link to page 1

Updated October 25, 2023
Section 307 and Imports Produced by Forced Labor
Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. §1307)
goods from specific producers, though this practice has
prohibits importing any product that was mined, produced,
changed in recent years.
or manufactured wholly or in part by forced labor,
Figure 1. Application of Section 307
including forced or indentured child labor. U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the prohibition.
Defining Forced Labor in Section 307
“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.” – 19 U.S.C. §1307;
language modeled on the ILO Forced Labor Convention, 1930.
U.S. customs law has prohibited importing goods produced
by certain categories of labor since the end of the nineteenth
century. Beginning in 1890, the United States prohibited
imports of goods manufactured with convict labor. In 1930,
Congress expanded this prohibition in Section 307 of the
Tariff Act to include any (not just manufactured) products

of forced labor. Although a few Members brought up
Source: CRS, based on CBP.
humanitarian concerns during debate, the central legislative
An importer has three months to contest a WRO and must
purpose was protecting domestic producers from competing
demonstrate that “every reasonable effort” has been made
with products made with forced labor. As such, Section 307
to determine the source and type of labor used to produce
allowed products of forced labor if no comparable product
the merchandise and its components. If the importer does
was made in the United States or the level of domestic
not successfully contest the WRO or remove the
production did not meet U.S. “consumptive demand.”
merchandise from the United States, CBP may seize and
Over the decades, lawmakers and civil society became
destroy it. Beyond publishing the date, type of good,
increasingly concerned about forced labor in the context of
manufacturer, and WRO status, CBP does not generally
human trafficking. The Trafficking Victims Protection Act
publish information about detentions, reexportations,
of 2000 (Division A of P.L. 106-386), for example,
exclusions, or seizures. Immigration and Customs
included forced labor in its definition of human trafficking,
Enforcement (ICE) can pursue criminal investigations of
concordant with a U.N. anti-trafficking protocol adopted
Section 307 violations.
that year. Similarly, Congress removed the “consumptive
demand” clause
Other Labor and Anti-Trafficking Measures
as part of the Trade Facilitation and Trade
WROs are one of several congressionally mandated forced
Enforcement Act (P.L. 114-125) in 2015. Since then, and
labor and anti-human trafficking measures. Others include
amid ongoing interest in worker rights in trade policy, use
the Department of Labor’s Findings on the Worst Forms of
of Section 307 has increased.
Child Labor (prepared per the Trade and Development Act
Application of Section 307
of 2000, P.L. 106-200) and List of Goods Produced by
Any individual who has “reason to believe that any class of
Child Labor or Forced Labor (per the Trafficking Victims
merchandise that is being, or is likely to be, imported into
Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005, P.L. 109-164).
the United States” is being produced by forced labor may
These reports contain country profiles and lists of goods
communicate that belief to CBP (Figure 1). Port directors
suspected to have been produced by child or forced labor,
and other principal customs officers must report such
though have traditionally been used to increase awareness
instances to the CBP Commissioner. Persons outside of
rather than to inform specific CBP actions. More broadly,
CBP may also submit allegations online.
various international conventions and guidelines of the
United Nations and International Labor Organization (ILO)
Upon receipt, the CBP Commissioner is required to initiate
address forced labor, and have informed U.S. approaches.
an investigation “as appears warranted” by the amount and
reliability of the submitted information. If the
Trends
Commissioner finds the information “reasonably but not
Following its enactment in 1930, Section 307 was rarely
conclusively indicates” that imports may be the product of
used to block imports. The International Trade Commission
forced labor, then she or he is to issue an order to withhold
reported that between 1930 and the mid-1980s there were
release of such goods (WRO) pending further instructions.
60 to 75 instances when either interested parties requested
Traditionally, CBP has issued WROs that target specific
or Customs considered the application of Section 307. Of
those instances, merchandise was denied entry into the
https://crsreports.congress.gov

