labor regularly report on
foreign countries’ policy responses to human trafficking and forced labor, identify countries that
recruit and harbor child soldiers, and evaluate efforts made by foreign countries to eliminate the
worst forms of child labor, including child trafficking.
The most targeted of these reports is the State Department’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report
(hereinafter TIP Report), which reviews the status of foreign countries in achieving the TVPA’s
minimum standards to eliminate severe forms of trafficking in persons.21 In the TIP Report,
countries ultimately receive one of four possible ranking designations: Tier 1 (best), Tier 2, Tier 2
Watch List, and Tier 3 (worst). Only Tier 1 countries are fully compliant with the TVPA’s
minimum standards, while the rest are non-compliant and vary in terms of the level of effort to
improve. Other congressionally mandated foreign country reporting includes two reports, the
Findings of the Worst Forms of Child Labor (hereinafter Worst Forms of Child Labor Report) and
the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices (hereinafter Human Rights Report), as well as an
additional list, published in conjunction with the TIP Report, of countries involved in recruiting
and using child soldiers (see Table 2 below). For two of these reporting requirements—the TIP
Report and the list of countries involved in recruiting and using child soldiers—the worst-
performing countries may, in turn, be subject to restrictions on certain types of U.S. foreign
assistance (see section below on “Foreign Aid Restrictions”).
Table 2. Summary of Foreign Country Reporting Requirements
Reporting
Requirement Legislative
Source
Description
TIP Report
Section 110(b) of the
Due each June and issued annual y since 2001, the centerpiece of
TVPA, as amended; 22
the TIP Report is a country-by-country analysis and ranking, based
U.S.C. 7107(b)
on progress countries have made in their efforts to prosecute,
protect, and prevent human trafficking.
List of Countries
Section 404(b) of the
Beginning in 2010, the State Department annually publishes a list
Involved in
CSPA; 22 U.S.C.
of countries that recruit or use child soldiers in their armed
Recruiting and Using
2370c-1(b)
forces, or that harbor non-government armed forces that recruit
Child Soldiers
or use child soldiers. Following these guidelines, the State
Department identified six such countries in both 2010 and 2011:
Burma, Chad, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Somalia,
Sudan, and Yemen. In 2012, Chad was removed from the list, but
two more were added—Libya and South Sudan—for a total of
seven listed countries.
21 Section 108(a) of the TVPA, as amended; 22 U.S.C. 7106(a).
Congressional Research Service
9
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
Reporting
Requirement Legislative
Source
Description
Worst Forms of Child
Section 412(d) of the
Since 2002, the Labor Department has issued an annual report on
Labor Report
TDA, as amended; 19
the progress made by certain specified countries to eliminate the
U.S.C. 2464
worst forms of child labor. The most recent report, released in
September 2011, covers 144 countries and territories designated
as current or previous beneficiaries of trade preference programs.
Human Rights Report
Section 504 of the
Congress also requires the State Department to include in its
Trade Act of 1974 (19
annual Human Rights Report sections for each country on the
U.S.C. 2464) and
status of the “prohibition of forced or compulsory labor” as wel
Section 104 of the
as on trafficking in persons. In the 2011 edition, the State
TVPA (22 U.S.C.
Department reported on 196 countries. The 2011 edition cross-
2151n)
referenced the TIP Report for details on human trafficking and
also stated that most countries faced challenges associated with
implementing and enforcing prohibitions against forced or
compulsory labor.
Sources: CRS presentation of data from the Legislative Information System (LIS); DOS, J/TIP, 2012 TIP Report;
DOL, 2011 Worst Forms of Child Labor Report; and DOS, 2011 Human Rights Report.
These annually updated analyses provide regular reporting and country-level detail. As public
documents, the information contained in them has created diplomatic opportunities for
engagement with foreign counterparts, as well as for increased public awareness of human
trafficking as an international problem. Some officials and outside observers value these reports
as an effective means through which to praise countries that have implemented best practices,
criticize those that have balked at reform, and offer support to those that could benefit from
foreign donor assistance.
In contrast, the State Department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) describes several of these
reports as resource-intensive, unnecessarily “encyclopedic in detail and length,” largely
redundant, and at times the cause of more diplomatic harm than good.22 Although the actual
number of pages devoted to each individual country narrative tends to be relatively few, OIG
criticized the length of the State Department’s TIP Report, which in 2012 totaled 396 pages, and
the Department of Labor’s Worst Forms of Child Labor Report, which in 2011 totaled 855 pages.
The State Department’s OIG described the TIP Report as among the most cost-intensive in terms
of personnel resources both at U.S. diplomatic posts abroad and at headquarters in Washington,
DC.
To illustrate such criticisms, the OIG highlighted the experience of U.S. Embassy Bridgetown,
located in Barbados. In addition to Barbados, Embassy Bridgetown is responsible for diplomatic
relations with six additional governments in the Eastern Caribbean, including Antigua and
Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines.
All are covered by either the TIP Report or the Worst Forms of Child Labor Report, or both.
Embassy Bridgetown reportedly estimated that approximately 200 person-hours were required to
resolve questions and differences in its submission to Washington for the 2009 TIP Report and an
additional 200 person-hours for “dealing with negative political, media, and public reactions.”23
22 DOS and the BBG, OIG, Inspection of Department-Required and Congressionally Mandated Reports: Assessment of
Resource Implications, report no. ISP-I-11-11, October 2010.
23 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
10
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
Some, however, may consider such time and personnel resources committed to human trafficking
issues appropriate, given the perceived magnitude and seriousness of the problem.
Other concerns have centered on the lack of consistent reporting quality across countries, as well
as questions regarding discrepancies in data collection and the reliability of report findings. For
example, the Labor Department’s Worst Forms of Child Labor Report identifies a substantially
larger number of countries associated with child soldiers, compared to the State Department’s list.
A rationale for this discrepancy may be that, in most cases, reports of child soldiers are often
associated with unsanctioned rebel groups beyond the control of state policies. However, in the
case of Afghanistan, the Department of Labor reports that children have joined its national
military and police forces.
Foreign Product Blacklisting
A second line of foreign policy activity to combat human trafficking is through foreign product
blacklisting. Through two acts (the Tariff Act of 1930 and the TVPRA of 2005) and an executive
order (EO 13126), the Departments of Labor, State, and Homeland Security are required to
maintain lists of foreign products that have been produced by forced labor, child labor, indentured
labor, forced or indentured child labor, and convict labor.
