Chilean non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have drawn international attention after their claims of forced labor during an investigation led to new tariffs imposed by the United States. The U.S. Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) announced this week that it would apply a 12.5 percent tariff on imports from Chile and 59 other countries under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act. This follows a determination that these nations failed to adequately enforce bans on goods produced with forced labor. Chile, among 39 countries facing the highest rate, will see its exports hit by the new measure, which replaces a previous 10 percent temporary tariff that expired earlier this month. The U.S. government justified the new tariffs based on findings from an investigation launched in early June. It concluded that Chile imported products made using forced labor, warranting the maximum penalty. However, certain Chilean exports were exempted from the tariffs, including refined copper cathodes, silver, iodine, fresh oranges, lithium carbonate, non-monetary gold, potassium nitrate, rhenium, fresh kiwifruit, seeds, avocados, unroasted molybdenum concentrates, copper sulfate, and lithium hydroxide. These items account for more than half of the total value of Chile’s exports to the U.S., according to the Undersecretariat of International Economic Relations (Subrei). Other Chilean exports, however, face the new tariffs. Products such as salmon in various formats, fresh grapes, fresh blueberries, poultry meat, salt, fresh cherries, bottled wines, citrus fruits, fish meal, frozen fruits, wood panels, fresh peaches, frozen blueberries, apples, lemons, condensed milk, dairy products, inulin, canned mussels, and olive oil are affected. These sectors, particularly the salmon industry, food processing, and forestry, had participated in public hearings in the U.S. seeking exemptions but did not succeed. The Chilean government, represented by Foreign Minister Francisco Pérez Mackenna, was part of the delegation attending these proceedings. The impact of the tariffs has been felt strongly within Chile's export sectors. Salmon, which constitutes nearly 30.5 percent of Chile’s total salmon exports to the U.S., is one of the hardest-hit industries. According to data from the Central Bank, salmon and trout exports reached $1.99 billion in the first three months of 2026, showing an 8 percent increase compared to the same period last year. The president of SalmónChile, Patricio Melero, described the situation as a “bad news” and expressed disappointment that the U.S. did not accept Chile’s argument that salmon does not compete with domestic production and benefits American consumers. He urged President José Antonio Kast to visit the U.S. and speak directly with President Donald Trump, emphasizing the need for stronger political and economic ties. Meanwhile, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva criticized the U.S. for imposing the tariffs, accusing the Trump administration of manipulating human rights issues to justify its protectionist trade policies. Lula stated that Brazil has long been recognized by the International Labour Organization (ILO) for its commitment to combating forced labor. He noted that Brazil has ratified four ILO conventions related to forced labor, while the U.S. has only ratified one. Lula emphasized that Brazil’s free trade agreements include commitments to eliminate forced labor and ensure effective enforcement of these prohibitions. He announced that Brazil would initiate procedures under the Law of Reciprocity and take the issue to the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement mechanism. The U.S. decision comes amid ongoing tensions over trade practices and human rights standards. While some countries have managed to secure exemptions for specific products, others, including Chile and Brazil, face significant economic repercussions. The Chilean government is now focusing efforts on seeking exemptions for key sectors such as salmon, cherries, wine, meats, and certain fruits. The outcome of these negotiations could significantly influence future trade relations and economic strategies for both Chile and the U.S.
4 reports
La TerceraIndependent🔒CenterFactual 85Objective 758 days agoThe article discusses the change in U.S. tariffs imposed on Chile following the expiration of a 10% tariff that was previously applied due to trade policies under President Donald Trump. The new tariff, which took effect immediately after the old one expired, imposes a maximum rate of 12.5% on Chile and 59 other economies. The U.S. justified this by claiming that Chile imported goods produced with 'forced labor,' though the process allowed some products to be exempt from the tariff. Chile's copper was highlighted as an exempt product, while others like salmon, fresh grapes, and dairy products were affected. The Chilean government, including Minister Francisco Pérez Mackenna, participated in discussions to avoid the tariff but was unsuccessful. The Subsecretariat of International Economic Relations (Subrei) now focuses on seeking exemptions for certain sectors.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the situation objectively, detailing both the imposition of the new tariff and the efforts by Chilean authorities to mitigate its impact. It does not overtly favor any particular political stance or ideology, nor does it emphasize one side over another. While the issue involvesU
Why factuality (85): The article accurately describes the transition from a 10% to a 12.5% tariff on Chile and lists exempt products. It references official sources like the Subsecretaría de Relaciones Económicas Internacionales and explains the rationale behind exemptions. However, it doesn’t elaborate on the validity
Why objectivity (75): The article maintains a neutral tone overall, presenting facts about the tariffs and exemptions without taking sides. It avoids strong language but still emphasizes the negative impact on certain Chilean exports, slightly leaning toward concern for the affected industries.