link to page 2

Section 307 and Imports Produced by Forced Labor
United States at least 10 times (6 times from Mexico, and
wide WRO on imports of all cotton products and tomato
once each from Japan, the Dominican Republic, Canada,
products from Xinjiang.
and the former Soviet Union). Use of Section 307 increased
Congress enacted P.L. 117-78, commonly known as the
substantially in the 1990s with an increase in exports from
Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA), in
China to the United States. Between 1991 and 1995, CBP
December 2021. The law creates a rebuttable presumption
issued 27 WROs against manufacturers in China. Between
that goods made in Xinjiang or by certain entities with ties
2000 and 2016, CBP did not issue any WROs (Figure 2).
to the region are made with forced labor and prohibited
Observers generally linked the difficulties in enforcing
from U.S. entry. It creates new reporting requirements and
Section 307 to the “consumptive demand” clause; as more
declares that it is U.S. policy to coordinate with Canada and
goods were manufactured exclusively abroad, it became
Mexico on this issue. UFLPA’s enactment continues the
easier for importers to make use of the exception. CBP also
recent trend toward using Section 307 on a region-wide
emphasized limited resources and a lack of sufficient
basis and for humanitarian purposes. CBP began enforcing
evidence, caused in part by the infeasibility of spot
UFLPA in June 2022, and issued importer guidance to
inspections that would provide evidence of forced labor. As
assist in its implementation. As mandated by the act, the
noted, Congress removed the consumptive demand clause
Forced Labor Enforcement Task Force (FLETF), chaired by
in 2015, which CBP stated, would “[enhance] CBP’s ability
the Secretary of Homeland Security, issued its strategy on
to prevent products made with forced labor from being
UFLPA enforcement, which includes lists of entities subject
imported.” Since then, CBP has issued 39 WROs to date.
to the rebuttable presumption and “high-priority” sectors
Figure 2. WROs Issued Per Year
for enforcement. As of September 2023, CBP has detained
5,346 shipments under the act, with 2,325 denied entry.
Members of the 118th Congress have held oversight
hearings on UFLPA implementation. Some Members and
experts have raised concerns over enforcement challenges
and whether the rebuttable presumption standard is being

implemented as intended. As of October 2023, there are 27
Source: CBP, as of October 2023.
distinct entities on the UFLPA entity list, prompting
concerns among some Members and stakeholders that the
Issues for Congress
list remains too narrow and additions are made too slowly.
Section 307 Implementation and Enforcement
Trade Policy and Forced Labor Provisions
While congressional action to close the Section 307
The treatment of forced labor in U.S. trade policy and free
loophole was widely welcomed, some observers question
whether CBP is effectively making use of the change. Some
trade agreements (FTAs) has been of long-standing
congressional interest and has evolved in recent years. In
labor groups cite lack of clear evidentiary standards
2022, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) announced
required in petitions and transparency by CBP on
explanations of enforcement actions as concerns. Observers
plans to develop its “first-ever focused trade strategy to
combat forced labor.” Per negotiating objectives set by
attribute few actions to the customary practice of targeting
Congress in trade promotion authority legislation, recent
individual producers and the difficulty of tracing products
back to the facility using forced labor, given complex
U.S. FTAs commit countries to maintain laws on core ILO
rights/principles, for example, elimination of forced or
global supply chains. Recent industry- and country-wide
compulsory labor. For the first time in a U.S. FTA, the
enforcement actions have been welcome developments to
some, including Members of Congress who advocated this
U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) commits
parties to prohibit imports made by forced labor and to
approach to the Xinjiang region of China. Some industry
cooperate over identifying such goods. USMCA
groups caution that broader WROs may disrupt supply
chains, deter legitimate business with other suppliers, and
implementing legislation (P.L. 116-113) created the FLETF
worsen the economic security of vulnerable workers. They
to monitor and report on enforcement of Section 307.
have expressed uncertainty as to what evidence
In addition, eligibility criteria for U.S. trade preference
demonstrates compliance. Other stakeholders view greater
programs includes taking steps to maintain worker rights.
supply chain due diligence and accountability by companies
Some eligibility reviews and revocation of developing
as critical components. Enhancing Section 307 enforcement
country benefits by USTR have involved labor practice
may hinge on greater resources. CBP cited staff shortages
concerns.
as leading to dropped investigations and limited ability to
monitor existing cases. Congress could appropriate funds if
Trade agreements have expanded coverage of trade and
lack of capacity hinders WRO issuance and enforcement.
labor issues in part because the World Trade Organization
does not cover such rules, deferring to the ILO—though it
China and Forced Labor
provides exceptions to a country’s obligations for measures
Goods imported from China have been the primary target of
related to imports of products of prison labor. Congress
WROs due to long-standing concerns related to prison labor
might consider assessing the ILO’s role and whether to
and more recent concerns about the systemic forced labor
encourage elevating forced labor as part of trade
of ethnic Uyghurs and other minority groups in Xinjiang
discussions in other international fora.
and other parts of China. Xinjiang-connected raw materials
and products are used in finished goods in China and
Christopher A. Casey, Analyst in International Trade and
neighboring countries, putting supply chains at risk of
Finance
exposure to forced labor. In 2021, CBP issued a region-
https://crsreports.congress.gov

Section 307 and Imports Produced by Forced Labor

Michael A. Weber, Analyst in Foreign Affairs
Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs, Specialist in International
IF11360
Trade and Finance

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11360 · VERSION 12 · UPDATED