• Pursuant to the Tariff Act of 193024 and implementing regulations, DHS may
prohibit certain types of goods from import into the United States when it is
determined that (1) the goods are produced, mined, or manufactured with the use
of convict, forced, or indentured labor; and (2) such goods had been or are likely
to be imported into the United States. According to DHS’s Customs and Border
Protection (CBP), currently banned products include specified furniture, clothes
hampers, and palm leaf bags from a state penitentiary in Tamaulipas, Mexico, as
well as specified diesel engines, machine presses, sheepskin and leather products,
and malleable iron pipe fittings from a combination of factories and prisons in
Yunnan, Xuzhou, Qinghai, and Tianjin, China.25
• Pursuant to EO 13126, issued by President Clinton on June 12, 1999, the
Department of Labor, in consultation with the State Department and DHS, is
required to jointly publish and maintain a list of countries and products that are
likely to have been mined, produced, or manufactured by forced or indentured
child labor. The appearance on the list triggers an additional requirement for U.S.
federal contractors to certify that they have made good faith efforts to ensure that
their products and services to the U.S. government do not involve forced or
indentured child labor. The most recent version of the list identifies 31 products
from 23 countries.26
24 Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (Title III, Chapter 497, as amended; 19 U.S.C. 1307).
25 DHS, CBP, Convict, Forced, or Indentured Labor Product Importations, December 10, 2009.
26 U.S. Department of Labor, ILAB, Executive Order 13126, Current List of Products and Countries on EO 13126,
current as of April 3, 2012, http://www.dol.gov/ILAB/regs/eo13126/. In September 2012, the Department of Labor
issued a public notice on a proposed revision to the existing list that would add several new line items pursuant to EO
13126. See “Department of Labor: Notice of Initial Determination Revising the List of Products Requiring Federal
Contractor Certification as to Forced/Indentured Child Labor Pursuant to Executive Order 13126,” Federal Register,
Vol. 77, No. 188, September 27, 2012, pp. 59418-59420.
Congressional Research Service
11
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
• The TVPRA of 2005 mandates the Department of Labor to “develop and make
available to the public a list of goods from countries that the Bureau of
International Labor Affairs has reason to believe are produced by forced labor or
child labor in violation of international standards.”27 Pursuant to this mandate, the
Department of Labor initially published a list in 2009 and subsequently updated
the list in 2010, 2011, and 2012. There are currently 134 goods from 74 countries
identified by the Department of Labor as likely produced by child labor or forced
labor.28
Although not all of the blacklisted products pursuant to these provisions are necessarily indicative
of human trafficking, they are often included today as a dimension of U.S. policy to combat
international human trafficking and described in recent State Department TIP Reports as a
component of the overall U.S. anti-trafficking policy regime.29 The consequences of being
identified as a blacklisted product vary, depending on which list a product is placed.
These lists can be viewed as innovative policy responses to prevent labor-related human
trafficking, often considered an under-emphasized and under-prioritized dimension of the
trafficking in persons problem. They may, however, be criticized by some as duplicative, while
also not sufficiently tailored or utilized as a tool to combat human trafficking, given variations in
the standards, definitions, and criteria used for each blacklist. The direct correlation between
blacklisted products and human trafficking is therefore imprecise, as none of the three lists
specify whether blacklisted products are indicative of human trafficking as defined by either the
U.N. or the TVPA (see Table 3 below).
Table 3. Foreign Product Blacklisting Terms Used in Comparison
Factors that Trigger Inclusion on a Foreign Product Blacklist
Forced
Indentured
Consequence
Legislative Implementing Convict
Child
Forced
Child
Indentured
Child
Human
of
Source
Agency
Labor
Labora Laborb
Laborc
Labor
Laborc
Trafficking
Blacklisting
Tariff Act of DHS X
X
X
X
X
N/A
Import
Ban
1930
EO 13126
DOL, in
X X N/A
Procurement
consultation
Ban
with DOS and
DHS
TVPRA of
DOL
X
X
X
N/A
N/A
2005
Sources: Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (Title III, Chapter 497, as amended; 19 U.S.C. 1307), EO 13126
(June 12, 1999), Section 105 of the TVPRA of 2005 (P.L. 109-164; 22 U.S.C. 7112), and U.S. Department of
Labor, Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB), Frequently Asked Questions, Trafficking Victims Protection
Reauthorization Act (TVPRA), “What Definitions of Child Labor and Forced Labor are Used in Developing the List?”
27 Section 105(b)(2)(C) of the TVPRA of 2005 (P.L. 109-164; 22 U.S.C. 7112(b)(2)(C)). Section 110 of the TVPRA of
2008 (P.L. 110-457) reiterates this reporting requirement (no corresponding U.S. Code citation).
28 U.S. Department of Labor, ILAB, List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor, 2012.
29 The original purpose of enacting these provisions was not necessarily designed to serve specifically as a policy
response to trafficking in persons, but rather to condemn foreign labor practices in contravention to international labor
standards.
Congressional Research Service
12
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
http://www.dol.gov/ilab/faqs2.htm#tvpra3. N/A=not applicable; DHS=Department of Homeland Security,
DOS=Department of State, DOL=Department of Labor.
a. Child labor is undefined in the TVPRA of 2005, but the Department of Labor defines “child labor” as “al
work performed by a person below the age of 15” and includes al work performed by a person below the
age of 18 under circumstances that fit the ILO’s definition of the “worst forms of child labor” (ILO
Convention No. 182). ILO Convention No. 182 defines the “worst forms of child labor” as “(a) al forms of
slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom
and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed
conflict; (b) the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or
for pornographic performances; (c) the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular
for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in the relevant international treaties; (d) work which,
by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of
children.”
b. Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 defines “forced labor” consistent with ILO Convention No. 29. ILO
Convention No. 29 defines forced labor as “al work or service which is exacted from any person under the
menace of any penalty for its nonperformance and for which the worker does not offer himself voluntarily.”
c. EO 13126 defines “forced or indentured child labor” as all work or service (1) exacted from any person
under the age of 18 involving forced labor as defined by ILO Convention No. 29; or (2) performed by any
person under the age of 18 pursuant to a contract the enforcement of which can be accomplished by
process or penalties.
Foreign Aid and International Anti-Trafficking Projects
A third line of foreign policy activity to combat human trafficking is through provisions of aid to
foreign countries. For more than a decade, Congress has authorized and appropriated foreign
assistance and international grants to combat human trafficking. From FY2005 through FY2010,
the U.S. government obligated a total of $493 million for international anti-trafficking projects
outside the United States. Given the transnational nature of human trafficking, these anti-
trafficking programs are viewed by proponents as crucial tools to build the capacity and
capability of other countries to prevent trafficking, protect victims, and prosecute traffickers
(commonly referred to as the three Ps). Improved foreign efforts to eliminate trafficking could, in
turn, translate into fewer legal, political, and physical safe havens for international traffickers to
exploit.
Such international projects, however, are also challenged by limitations in measuring
effectiveness and developing meaningful measures of progress. Given the general absence of data
to formulate a baseline estimate for the scope of the human trafficking problem, it is often
difficult to specify how anti-trafficking aid programs have improved the situation. For example,
the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) stated in a 2009 report that “without a sense of
the magnitude of the problem, it is impossible to prioritize human trafficking as an issue relative
to other local or transnational threats, and it is difficult to assess whether any particular
intervention is having effect.”30 In lieu of specifics, anti-trafficking assistance programs are often
described as providing diffuse capacity-building benefits for governance, civil society, and
general public awareness. Such factors, however, are difficult to measure and, even if they were
to be measured, may claim only tenuous links to any specific anti-trafficking program. In the past,
the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has reported on problems with coordinating,
30 U.N. Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking (UNGIFT) and U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC),
Global Report on Trafficking in Persons, February 2009.
