The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) directly rebutted a leading local outlet that strongly criticized the Donald Trump administration's tariff policy. After the outlet highlighted a situation in which the same tariff rate would be imposed on China and Korea and pointed out the policy's contradictions, the USTR's top official personally moved to contain the fallout. As the Trump administration seeks to erect a sweeping, indiscriminate tariff wall against allies and non-allies alike, criticism over its validity is growing within the United States.
On the 11th (local time), Jamieson Greer, the USTR representative, posted a rebuttal letter on the USTR website and vigorously defended President Trump's trade policy to The Washington Post (WP) editorial board. Earlier, in an editorial on the 3rd, the WP criticized the White House for trying to bypass Congress to pursue tariff policy. In the editorial, the WP called the USTR's tariff plan "plainly a pretext for protectionism," adding, "Otherwise, China would not be subject to the same tariffs as Japan, Korea, and Switzerland." It was a sharp critique that grouping China—where forced labor and human rights abuses are severe—with countries such as Korea, where that is not the case, and applying the same punitive standard, makes no sense.
In the letter that day, Greer reacted harshly to the editorial. "Only the Washington Post editorial board would find a way to defend a laissez-faire approach to modern-day slavery," he said. Some assessed that he cast the questions raised by the outlet as a defense of slavery and dismissed them as media hostility toward President Trump. He went on, "Under President Trump, the United States will no longer tolerate forced labor in global supply chains," reaffirming the intent to press ahead with the current tariff policy. He also argued that "U.S. corporations pay a massive expense to cleanse their supply chains while other countries look the other way."
On the 2nd, the USTR announced a plan to impose a 10%–12.5% tariff on 60 economies for lacking sufficient efforts to eradicate forced labor. Under the measure, 46 regions, including Korea, Japan, and China, were listed side by side as subject to the record high 12.5% tariff. The Trump administration is also conducting anti-dumping investigations against 16 trading partners that account for 70% of imports by invoking Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. On the 1st, it proposed a 25% tariff on Brazil, citing the pretext of non-enforcement of anti-corruption laws. After a tariff based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act that had been pursued was ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court, the administration appears to be mobilizing every available tool that does not require congressional approval.
In U.S. political circles and the media, there were warnings that if the administration pushes tariff policy too far, it will ultimately face blowback. The WP reported that many in the White House staff internally acknowledge that indiscriminate tariff imposition could become a headache for the national economy. A prime example is quietly including essential items—such as coffee, beef, and rare earths needed for producing advanced products—on the list exempt from forced labor tariffs. Another point raised is that the abrupt cut in tariffs on agricultural and industrial equipment from 25% to 15% reflects the administration itself recognizing that tariffs directly lead to higher costs for farmers and consumer price inflation.