La TerceraIndependent🔒ProgressiveFactual 85Objective 758 days ago Lula accuses the US of 'manipulating a fundamental issue' to justify its tariff policyPresidente de Brasil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, criticó públicamente la decisión de Estados Unidos de impor aranceles del 12,5% a productos brasileños, acusando a la Administración de Donald Trump de manipular temas relacionados con los derechos humanos y la lucha de los trabajadores para justificar su política de aranceles. Lula sostuvo que Brasil ha proporcionado evidencia suficiente sobre su compromiso con la erradicación del trabajo forzoso y destacó que el país ha ratificado múltiples convenios internacionales sobre este tema, mientras que Estados Unidos solo ha ratificado pocos. Además, señaló que los tratados de libre comercio entre Brasil y otros países incluyen compromisos para eliminar el trabajo forzoso.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the U.S. imposition of tariffs as politically motivated and ideologically driven, using strong language like 'manipular un tema fundamental' and contrasting Brazil's international commitments with the U.S.'s limited ratifications. The tone suggests a critical view of U.S. policies
Why factuality (85): The article accurately reports Lula’s statements regarding U.S. tariffs and his claim that the U.S. administration is manipulating human rights issues to justify protectionist policies. It cites specific details such as the 12.5% tariff and references the USTR investigation. However, it lacks explic
Why objectivity (75): The article presents Lula’s perspective without significant counterpoints but avoids overtly biased language. The tone leans toward supporting Lula’s position, though it remains relatively neutral compared to more polemic reporting.
La TerceraIndependent🔒ConservativeFactual 80Objective 708 days ago Chilean President Salmon asks Kast to go to the US and tell Trump that "we are allies"The U.S. Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) has imposed new tariffs under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act, citing insufficient enforcement by 60 economies against imports made with forced labor. Chile was among those affected, facing a 12.5% tariff rate. This comes after the expiration of temporary tariffs previously imposed by former President Donald Trump, which were lifted by the U.S. Supreme Court in April 2025. The salmon industry, which exports nearly 30.5% of its volume to the U.S., is particularly impacted. In early 2026, salmon and trout exports reached $1.99 billion FOB, showing an 8% increase compared to the same period in 2025. Patricio Melero, president of SalmónChile, criticized the decision, arguing that Chilean salmon does not compete with U.S. producers and benefits American consumers. He urged President Sebastián Piñera (Kast) to visit the U.S. and engage directly with Trump, emphasizing strengthened political and economic ties between the two countries.
Bias read (Conservative): The article frames the imposition of tariffs as a negative development for Chile, emphasizing the potential for improved bilateral relations under the current administration. It highlights the call for direct engagement between Chile’s leadership and Trump, suggesting a strategic alignment based on‘
Why factuality (80): The article provides factual information about the U.S. Section 301 investigation, the 12.5% tariff imposed on Chile, and the impact on the salmon industry. It includes data from the Central Bank of Chile and mentions the affected sectors. However, it does not clarify whether the allegations of forc
Why objectivity (70): The article frames the situation as a negative outcome for Chile, particularly for the salmon sector, and quotes Patricio Melero using emotionally charged terms like 'mala noticia' and 'decepcionante.' This introduces some bias despite presenting factual economic data.
BioBioChileIndependentProgressiveFactual 70Objective 658 days agoThe article reports on Chilean NGOs that accused the United States of forced labor practices during an investigation that led to tariffs. The NGOs' allegations were part of a broader trade dispute, highlighting concerns over labor conditions and international trade policies.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the issue through the lens of human rights violations and international trade justice, aligning with progressive values. It emphasizes the role of NGOs in exposing alleged wrongdoing by a powerful country, which suggests a left-leaning perspective on global labor standards and U.S
Why factuality (70): The article briefly mentions that Chilean NGOs reported forced labor during the U.S. investigation leading to tariffs. However, it lacks detailed sourcing or clarification on what specific actions these NGOs took or whether their claims were verified. This limits the depth of factual support.
Why objectivity (65): The article is very brief and does not provide a balanced view of the situation. It focuses only on the role of NGOs without addressing the broader context or responses from the Chilean government or businesses.
★
Keep the news honest.
ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.
Become a Supporter
CL