Congressional Research Service
13
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
evaluating, and monitoring the effectiveness of U.S. foreign aid projects to combat human
trafficking.31
Accounting for the annual amount of U.S. funding for international projects to combat human
trafficking can also present difficulties. Executive branch agencies receive anti-trafficking
funding through several appropriations accounts that are not necessarily linked to TVPA
authorities. State Department aid for anti-trafficking is broken down on a country and regional
basis, rather than allocated according to the TVPA’s specified authorities. For each fiscal year
from FY2008 through FY2011, the TVPRA of 2008 authorized a total of $63.8 million in foreign
assistance to the State Department and to the President for combating trafficking in persons.32
Differing sources, however, provide varied portraits of how much the U.S. government has spent
on anti-trafficking aid projects, depending on how human trafficking projects are defined and in
part due to lags in the budget cycle. The State Department, for example, reported that it budgeted
a total of $34.6 million in anti-trafficking foreign aid for FY2010 (see Table 4). Separately, the
State Department also reported that, in FY2010, the U.S. government obligated $85.3 million for
approximately 175 international anti-trafficking projects benefitting more than 80 countries (see
Figure 1).33 The latter figure for obligated funds in FY2010 includes funding for projects that are
allocated to agencies and for purposes beyond those referenced in the TVPA, such as Department
of Labor funds for combating the worst forms of child labor, which, at least in part, may address
human trafficking.
Table 4. Assistance to Combat Trafficking in Persons in the State Department’s
Foreign Operations Budget
(in current U.S. $ thousands)
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Actual
Actual
Actual
Estimate
Request
Africa 900
435
750
1,500
1,550
East Asia and Pacific
4,505
2,818
4,180
5,150
4,302
Europe
and
Eurasia
5,894 2,136 4,556 5,943 4,450
31 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Human Trafficking: Better Data, Strategy, and Reporting Needed to
Enhance U.S. Anti-Trafficking Efforts Abroad, GAO-06-825, July 18, 2006. In 2007, GAO followed up with a second
report with similar conclusions, but indicated that progress in addressing GAO’s recommendation, though mixed, was
generally positive. According to GAO, the executive branch continues to remain in the process of responding to several
of its recommendations to improve anti-trafficking program monitoring, effectiveness, and coordination. GAO, Human
Trafficking: A Strategic Framework Could Help Enhance the Interagency Collaboration Needed to Effectively Combat
Trafficking Crimes, GAO-07-915, July 26, 2007.
32 P.L. 110-457; not included in this total are additional funds authorized to the President for research ($2 million,
pursuant to Section 113(e)(3) of the TVPA) and to the State Department for the interagency task force, additional
personnel, and official reception and representation expenses (approximately $7 million, pursuant to Section 113(a) of
the TVPA).
33 DOS, J/TIP, U.S. Government Anti-Trafficking in Persons Program Funding, June 27, 2011. This document warns,
however, that the total figure for international anti-trafficking projects “may be overstated” because funds through the
Department of Labor to address the worst forms of child labor, including but not limited to child trafficking, cannot be
disaggregated. Obligated totals for international anti-trafficking projects include funding budgeted separate from the
foreign operations appropriations process, including some Educational and Cultural Exchange (ECE) programs funded
by the State Department as well as some international, bilateral, and multilateral technical assistance to combat
exploitative child labor internationally provided by the Department of Labor’s ILAB.
Congressional Research Service
14
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Actual
Actual
Actual
Estimate
Request
Near
East 300
2,000
South and Central
3,834 4,930 5,404 5,338 4,260
Asia
Western
1,565 1,150 1,396
700
Hemisphere
DOS/J-TIP
19,380 21,262 16,233 18,720 18,720
DOS/INL
425
USAID/DCHA
1,600
1,500
1,800
USAID/EGAT 1,567 900
TOTAL
38,445 34,631 34,119 38,151 38,207
Sources: DOS, responses to CRS request, December 21, 2011 and April 4, 2012; DOS, CBJ, Volume 2: Foreign
Operations, Fiscal Year 2012-2013 (revised).
Notes: USAID=U.S. Agency for International Development; DCHA=USAID Bureau for Democracy, Conflict,
and Humanitarian Assistance, DOS=U.S. Department of State, EGAT=USAID Bureau for Economic Growth,
Agriculture and Trade; J-TIP=DOS Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons; INL=DOS International
Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs Bureau, Estimates are rounded up to the nearest thousand. Foreign
assistance spigots included in this chart encompass Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia (AEECA),
Development Assistance (DA), Economic Support Fund (ESF), and International Narcotics Control and Law
Enforcement (INCLE) funds. U.S. Department of Labor and DOS Educational and Cultural Exchange (ECE)
assistance funds are listed separately. The State Department has in the past reported that some non-quantified
amount of Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA) is obligated in support of projects related to anti-trafficking.
but the anti-trafficking component of such projects could not be disaggregated.
Congressional Research Service
15
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
Figure 1. International Anti-Trafficking Obligations and Foreign Operations Budget
(in current U.S. $ millions)
Source: CRS presentation of data from DOS, J/TIP, and DOS, F.
Note: Numbers are rounded to the nearest decimal.
Further, it is difficult to determine from annual budget request documents which countries will be
selected for aid projects and what role the TIP Report’s country rankings play in such selections,
due primarily to lags in the budget process. For FY2013, for example, the State Department
requested in its annual congressional budget justification (CBJ) to Congress, released in March
and April 2012, funds for anti-trafficking projects associated with 28 countries.34 Some portion of
the requested FY2013 funds are intended to support additional anti-trafficking projects overseas,
including through an international grants program administered by the State Department’s Office
to Monitor and Combat Trafficking (J/TIP). J/TIP announced its FY2013 list of priority countries
for the grants program in December 2012.35 Similarly, as of early January 2013, the most recent
34 Included among the countries for which the State Department requested anti-trafficking aid in FY2013 were Georgia
and Macedonia (Tier 1 in the 2012 TIP Report); Albania, Armenia, Bangladesh, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cambodia,
Egypt, Guatemala, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Moldova, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nepal, Philippines,
Tajikistan, Ukraine, and Vietnam (Tier 2); Azerbaijan, Belarus, Lebanon, Malaysia, Russia, Thailand, and Uzbekistan
(Tier 2 Watch List); and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) (Tier 3).
35 For FY2013, J/TIP’s list of priority countries for the anti-trafficking grants program include Afghanistan,
Bangladesh, Cambodia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Honduras, Jordan, Kenya, Malaysia, Mexico, Senegal, Sierra
Leone, South Sudan, and Uganda. U.S. Department of State, Request for Statements of Interest: J/TIP FY 2013
International Program to Combat Trafficking in Persons, December 18, 2012.
