---
title: "SA unlikely to reverse Trump’s new 12.5% tariff"
description: "South Africa’s efforts to reverse Trump’s new 12.5% tariff are unlikely to succeed because the measure appears driven more by US trade politics than forced labour concerns."
type: "NewsArticle"
publisher: "Daily Maverick"
site: "https://www.dailymaverick.co.za"
section: "Forced Labour?"
author: "Peter Fabricius"
author_url: "https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/author/peterfabricius/"
canonical_url: "https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2026-08-05-sa-unlikely-to-reverse-trumps-new-125-tariff/"
published: "2026-08-05T12:44:24"
lang: "en-ZA"
word_count: 1403
---

# SA unlikely to reverse Trump’s new 12.5% tariff

> South Africa’s efforts to reverse Trump’s new 12.5% tariff are unlikely to succeed because the measure appears driven more by US trade politics than forced labour concerns.

By Peter Fabricius · Published 5 August 2026, 14:44 SAST

## Key points
- South Africa is unlikely to get the new 12.5% US import tariff reversed – despite government, labour and business briefings and Trade Minister Parks Tau’s pledge to ban imports made with forced or child labour – because the US move is governed by S.301 of the 1974 Trade Act.
- Experts say the tariff is less about forced labour and more a legal-political workaround after the US Supreme Court struck down the Trump administration’s wider IEEPA tariffs; Washington shifted from S.122 temporary levies to an expansive S.301 regime that took effect on 24 July.
- The S.301 duties hit 60 economies (about 98% of US trade); USTR exemptions shield roughly 80% of South Africa’s US exports (macadamias, some citrus, critical minerals, PGMs, pharma), but important agricultural lines – certain citrus, wine, apple juice, rock lobster – remain exposed to 12.5% and tariffs could be raised.
- There’s partial relief from Agoa’s reauthorisation and the end of the 30% IEEPA levy, but uncertainty over Agoa’s extension and SA’s eligibility persists before US elections; 25 Democratic state governments are suing, calling the forced‑labour rationale a pretext.

## Content

South Africa is unlikely to be able to reverse a new 12.5% import tariff that the Trump administration imposed on the country on 24 July on the grounds that SA has allegedly failed to block the import of goods produced with forced labour.

Trade, Industry and Competition Minister Parks Tau announced on 25 July that the US had gone ahead with the new tariff despite extensive consultations by the SA government, organised labour and the private sector with the US Trade Representative and testimony given by the SA government at a public hearing in Washington earlier in July.

To address the US complaint, he added that he intended to issue regulations “to prohibit goods produced using, in whole or in part, forced labour and child labour”.

But this seems unlikely to persuade the Trump administration to reverse the 12.5% tariff under Section 301 (S. 301) of the 1974 US Trade Act. That’s because the tariff isn’t really about forced labour at all.

It’s really about the administration needing to find a more solid legal justification for continuing to impose tariffs on foreign countries across the globe after its huge “reciprocal” tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act were struck down by the US Supreme Court in February this year.

In response to that setback, the Trump administration immediately imposed a new across-the-board 10% tariff globally under Section 122 of the 1974 US Trade Act. But legally those tariffs could only apply for 150 days and they expired on 24 July – not coincidentally, the day the new S. 301 tariffs kicked in.

### **Political move**

The US imposed the S. 301 tariffs – either 10% or 12.5% – on 59 countries plus the 27-member European Union, effectively therefore covering 86 countries. This was despite the 59 countries and the EU all having made strong cases to show they were making efforts to avoid importing goods produced with forced labour.

As Eckart Naumann, independent economist and associate of the Trade Law Centre, points out, the S. 301 tariffs imposed on 24 July are almost universal, as the 60 economies that are affected represent almost 98% of US trade. This clearly suggests the new tariffs target “trade volumes more broadly rather than… specific suspicion around forced labour-connected trade undermining US competitiveness”, he said in a new Trade Law Centre trade brief.

He added to Daily Maverick: “I wouldn’t attach much weight” to the chances of SA getting a waiver on the S. 301 tariffs by introducing new legislation or regulations prohibiting the import of goods produced with forced labour.

“I think much of this is political and even strong legislation and attempts at enforcement wouldn’t move the needle much in this regard.”

This was about “the Trump administration’s broader push for tariffs”, he added.

[Read more

Ambassador Roelf Meyer details plans for mending fractured SA-US relationship

July 25, 2026 ![Image](https://cdn.dailymaverick.co.za/i/cCDPD8IIe27rU8DaPvJUSkkQalQ=/450x0/smart/file/attachments/2995/roelf-meyer-donald-trump-afrikaner-refugee-programme_584585.jpg)](https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2026-07-25-ambassador-roelf-meyer-details-plans-for-mending-fractured-sa-us-relationship/)

Twenty-five Democratic US state governments agree and have challenged the legality of the S. 301 tariffs in the US Court of International Trade.

Their lawsuit argues that countering forced labour is just a pretext for imposing the same sweeping tariffs the Trump Administration tried to impose last year under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act before the US Supreme Court ruled that manoeuvre illegal.

