The proposal from the U.S. Trade Representative’s office, issued late on Tuesday, comes from a Section 301 unfair trade practices investigation designed to help rebuild U.S. President Donald Trump’s emergency tariffs, struck down by a U.S. Supreme Court decision in February.

Despite laws banning them, the products of forced labor are deeply embedded in supply chains around the world. But European lawmakers in particular bristle at the ​accusation that the region is less effective than the U.S. at curbing the trade in such goods, with one describing the U.S. findings as “utterly absurd.”

The USTR proposed 10% additional ​duties on imports from Canada, Ecuador, the European Union, Indonesia, Mexico, Pakistan, Argentina, Bangladesh, Cambodia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Malaysia, Taiwan and Britain. The USTR said ⁠all had plans or partial schemes in place.

The trade agency said it would impose additional duties of 12.5% on the remaining 45 countries that it investigated. These include China, India, Nigeria, Japan, ​South Korea, Vietnam, Australia and New Zealand.

“The failure of our most important trading partners to address the importation of goods made with forced labor is unacceptable,” U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a ​statement. “This creates a dynamic where American workers are forced to compete globally on an unlevel playing field.”

The USTR said it would accept public comments on the proposed tariffs and other remedies through July 6, with a public hearing scheduled for July 7.

The announcement comes ahead of the July 24 expiration of a 10% temporary tariff imposed by the Trump administration on Feb. 20, the day the Supreme Court struck down Trump’s ​tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

The European Commission said the tariffs were unjustified and reiterated its commitment to the trade deal sealed with Washington last year.

Bernd Lange, the chair of the European ​Parliament’s trade committee, which voted on Tuesday to accept that trade deal, said the new tariffs were expected, but said the results of the U.S. investigation were still “utterly absurd” given a 2024 E.U. law to ban imports ‌of forced labor ⁠products.

“The impression is increasingly emerging that a tariff measure is sought first, and only then is a suitable legal justification found,” he said. However, he added that the key question would be whether the additional tariffs would exceed those agreed between both sides last July.

The U.S.’s largest trading partner, the European Union, agreed last July to accept tariffs of 15% on a broad range of its exports. In its report, the USTR said the E.U. measures came into force only in December 2027 and lacked key elements.

“We know there are ups and downs in what people say,” French Finance Minister Roland Lescure ​told reporters after a Cabinet meeting. “But the goal ​is to ratify the (trade) accord and stick ⁠to that.”

Britain said it was in regular talks with the United States and was taking action to tackle forced labor. It added that the preferential access to U.S. markets that it had negotiated for U.K. businesses remained in place.

Taiwan said it was “hopeful and confident” that the final results would reflect agreements ​already reached, securing relatively preferential treatment.

Beijing, facing 12.5% tariffs, said that it opposed all forms of unilateral tariffs and that there was no forced labor ​in China. India, confronted with ⁠the same rate, said it was engaged with Washington on the Section 301 proceedings, noting the proposed tariffs were not final.

On Monday, the USTR proposed a 25% duty on many Brazilian goods as a result of a Section 301 investigation into the country’s digital trade practices and preferential tariffs.

The trade agency is also expected to soon unveil the findings of another major Section 301 probe into the buildup of excess industrial capacity ⁠in 16 trading ​partners, including China and the European Union.

In the forced labor findings, the USTR said it would exempt from tariffs ​products including energy, rare earths and some other metals, beef, coffee, certain fruits and vegetables, pharmaceuticals, organic chemicals and aircraft parts.

It also said it was proposing a textile mechanism that would allow for a certain volume of apparel and textile imports ​to enter the U.S. at a reduced tariff rate, without giving details.

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to the commissioner Monday requesting his appearance at a hearing June 10 examining the league’s TV deals and their compliance with the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961.

The 65-year-old law grants professional sports leagues limited antitrust immunity, allowing them to pool their media rights and negotiate as a single entity while protecting them from antitrust lawsuits.

The law applies only to broadcast networks. Courts have ruled in the past that it does not apply to other media, including cable, satellite and streaming. There has been bipartisan sentiment in favor of updating the law, and President Donald Trump has been among the critics of the NFL’s embrace of streaming.

According to Jordan’s letter, the hearing next week will “examine the extent to which the antitrust exemption created by the SBA has been used by the professional sports leagues to harm consumers and whether potential legislative remedies may be needed to address that harm.”

An NFL spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the letter.

The move by Congress comes as the Justice Department is investigating the NFL for potential anticompetitive practices. Speaking in April when the probe was disclosed, a government official, who was not authorized to discuss an ongoing investigation by name, said it was “about affordability for consumers and creating an even playing field for providers.”

In March, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, wrote a letter to the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission urging them to review whether the NFL’s distribution methods comply with the 1961 law. The FTC has sought comments from the public on the shift of live sports from broadcast channels to streaming services.

The NFL has said 87% of its games are available on free television, and games aired exclusively on cable or streaming services remain available over the air in the home markets of the competing teams.

The league has broadcast or streaming deals with CBS/Paramount+, NBC/Peacock, ABC/ESPN/ESPN+, Fox, NFL Network, Amazon Prime Video, Netflix and YouTube TV. Thursday night games moved to Prime Video in 2022, and the league has since moved a wild-card playoff game, Christmas Day games and a Black Friday game to streamers.

This season, Netflix will stream an opening-week game between the San Francisco 49ers and Los Angeles Rams in Melbourne, Australia, and a Green Bay Packers-Rams game the day before Thanksgiving.