Congressional Research Service
16
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
summary of obligated funds for anti-trafficking projects administered by departments and
agencies throughout the U.S. government is available through FY2010.36
Foreign Aid Restrictions
Restrictions on foreign assistance are also used to combat human trafficking. Congress has
enacted two provisions through which to deny certain types of foreign aid to countries that are not
advancing U.S. and international community anti-trafficking goals. One of these provisions,
pursuant to the TVPA, seeks to restrict non-humanitarian, nontrade-related foreign aid from
certain governments that do not show progress in eliminating human trafficking.37 Under this
provision, countries that receive a Tier 3 ranking in the TIP Report are ineligible to receive non-
humanitarian, nontrade-related aid in the following fiscal year. The second provision, which first
went into effect in 2010 pursuant to the CSPA of 2008, seeks to restrict certain U.S. military
assistance from countries known to recruit or use child soldiers in their armed forces, or that host
non-government armed forces that recruit or use child soldiers.38 For both provisions, the
President may reserve the option of waiving aid sanctions in cases where the continuation of aid
would promote U.S. national interests that supersede anti-trafficking policy goals.
The goal of these aid restriction mechanisms is to induce foreign governments to enhance their
commitments to combat human trafficking. Withholding or denying U.S. aid, it is argued, can be
an effective point of leverage for countries that would like to continue receiving such aid. Some,
however, perceive aid sanctions as a potentially blunt policy tool that can interfere with or
undermine other U.S. interests in such countries. With the discretion to partially or fully waive
sanctioned countries from experiencing the full effect of the aid restrictions, Presidents have
sought to balance the impact of the aid restrictions with consideration of other U.S. foreign policy
interests that may be at play (see Table 5 and Table 6). An issue for debate is the extent to which
the waiver option should be exercised and whether extensive use of the waiver option can have a
negative effect on international commitments against human trafficking.
36 U.S. Department of State, U.S. Government Funds Obligated in Fiscal Year 2010 for Anti-Trafficking in Persons
Project, April 21, 2011.
37 Section 110(a) of the TVPA, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 7107(a).
38 Title IV of the TVPRA of 2008 (P.L. 110-457); 22 U.S.C. 2151 note, and 2370c through 2370c-2. Prohibited aid,
pursuant to the CSPA of 2008 include international military education and training (IMET); foreign military financing
(FMF); excess defense articles; other DOD-funded aid, including aid provided pursuant to Section 1206 of the National
Defense Authorization Act of FY2006 (P.L. 109-163), as amended and extended; and the issuance of direct commercial
sales of military equipment.
Congressional Research Service
17
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
Table 5. Aid Restrictions and Waivers Pursuant to the TVPA, FY2004-FY2013
In the
Absence of
Aid to
Non-
Restrict,
Partial
Humanitarian,
Exchange
National
Waivers Due to
Non-Trade Aid
Programs
Full National
Interest
Subsequent
Restricted in Full
Restricted
Interest Waivers
Waivers
Compliance
FY2004 none Burma,
Cuba,
none
Liberia, Sudan
Belize, Bosnia and
North Korea
Herzegovina,
Dominican Republic,
Georgia, Greece,
Haiti, Kazakhstan,
Suriname, Turkey,
Uzbekistan
FY2005 none Burma,
Cuba,
none Equatorial
Bangladesh,
North Korea
Guinea,
Ecuador, Guyana,
Sudan,
Sierra Leone
Venezuela
FY2006 none Burma,
Cuba,
Ecuador, Kuwait,
Cambodia,
Bolivia, Jamaica,
North Korea
Saudi Arabia
Venezuela
Qatar, Sudan, Togo,
UAE
FY2007 Burma Cuba,
North
Saudi Arabia, Sudan,
Iran, Syria,
Belize, Laos
Korea
Uzbekistan
Venezuela,
Zimbabwe
FY2008 Burma Cuba
Algeria,
Bahrain,
Iran, North
Equatorial Guinea,
Malaysia, Oman,
Korea, Syria,
Kuwait
Qatar, Saudi Arabia,
Venezuela
Sudan, Uzbekistan
FY2009 Burma, Syria
Cuba
Algeria, Fiji, Kuwait,
Iran, North
Moldova, Oman
Papua New Guinea,
Korea
Qatar, Saudi Arabia,
Sudan
FY2010 North Korea
Cuba
Chad, Kuwait,
Burma,
Swaziland
Malaysia, Mauritania,
Eritrea, Fiji,
Niger, Papua New
Iran, Syria,
Guinea, Saudi Arabia,
Zimbabwe
Sudan
FY2011 none North
Korea,
DRC, Dominican
Burma, Cuba,
none
Eritrea
Republic, Kuwait,
Iran,
Mauritania, Papua
Zimbabwe
New Guinea, Saudi
Arabia, Sudan
FY2012 none North
Korea,
Algeria, CAR, Guinea-
Burma, Cuba,
none
Eritrea,
Bissau, Kuwait,
DRC,
Madagascar
Lebanon, Libya,
Equatorial
Mauritania,
Guinea, Iran,
Micronesia, Papua
Venezuela,
New Guinea, Saudi
Zimbabwe
Arabia, Sudan,
Turkmenistan, Yemen
Congressional Research Service
18
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
In the
Absence of
Aid to
Non-
Restrict,
Partial
Humanitarian,
Exchange
National
Waivers Due to
Non-Trade Aid
Programs
Full National
Interest
Subsequent
Restricted in Full
Restricted
Interest Waivers
Waivers
Compliance
FY2013 none Cuba,
North
Algeria, CAR, Kuwait,
DRC,
none
Korea, Eritrea,
Libya, Papua New
Equatorial
Madagascar
Guinea, Saudi Arabia,
Guinea, Iran,
Yemen
Sudan, Syria,
Zimbabwe
Sources: Presidential Determination (PD) with Respect to Foreign Governments’ Efforts Regarding Trafficking in Persons,
PD nos. 2003-35, 2004-46, 2005-37, 2006-25, 2008-4, 2009-5, 2009-29, 2010-15, 2011-18, and 2012-16.
Notes: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton revised PD 2011-18 on February 6, 2012, to waive prohibitions on U.S.
support for assistance to Burma through international financial institutions. See President Obama, “Memorandum
of February 3, 2012: Delegation of Authority Pursuant to Sections 110(d)(4) and 110(f) of the Trafficking Victims
Protection Act of 2000, as Amended,” Federal Register, Vol. 77, No. 37 (February 24, 2012), p. 11375; U.S.
Department of State, “Determination With Respect to Foreign Governments’ Efforts Regarding Trafficking in
Persons—Burma,” public notice 7799 dated February 6, 2012, Federal Register, Vol. 77, No. 32 (February 16,
2012), pp. 9295-9296.