According to a report in the Washington Trade Daily, the lawsuit of the 25 state governments states that the Trump administration could only identify three products made with forced labour to justify imposing tariffs on 60 economies – and one of the products, Brazilian frozen beef, is specifically exempted from the tariffs.

The lawsuit also notes that countries with and without mechanisms to avoid forced labour were treated similarly under the new tariffs. The Democratic governments complain that the Trump administration’s tariffs are increasing costs for their people under false pretences.

### **SA’s improved position**

For SA, the new S. 301 measure effectively increased tariffs on exports to the US by 2.5% on 24 July, compared with the situation before, as they replaced the 10% S. 122 tariffs.

Tau noted that the US Trade Representative also published a list of products that would be exempted from the S. 301 tariffs.

“Some of the exempted products of export interest to SA include, among others, macadamia nuts, oranges, limes, tea, spices, seeds, cane sugar, orange and lime juice, syrups, chemicals, critical minerals, platinum-group and precious metals, isotopes, civil aircraft and parts and components, and pharmaceuticals,” he said.

Naumann points out in his Trade Law Centre brief that these exemptions cover about 80% of SA’s exports to the US, based on 2025 exports which totalled $15.972-billion. But he adds that the exemptions only cover 26% of SA’s agricultural exports (based on 2025 trade), leaving important exports such as certain citrus fruits, apple juice, wine, fruit preparations and rock lobster subject to the 12.5% tariff.

He also cautions that S. 301 of the US Trade Act of 1974 does not place explicit percentage or time limits on such tariffs, so the US administration could increase the tariffs.

![peterfab-US trade-forced labour](https://cdn.dailymaverick.co.za/i/tZdn9-y81WoYxF8eq3L3rv3panc=/200x100/smart/filters:strip_exif\(\)/file/attachments/orphans/images30_753341.jpg)

*Trade Law Centre labour expert Eckart Naumann. (Photo: Tralac)*

However, he says SA is much better off now than it was between August last year – when the 30% International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariffs kicked in against SA – and February this year, when the US Supreme Court threw out the IEEPA tariffs.

In addition to the termination of the 30% IEEPA tariffs, exports of SA and other eligible African countries to the US were also boosted in February 2026 by the reauthorisation of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (Agoa).

Agoa, which gives duty-free access to the US market for most exports from SA and other eligible countries, had expired on 30 September 2025 and the US Congress reauthorised it retrospectively and until 31 December this year.

Naumann gives an example of the implications for SA of the changes in the US trade regime over the past year. He notes that for “edible ice” (sorbets etc), a major SA export to the US, the competitive position of a South African exporter compared to a European competitor had improved significantly.

[Read more

Agoa extension offers little relief as US trade chaos rattles African exporters

March 13, 2026 ![Image](https://cdn.dailymaverick.co.za/i/gi8dOU6g3IAbInbzUd1quj3hBo0=/450x0/smart/file/attachments/2989/ISS_Agoa_998337.jpg)](https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2026-03-13-agoa-extension-offers-little-relief-as-us-trade-chaos-rattles-african-exporters/)

Under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act regime and prior to Agoa renewal, the effective import tariff on South African edible ice was 50% – comprising a 20% underlying tariff plus the 30% IEEPA tariff.

After Agoa’s re-authorisation and the change from IEEPA to S.122 and finally to S.301 tariffs, SA’s effective tariff became 12.5%. Meanwhile the hypothetical European competitor faced a 20% tariff under IEEPA, which remained 20% under S.301.

“Thus, from a 30% nominal disadvantage, a South African exporter now enjoys a 7.5% advantage over a European competitor in this tariff line.”

Naumann said that, overall, the trade-weighted US applied tariff for SA exports had increased from an average of 8.5% just before the S.301 tariff regime was implemented on 24 July, to 8.9% just after.

### **Agoa eligibility**

What remains uncertain, though, is the future of Agoa and SA’s continued participation in it. With the US mid-term elections looming in November, it is not clear if Congress will find the time to reauthorise and extend it.

On Tuesday this week, the US Senate voted 89 to 4 to move forward with debate on legislation to extend Agoa to 31 December 2028.

This was tacked onto a bill to temporarily fund the federal government, a vital piece of legislation, so this increases the chances of the Agoa renewal succeeding.

If it does, the next question will be whether SA remains eligible. Naumann told Daily Maverick the overall Agoa eligibility review was under way and would probably conclude with an announcement by the end of October of an updated list of eligible countries.

“I remain hopeful that SA continues to be part of Agoa’s future, and I think there’s a better understanding all around that economic links between the countries remain strong and deeply integrated,” Naumann said.

“But also that SA is an important staging post… for some of the regional economies – many of whose goods are further processed in SA and exported to the US under Agoa. We finally also have an ambassador in Washington – filling a void that has been allowed to develop for too long,” he said, referring to the arrival in Washington late last month of SA’s new ambassador to the US, Roelf Meyer. **DM**