Scott Lincicome says the forced-labor tariffs lack a sound evidentiary basis
Scott LincicomeCato Institute trade-policy scholar and commentary author
Lincicome argues that the forced-labor investigation was designed to produce broad replacement tariffs and that its evidence does not justify the rates imposed.
“The findings were clearly predetermined. The methodology is thin to the point of embarrassment.”
Analysis
Where this statement fits
Are Trump's Section 301 "forced labor" tariffs a lawful remedy, or a pretext to revive struck-down global tariffs?
On July 23, 2026, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, at President Trump's direction, imposed additional tariffs of 10% or 12.5% on imports from 60 economies under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. The duties took effect July 24. USTR says each economy failed to impose and effectively enforce a ban on imports of goods made with forced labor, which it found unreasonable and a burden on U.S. commerce. Businesses and 25 states sued in the Court of International Trade. They say the forced-labor rationale is a pretext for re-creating the global tariffs the Supreme Court struck down in February, and that USTR skipped the country-by-country findings the statute requires. The Justice Department says USTR made findings for all 60 economies on a record of data, testimony and public comments. A three-judge panel heard argument on September 30, 2026. As of that date, no court had ruled on the Section 301 tariffs. The disputed question is whether the tariffs are a lawful remedy under Section 301 or a pretext to revive the struck-down global tariffs.
Source and context
Analysis
About this source
The essay recognizes forced labor as a real problem before arguing that this investigation uses it as legal cover. Lincicome analyzes the report, the tariff rates and the risk of creating an open-ended tariff power. The essay predates the July 24 complaint.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
The essay recognizes forced labor as a real problem before arguing that this investigation uses it as legal cover.
After the quotation
Lincicome analyzes the report, the tariff rates and the risk of creating an open-ended tariff power. The essay predates the July 24 complaint.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
Relative to the Section 301 forced-labor tariff policy, Lincicome expressly criticizes its design, evidence and remedy. His criticism goes beyond disputing a description of the policy.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseWolff says Section 301 gives no global tariff power and the forced-labor cases were unlawful
“We argue that Section 301 is only for use against individual countries' practices, not a global measure like Section 122. We state that no prior administration and no Congress in its drafting of the provision, or subsequently in is amendments of the statute, ever indicated that Section 301 conferred global tariff authority. We argue that Section 301 could not do so under the Constitution and that USTR's forced labor Section 301 cases were arbitrary and capricious, and not authorized by law.”Read statement
Liberty Justice Center asks the court to set aside the forced-labor tariffs
Liberty Justice Center
“Our answer: Set aside these unlawful tariffs.”Read statement
DOJ defends USTR's tariff authority and opposes setting the tariffs aside
United States Department of Justice
“Congress included an expansive definition of “unreasonable” acts, policies, or practices, in Section 301.”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Scott Lincicome says the forced-labor tariffs lack a sound evidentiary basis
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/6305-lincicome-argues-that-the-forced-labor-investigation-was
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Scott Lincicome says the forced-labor tariffs lack a sound evidentiary basis". First published: 2026-10-21. Last updated: 2026-10-21. https://disputeindex.com/events/6305-lincicome-argues-that-the-forced-labor-investigation-was