Table 6. Aid Restrictions and Waivers Pursuant to the CSPA of 2008, FY2011-FY2013
Waivers Due to
Partial National
Full National
Subsequent
Aid
Restricted
Interest Waivers
Interest Waivers
Compliance
FY2011
Burma and Somalia
none
Chad, DRC, Sudan,
none
and Yemen
FY2012
Burma, Somalia, and
DRC Yemen Chad
Sudan
FY2013
Burma, Somalia, and
DRC
Libya, South Sudan,
none
Sudan
Yemen
Source: Presidential Determination (PD) with Respect to the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008, PD 2011-4,
PD 2012-01, PD-2012-18.
Observers have questioned whether the aid restrictions are effective in prompting countries to
improve their efforts to combat human trafficking. It may be too soon to assess the impact of the
child soldiers-related aid restriction. With regard to the aid sanctions program pursuant to the
TVPA, however, few countries have improved from Tier 3, the worst-performing category, to Tier
1, the highest-performing category, since the aid restriction program first went into effect almost a
decade ago. Many more countries have either maintained the same tier ranking over the years, or
are middling in their performance ratings without clear trends toward significant improvement. To
this end, some commentators have questioned whether the existing aid restrictions are sufficient.
See text box below on “TIP Report Ranking Trends: Measurable Signs of Improvement?”
Congressional Research Service
19
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
TIP Report Ranking Trends: Measurable Signs of Improvement?
Since 2001, the State Department’s TIP Report has been ranking countries on the basis of their efforts to combat
human trafficking. In the 2012 report, a total of 185 countries were ranked. Only Tier 1 countries are compliant with
achieving the TVPA’s minimum standards for eliminating trafficking. The rest, totaling approximately 83.5% of all
countries ranked in the 2012 TIP Report, are listed as non-compliant—variously receiving designations as Tier 2, Tier 2
Watch List, or Tier 3, depending on their level of effort in achieving the minimum standards. Following are trends in
country rankings over the course of the TIP Report’s existence:
•
Consistent top performers, having always received a Tier 1 designation in annual TIP Reports, include
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Colombia, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, the
Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States of
America (first ranked in 2010).39
•
Most improved countries, having previously been ranked as a Tier 3 countries and eventual y attaining Tier
1 status in 2012, include South Korea (from Tier 3 in 2001 to Tier 1 since 2002), Georgia (from Tier 3 in
2003 to Tier 1 since 2007, and Israel (from Tier 3 in 2001 to Tier 1 in 2012).
•
Middling countries, having always received a Tier 2 designation, include Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba
(first ranked in 2011), Botswana, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Chile, El Salvador, Kosovo, Marshall
Islands (first ranked in 2011), Mongolia, Palau, St. Lucia (first ranked in 2011), Timor-Leste, Tonga
(first ranked in 2011), Uganda, and Uruguay.
•
Consistent worst performers, having always received a Tier 3 designation, include Cuba, Eritrea, North
Korea, and Sudan.
•
Countries that have backslid, having previously attained Tier 2 status but are now listed in the current 2012
TIP Report as a Tier 3 countries, include Algeria, DRC, Equatorial Guinea, Iran, Kuwait, Libya,
Madagascar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Yemen, and Zimbabwe.
Congress sought to increase the consequences associated with consistent poor performance in the
TIP Report through the TVPRA of 2008, which included a new provision to automatically
downgrade to Tier 3 those countries that have stayed on the “Tier 2 Watch List” for two
consecutive years (unless the President issues a waiver to block the downgrade).40 FY2012 is the
first year in which this provision resulted in automatic downgrades to Tier 3 and posed a
subsequent risk of aid denial. Of the countries at risk of a downgrade to Tier 3 in the 2011 TIP
Report, trafficking-related restrictions on aid were not fully imposed on such countries in
FY2012.41 Even if aid restrictions were fully applied to all poor-performing countries, however,
39 The TVPA does not require the TIP Report to include and rank the United States in its country-by-country
evaluations. The State Department, however, has voluntarily chosen to do so. Separately, the TVPA requires the
Attorney General to submit a report each year to Congress on specified actions by the U.S. government to combat
human trafficking, pursuant to Section 105(d)(7) of the TVPA, as amended (22 U.S.C. 7103(d)(7)).
40 Section 107 of the TVPRA of 2008 (P.L. 110-457); 22 U.S.C. 7105a. This provision allows the President to waive
the Tier 3 downgrade for up to two years.
41 Ten countries received Tier 3 rankings in the 2011 TIP Report following at least two consecutive years as Tier 2
Watch List, including Algeria, CAR, Equatorial Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Lebanon, Libya, Micronesia, Turkmenistan,
Venezuela, and Yemen. Twelve other countries remained listed as Tier 2 Watch List after the Secretary of State issued
a waiver to prevent these countries from receiving an automatic downgrade to Tier 3, including Azerbaijan,
Bangladesh, Cameroon, China, Guinea, Iraq, Mali, Qatar, Republic of Congo, Russia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines,
and Uzbekistan. According to the 2011 TIP Report, such waivers were issued in cases in which the government in
question has a written plan that “would constitute making significant efforts to comply with the TVPA’s minimum
standards for the elimination of trafficking,” if implemented, and that there is credible evidence that the government in
question is “devoting sufficient resources to implement the plan.” In the 2012 TIP Report, one country dropped to Tier
3 after receiving a Tier 2 Watch List designation for the previous two years: Syria. The Secretary of State waived
downgrades to Tier 3 for 13 countries in the 2012 TIP Report: Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Barbados, Chad, China,
Republic of Congo, Iraq, Malaysia, Mauritania, Niger, Russia, Thailand, and Uzbekistan.
Congressional Research Service
20
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
such an action would not necessarily indicate that U.S. aid to those countries has stopped because
the existing aid denial provision exempts several categories of foreign aid.
Conditions on Country Beneficiary Status for Trade
Preference Programs
A further line of foreign policy activity to combat human trafficking is the designation of foreign
countries as U.S. trade preference program beneficiaries, provided they adhere to international
anti-trafficking commitments. For decades, the U.S. government has implemented a variety of
unilateral trade preference programs designed to promote exports among selected developing
countries.42 Through such trade preference programs, designated beneficiary countries are
provided duty-free entry for specified products into the United States. The first such program, in
existence since 1976, is the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP).43
Beneficiary countries may be designated (or removed) based on eligibility criteria specified in the
relevant authorizing legislation. Such eligibility criteria include commitments to “internationally
recognized worker rights,” such as prohibiting the “use of any form of forced or compulsory
labor,” as well as commitments to eliminate the “worst forms of child labor,” such as child
trafficking.44
In theory, conditioning preferential trade status on foreign policy goals, including prohibiting
forced labor and the worst forms of child labor, may serve to encourage country compliance with
international efforts to combat human trafficking. According to GAO, government officials as
well as representatives from non-governmental organizations and the private sector consider the
process of conditioning beneficiary status for trade preference programs valuable in raising
awareness about problems in foreign countries related to workers’ rights.45 Some, however,
question whether U.S. trade policies may nevertheless at times work at cross-purposes with U.S.
anti-trafficking policies, offering trade benefits to countries that have not effectively enforced
national policies to combat forced labor and the worst forms of child labor, including child
trafficking. The U.S. Trade Representative is not a member of interagency coordination
mechanisms on human trafficking, such as the SPOG and the PITF.
