New Delhi: The Union ministry of commerce and industry on Tuesday (July 14) banned the import of goods manufactured using forced labour, even as the United States is yet to release its final decision regarding tariffs it plans to levy on countries that it says did not do enough to stop such imports. The ministry’s decision, however, comes weeks after the US Trade Representative (USTR) proposed 12.5% tariffs on India linked to the issue.In March, the US had launched two Section 301 probes on India. On June 2, it proposed fresh tariffs following the outcome of its first investigation, which stated that India had failed to “effectively enforce” a forced labour import prohibition, and that it had hurt US commerce.What does the order say?In an order dated July 13, the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) inserted a new paragraph in the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) titled “Prohibition of import of goods produced or manufactured using forced labour”, stating that the import of goods produced or manufactured, “wholly or in part”, through the use of forced labour is “prohibited”.“The Central Government may, from time to time, specify, by notification, the goods whose import shall be prohibited under this paragraph, having regard to the findings of such enquiry or such other material as it may consider appropriate. The procedure for conducting an enquiry by the Director General of Foreign Trade into the use of forced labour in the production of such goods shall be as prescribed in the Handbook of Procedures, 2023,” the notification said.“The provisions of this notification shall come into effect after the expiry of 30 days from the date of its publication in the Official Gazette,” the ministry stated.‘Forced labour’, per the new order, means “all 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, as defined under the ILO Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29)”. The Indian Express, citing a government official, reported that there are already certain provisions within existing regulations to take care of issues like forced labour. However, the July 13 notification is “explicitly stating” it.Per the report, the addition of “suo motu” in the new notice makes it clear that the government is not dependent on a complaint to take action. “We had implicit powers, but we have made it explicit, and it may have implications in the discussions that are going on,” the official was quoted as saying.What is the US Section 301 investigation about?Section 301 of the US Trade Act, 1974, allows the USTR to investigate foreign trade practices that it considers unreasonable or discriminatory and that burden the US commerce. USTR Jamieson Greer has stated that importing goods made with forced labour creates an unfair advantage for those nations and created an “unlevel playing field” for US industries.Under the US’s draft proposal following an investigation, Washington found that India and 53 other countries had “failed to impose and effectively enforce” prohibitions on the import of goods produced using forced labour. As such, it proposed a tariff of 12.5% on imports from these countries.According to a report by The Hindu, commerce secretary Rajesh Agrawal said that India has made its submissions to the US on the matter and has protested the tariffs.Ongoing negotiationsIndia and the US have been negotiating a trade deal for months but have not reached a consensus yet.In May, Marco Rubio, United States Secretary of State, just ahead of his visit to India, announced that India had committed to purchasing $500 billion worth of American goods over the next five years.The Wire earlier reported that India’s intention to purchase $500 billion worth of American goods was part of the India-US Joint Statement issued on February 6, 2026 as part of the ongoing negotiations.In return for many concessions by India, Washington had agreed to lower its proposed “reciprocal tariff” on Indian exports from 25% to around 18%.However, the reciprocal tariff framework collapsed after a February 20 Supreme Court ruling, effectively invalidating the core economic justification for the agreement.