In the past, GAO has criticized the trade preference programs’ country beneficiary review
processes as disconnected with U.S. anti-trafficking policy.46 Further, the criteria used to
42 For an overview of trade preference programs, see CRS Report R41429, Trade Preferences: Economic Issues and
Policy Options, coordinated by Vivian C. Jones.
43 Title V (Trade Act of 1974) of the Trade Reform Act (P.L. 93-618), as amended; 19 U.S.C. 2462-2467.
44 Countries may be removed from beneficiary status on the basis of periodic administrative reviews for each trade
preference program, either initiated by the executive branch or as a result of external petitions from outside, non-
governmental organizations. In the past, countries have been petitioned by such groups for removal and ultimately
removed from beneficiary status due to worker rights issues, although it is unclear how many of such removals were
specifically due to poor government commitments to combat forced labor or the worst forms of child labor.
45GAO, International Trade: U.S. Trade Preference Programs Provide Important Benefits, but a More Integrated
Approach Would Better Ensure Programs Meet Shared Goals, GAO-08-443, March 2008. Hereinafter cited as GAO-
08-443.
46 Based on a review of trade preference programs from 2001 through 2007. GAO, International Trade: U.S. Trade
Preference Programs: An Overview of Use of U.S. Trade Preference Programs by Beneficiaries and U.S.
Administrative Reviews, GAO-07-1209, September 27, 2007.
Congressional Research Service
21
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
determine whether countries have committed to prohibiting forced labor and eliminating the
worst forms of child labor appear to be set at a different threshold or standard than the ranking
process established by either the State Department’s annual TIP Report to measure country
performance in combating severe forms of trafficking in persons or the Department of Labor’s
annual report listing countries and goods associated with child or forced labor. According to a
GAO report, U.S. Trade Representative officials stated that “there is not a specific link” between
eligibility criteria for trade preference programs and the State Department’s TIP Report.47 The
GAO report further states that “while following statutory requirements, agencies’ approaches to
monitoring compliance with program criteria nevertheless result in disconnected review processes
that are separate from ongoing U.S. efforts to [among other purposes] ... combat trafficking in
persons.”48
Among those countries eligible for trade preference programs in 2012, eight were designated by
the State Department’s 2012 TIP Report as Tier 3, the worst-performing category of countries,
described as not having achieved the minimum standards for eliminating severe forms of human
trafficking and not making significant efforts to do so.49 Similar discrepancies appear between the
trade preference program beneficiary countries and those listed by the Department of Labor as
producing goods with either child labor, forced labor, or both. A total of 21 beneficiary countries
are reported by the Department of Labor as producing goods with both forced and child labor.50
Such contrasts may raise questions regarding both the credibility and impact of the State
Department’s TIP Report ranking process and the Department of Labor’s annual list of goods
produced by child or forced labor, as well as the effectiveness of the administrative reviews for
beneficiary status for trade preference programs.
Preventing U.S. Government Participation in Trafficking Overseas
A final dimension of foreign policy activity to combat human trafficking addressed in this report
is efforts to prevent U.S.-facilitated trafficking from occurring abroad. U.S. government
personnel, diplomats, peacekeepers, and contractors operate overseas and represent U.S. interests
abroad at U.S. embassies, consulates, military bases, and other posts located in foreign countries
where domestic anti-trafficking laws and the enforcement of such laws may vary significantly.
In recent decades, news reports have unearthed a range of international sex and labor trafficking
schemes that have allegedly involved U.S. representatives overseas as the traffickers and
exploiters and the end-user consumers of services provided by trafficking victims. Current focus
has centered on allegations at U.S. installations in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as at U.S.
47 GAO-08-443.
48 Ibid.
49 These eight countries include Algeria, CAR, DRC, Eritrea, Madagascar, Papua New Guinea, Yemen, and Zimbabwe.
See U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC), Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (2012) –
Supplement 1, USITC Publication 4339, effective July 1, 2012.
50 These countries include Afghanistan (bricks), Angola (diamonds), Benin (cotton), Bolivia (brazil nuts/chestnuts and
sugarcane), Brazil (cattle and charcoal), Burkina Faso (cotton and gold), DRC (cassiterite and coltan), Cote d’Ivoire
(cocoa and coffee), Ethiopia (hand-woven textiles), Ghana (tilapia/fish), India (bricks, carpets, cottonseed/hybrid,
embroidered textiles/zari, garments, rice, and stones), Kazakhstan (cotton and tobacco), Malawi (tobacco), Mali (rice),
Nepal (bricks, carpets, embroidered textiles/zari, and stones), Nigeria (cocoa, granite, and gravel/crushed stones),
Pakistan (bricks, carpets, and coal), Russia (pornography), Sierra Leone (diamonds), Thailand (garments and shrimp),
and Uzbekistan (cotton). Paraguay reportedly produces goods with both child and forced labor, but not in combination
to make a single item.
Congressional Research Service
22
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
embassy missions, where third-country nationals (TCNs) are hired by subcontractors to perform
low-skill, labor-intensive jobs.51 Such schemes involving U.S. personnel apparently occur despite
NSPD-22, discussed above, which established a “zero tolerance” policy toward all U.S.
government employees and contractor personnel overseas who engage in human trafficking
violations. Individual departments and agencies have bolstered federal statutes and guidance with
internal policies. Examples include DOD’s Instruction Number 2200.01 on Combating
Trafficking in Persons, most recently updated in September 2010; USAID’s Counter-Trafficking
in Persons Code of Conduct, which went into effect in February 2011; and the State Department’s
Procurement Information Bulletin No. 2011-09 on Combating Trafficking in Persons, issued in
March 2011.
The 112th Congress introduced several bills that sought to improve the enforcement of anti-
trafficking regulations among federal contractors, including one, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, which was enacted in December 2012 (P.L. 112-239).52
Drawing in part on congressional initiatives, President Obama issued Executive Order 13627,
Strengthening Protections Against Trafficking in Persons in Federal Contracts, on September 25,
2012.
TVPA: Contractor Prohibitions and Reporting Requirements
The TVPA, as amended most recently by the 112th Congress, requires the President to authorize federal agencies and
departments to terminate, without penalty, grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements if the grantee, subgrantee,
contractor, or subcontractor (1) engages in severe forms of trafficking in persons while the grant, contract, or
cooperative agreement is in effect; (2) procures a commercial sex act while the grant, contract, or cooperative
agreement is in effect; (3) uses forced labor in the performance of the grant, contract, or cooperative agreement; or
(4) conducts one of several specified acts that directly support or advance trafficking in persons.53
Also pursuant to the TVPA, actions to enforce the U.S. government’s zero-tolerance policy against human trafficking
in contracts are reported in an annual report to Congress prepared by the Attorney General.54
51 Third-country nationals (TCNs) include non-local, non-U.S. citizen workers temporarily hired to work by federal
contractors for the U.S. government overseas. There is concern that they are particularly susceptible to trafficking
schemes, according to recent news and U.S. inspector general reports. As neither U.S. citizens nor citizens of the host
nation where they are working, such TCNs are vulnerable due to distance and isolation from their home communities,
the possibility of language barriers, and dependence on their employers to procure and maintain current visas and work
permits. The U.S. government is often heavily reliant on such contractors for support in providing services at its
overseas posts related to facilities maintenance, gardening, construction, cleaning, food, and local guard forces. Often,
such TCNs are hired to perform labor for significantly lower cost than would be required to hire local staff. See for
example DOS and the BBG, OIG, Performance Evaluation of Department of State Contracts to Assess the Risk of
Trafficking in Persons Violations in Four States in the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf, report no.
MERO-I-11-06, January 2011.
52 See also in the 112th Congress: S. 2234 and H.R. 4259, the End Trafficking in Government Contracting Act of 2012
and S. 2139 and S. 3286, the Comprehensive Contingency Contracting Reform Act of 2012.
53 Section 106(g) of the TVPA, as amended; 22 U.S.C. 7104(g). Such specified acts include the withholding employee
identity or immigration documents; refusing to provide or pay for return transportation for foreign national employees,
if requested, under certain circumstances; soliciting prospective employees by means of materially false or fraudulent
pretenses; charging recruited employees unreasonable placement or recruitment fees; and providing housing that fails
to meet host country housing and safety standards.
54 Section 105(d)(7) of the TVPA, as amended; 22 U.S.C. 7103(d)(7). Although not congressionally mandated to report
on anti-trafficking progress made by the U.S. government in the TIP Report, the 2011 edition reports that allegations of
U.S. defense contractor violations were investigated and ultimately resulted in the dismissal of one employee by a
DOD contractor. The 2012 edition reports that DOD conducted at least two investigations into allegations of forced
labor by federal contractors during the reporting period. TIP Report (2011 and 2012), “Country Narrative for the
United States.”
Congressional Research Service
23
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
The TVPRA of 2008 further mandated additional reporting requirements for the OIGs for the Departments of State
and Defense and USAID.55 This provision directed the OIGs to investigate, over the course of three years from
FY2010 through FY2012, a series of contracts and subcontracts at any tier under which contractors and
subcontractors are at heightened risk of engaging in acts related to human trafficking. Specified high-risk activities
include confiscation of employee passports, restriction on an employee’s mobility, abrupt or evasive repatriation of an
employee, and deception of an employee regarding the work destination.
Although the OIG reports submitted to Congress pursuant to the TVPRA of 2008 col ectively documented few
instances of likely contractor involvement in severe forms of human trafficking, solicitation of commercial sex acts,
sex trafficking, or involuntary servitude,56 several of them identified contractor management practices that increased
the risk of human trafficking and related violations. The State Department’s OIG, for example, found instances of
contractor coercion at recruitment and destination points and exploitative conditions at work, including frequent
instances in which workers paid recruiters brokerage fees and employers regularly confiscated employee passports,
withheld wages, used confusing calculations to determine earnings, provided unsafe or unsanitary living conditions for
workers, and participated in deceptive recruitment practices that exploited workers’ lack of language, education, and
information.57 The DOD’s OIG evaluated selected contracts in the U.S. Pacific Command and U.S. Central Command
areas of responsibility and revealed problems with ensuring that contracts had the appropriate anti-trafficking
clauses.58
Although the U.S. government reports that it continues to investigate alleged cases of trafficking
involving U.S. officials and contractors, many experts have questioned why such cases rarely
result in criminal prosecution or other enforcement measures. Regarding federal contractors,
allegations are generally corrected internally by the contractor before more severe contracting
penalties are imposed by the U.S. government, such as contract termination, or contractor
disqualifications, suspensions, and debarments. Though there are anti-trafficking laws,
regulations, and zero-tolerance policies in place, some question whether they are effectively
enforced.59 In war zones and overseas contingency operations, enforcement capacity is
particularly challenged by factors such as the unreliability of host nation capacity to enforce its
domestic rule of law, the need for low-cost and quickly recruited government contractors in large
volumes, the prioritization of investigating human trafficking violations relative to other possible
national security priorities in such operations, and the general absence of security, such that
investigators and contracting officer representatives (CORs) are unable to travel to sites for
inspection and audit.
55 Section 232 of the TVPRA of 2008 (P.L. 110-457).
56 DOS and the BBG, OIG, Performance Evaluation of Department of State Contracts to Assess the Risk of Trafficking
in Persons Violations in the Levant, report no. MERO-I-11-07, March 2011; Summary of Calendar Year 2009
Trafficking in Persons (TIP) Activities and Findings, report to the House Committee on Foreign Relations, January 15,
2010; Embassy Riyadh and Constituent Posts, Saudi Arabia, report no. ISP-I-10-19A, March 2010.
57 DOS and the BBG, OIG, Performance Evaluation of Department of State Contracts to Assess the Risk of Trafficking
in Persons Violations in Four States in the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf, report no. MERO-I-11-
06, January 2011; Summary of Calendar Year 2009 Trafficking in Persons (TIP) Activities and Findings, report to the
House Committee on Foreign Relations, January 15, 2010; and The Bureau of Diplomatic Security Baghdad Embassy
Security Force, report no. MERO-A-10-05, March 2010.
58 DOD, OIG, Evaluation of DOD Contracts Regarding Combating Trafficking in Persons, report no. IE-2010-001,
January 2010; and Evaluation of DOD Contracts Regarding Combating Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Central
Command, report no. IE-SPO-2011-002, January 18, 2011.
59 See for example U.S. Congress, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Subcommittee on
Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations, and Procurement Reform, Are Government Contractors
Exploiting Workers Overseas? Examining Enforcement of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, Serial no. 112-93,
112th Cong., 1st sess., November 2, 2011 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2012).
Congressional Research Service
24
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
Conclusion
Human trafficking is an inherently transnational and multi-dimensional issue that touches on a
broad combination of foreign policy, human rights, criminal justice, and national security
priorities. Despite U.S. and international efforts, perpetrators continue to persist in victimizing
men, women, and children worldwide through commercial sexual exploitation, forced labor, debt
bondage, domestic servitude, and the use of children in armed conflict. Although there remains
widespread support among policy makers and outside observers for the continuation of U.S. and
international anti-trafficking efforts, reports of ongoing exploitation of trafficking victims
worldwide appear to fundamentally question the effectiveness and prioritization of current
responses to the trafficking problem. In the face of persistent reports of human trafficking
worldwide, policy makers remain challenged to evaluate whether goals to eradicate human
trafficking worldwide are achievable and whether current international anti-trafficking programs
are measured against realistic expectations.
This report has explored issues related to several U.S. foreign policy responses to human
trafficking, including (1) foreign country reporting, (2) foreign product blacklisting, (3) foreign
aid, (4) foreign aid restrictions, (5) conditions on trade preference program beneficiaries, and (6)
preventing U.S. government participation in trafficking overseas. These U.S. approaches to
international human trafficking highlight a series of initiatives, often implemented unilaterally,
that are considered to exceed the international commitments set forth in treaties such as the U.N.
Trafficking Protocol. Issues discussed in this report have centered on challenges associated with
how well these policy mandates connect with and reinforce each other, and whether resources
devoted to combating human trafficking are allocated effectively and efficiently. Several
generations of legislative activity address aspects of human trafficking as currently
conceptualized by the U.N. Trafficking Protocol and TVPA, but they are neither necessarily or
easily integrated in current anti-trafficking policy nor implemented smoothly across federal
agencies. Given recent reports suggesting that U.S. government personnel and contractors have
been implicated in trafficking schemes overseas, some may also question the credibility of the
United States as an international leader against trafficking in persons.
As Congress considers action on international human trafficking issues related to potential
legislation, annual budget and appropriations cycle, and upcoming executive branch report
submissions to Congress, illustrative questions of congressional interest may include the
following:
• Reauthorizing the TVPA. Congressional authorization of funds related to anti-
trafficking grants and aid programs expired at the end of FY2011. The 112th
Congress introduced three bills to reauthorize the TVPA beyond FY2011: two
House bills, the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2011 (H.R.
2830 and H.R. 3589), and one Senate bill, the Trafficking Victims Enhanced
Protection Act of 2011 (S. 1301). None of these measures were ultimately
enacted. To what extent does the expiration of authorizations reflect a shift in
policymakers’ prioritization of anti- trafficking policy responses? What risks and
opportunities would the 113th Congress face if it sought to introduce legislation to
reauthorize the TVPA?
• Congressionally Mandated Reports: Redundancies and Resource Costs. In
October 2010, the State Department’s OIG released a report that singled out the
TIP Report as among the most cost-intensive in terms of personnel resources
Congressional Research Service
25
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
both at U.S. diplomatic posts abroad and at headquarters in Washington, DC. It
also pointed to redundancies among other congressionally mandated reports that
reference human trafficking-related concerns, including the Labor Department’s
annual Worst Forms of Child Labor Report. Is there value in requiring the
executive branch to submit multiple reports to Congress with similar
information? To what extent have these reports provided Congress with relevant
information needed to make policy decisions?
• U.S. Military Aid to Countries with Child Soldiers. Beginning with the 2010
TIP Report, the State Department has been mandated by Congress to identify
countries that recruit or harbor child soldiers. Yet, some of the listed countries
continue to receive various types of U.S. military assistance, pursuant to
presidential national interest waivers. Other countries that receive U.S. military
assistance, such as Afghanistan, have also been variously reported by the
Department of Labor and non-governmental groups as having recruited and
harbored minors in their armed forces. What factors are taken into consideration
when balancing the priorities of providing U.S. military assistance to key partner
countries and combating the practice of child soldiers? Are current U.S.
restrictions on military aid effective in preventing and deterring countries from
recruiting child soldiers? What policy options might exist to further induce
foreign countries to halt such practices?
• Effectiveness of U.S. Aid Restrictions to “Tier 3” Countries. For FY2012,
President Obama authorized the full force of anti-human trafficking aid
restrictions to be applied to 3 of 23 Tier 3 countries listed in the 2011 TIP Report:
Eritrea, Madagascar, and North Korea. None of these countries, however, were
anticipated to receive U.S. assistance that could have been sanctioned in FY2012.
Have congressionally authorized anti-trafficking aid restrictions been effectively
used by the executive branch? What additional policy options might exist to
reach poor-performing countries that do not receive much U.S. foreign aid?
• Interagency Consistency in the Implementation of Anti-Trafficking Policy.
Through the TVPA, Congress mandated the creation of two senior-level
interagency coordinating bodies, including the SPOG and the PITF, to de-conflict
and ensure consistency among international anti-trafficking initiatives. Yet, some
interagency inconsistencies persist. For example, U.S. trade preference programs
in 2012 continue to list as among its beneficiaries 12 Tier 3 countries listed in the
2011 TIP Report and 8 Tier 3 countries from the 2012 TIP Report. Additionally,
21 trade preference program beneficiary countries are listed by the Department of
Labor as producing goods with a combination of both forced and child labor.
Although there are no specific requirements to ensure consistency among U.S.
trade policies and anti-trafficking policies, how do such discrepancies affect the
effectiveness of efforts to combat human trafficking?
• Enforcement of Anti-Trafficking Policies Among U.S. Contractors Overseas.
Recent OIG reports submitted to Congress by the Departments of State and
Defense and USAID identified several contractor management practices that
increased the risk that human trafficking and related violations might occur.60 In
60 DOS and the BBG, OIG, Performance Evaluation of Department of State Contracts to Assess the Risk of Trafficking
in Persons Violations in Four States in the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf, report no. MERO-I-11-
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
26
Trafficking in Persons: International Dimensions and Foreign Policy Issues for Congress
response, President Obama issued Executive Order 13627, Strengthening
Protections Against Trafficking in Persons in Federal Contracts, and the 112th
Congress passed legislation to amend the TVPA and incorporate heighted
requirements to prevent trafficking among federal contractors. How will these
enhanced mandates be implemented by contractors and enforced by the U.S.
government?
• Multilateral Policy Options: Potential for Redundancy or Efficiency Gains?
As discussed in this report, the U.S. government implements a series of unilateral
policy responses to combat international human trafficking. The United States is
also an active participant in multilateral anti-trafficking initiatives. To what
extent do such multilateral initiatives enhance or render redundant existing U.S.
efforts? Do other countries and international organizations consider U.S. foreign
policy responses to combat human trafficking an effective model? Given the
common goal of eliminating trafficking in persons, what can or should the U.S.
government do, if anything, to enhance its support of multilateral anti-trafficking
initiatives?
Author Contact Information
Liana Sun Wyler
Analyst in International Crime and Narcotics
lwyler@crs.loc.gov, 7-6177
(...continued)
06, January 2011; Summary of Calendar Year 2009 Trafficking in Persons (TIP) Activities and Findings, report to the
House Committee on Foreign Relations, January 15, 2010; and The Bureau of Diplomatic Security Baghdad Embassy
Security Force, report no. MERO-A-10-05, March 2010. Such reports described observations at inspection sites that
suggested instances of contractor coercion at recruitment and destination points and potentially exploitative conditions
at work, such as unregulated recruitment fees, regular confiscation of employee passports, withheld wages, confusing
calculations of earnings, unsafe or unsanitary living conditions, and deceptive recruitment practices that exploit
workers’ lack of language, education, and information.
Congressional Research Service
27