Most important supply chain mapping news for this week, June 29th 2026
1. USTR forced-labour tariffs: comment deadline July 6, public hearing July 7
On 2 June 2026, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative issued determinations in 60 Section 301 investigations, finding that each investigated economy fails to impose or effectively enforce a prohibition on imports made with forced labour, and that this is actionable under Section 301(b). USTR proposed an additional ad valorem duty of either 10% or 12.5%, depending on the economy, with product and program exclusions set out in Annex A (including goods already subject to Section 232 tariffs and certain raw materials). The 10% tier covers economies that maintain a prohibition but do not effectively enforce it — among them the European Union, Canada, Mexico, Indonesia, Ecuador, and Pakistan; the 12.5% rate applies to the remaining economies. USTR also proposed a textile/apparel mechanism allowing a capped volume of imports at a reduced rate, and is seeking comment on its design.
Procedural dates landing in this week: written comments are due 6 July 2026 (docket USTR-2026-0265) and the Section 301 Committee holds public hearings beginning 7 July 2026 (requests to appear were due 22 June 2026). No duties are in effect yet; they would be finalised after the comment-and-hearing process.
Why it matters: Landed cost is determined on country of origin and HTS classification. Importers cannot assess exposure or file substantive comments without mapping which lines, suppliers, and sub-tier inputs trace back to each of the 60 economies.
2. EUDR: simplification package finalised, Information System relaunch planned for June
On 4 May 2026 the European Commission published its EUDR simplification review report, updated FAQs and guidance, and a draft delegated act amending the product scope. The delegated act's four-week public feedback period closed on 1 June 2026. Proposed scope additions include soluble (instant) coffee, certain palm-oil derivatives, and frozen cattle tongues; proposed removals include retreaded tyres and cattle hides, skins, and leather. The Commission estimates the combined simplification measures could cut annual compliance costs by roughly 75% versus the original regime, and has confirmed it will not reopen the EUDR's core text.
On the system itself: the EUDR Information System (TRACES NT), where due diligence statements are filed, has been in read-only mode since 16 February 2026. The Commission states the system will become accessible again in June 2026 with the core features required under the revised Regulation, with further functionality over the summer. Application dates are unchanged: 30 December 2026 for large and medium operators, 30 June 2027 for micro and small operators.
Why it matters: The scope changes mean affected companies must re-run their scoping exercise to confirm which products are still in scope, and the system relaunch reopens the operational path to registration and submission ahead of the December deadline.
Source (law firm analysis): https://www.bakermckenzie.com/en/insight/publications/2026/05/eu-commission-publishes-simplification-review-of-eudr
3. EU Forced Labour Regulation: 14 June guidelines and risk database — status unconfirmed
Regulation (EU) 2024/3015 entered into force on 13 December 2024 and applies from 14 December 2027. It bans products made with forced labour from being placed on, made available on, or exported from the EU market, across all products and sectors, regardless of origin. Two implementation tools were due under a statutory deadline of 14 June 2026: the Commission's implementation guidelines (covering due diligence, risk indicators, and best practices) and a public database of forced-labour risks by geographic area, product, and sector.
As of mid-June 2026, reputable legal sources still described both as forthcoming rather than released.
Why it matters: The risk database is expected to draw on ILO data, the U.S. Department of Labor's TVPRA list, and civil-society research, and will signal where enforcement is likely to concentrate. Once published, sourcing regions and products that appear in it become elevated-risk areas to screen against in supplier mapping. Until then, CSDDD-aligned due diligence is the closest available benchmark.
Source (law firm analysis): https://www.mayerbrown.com/en/insights/publications/2026/06/the-eu-forced-labour-regulation-10-questions-every-general-counsel-should-be-asking
Summer Reading: IEA on critical mineral traceability
On 22 April 2026 the International Energy Agency published "Critical Mineral Traceability for Energy and Economic Security," based on results from more than 80 companies active across copper, lithium, nickel, cobalt, graphite, and rare-earth supply chains, collected between October and December 2025. The report assesses the state of company traceability practice, examines how governments use traceability as policy, and identifies barriers including high implementation cost, limited interoperability between systems, and the difficulty of transmitting information along concentrated, multi-tier supply chains. It sets out five actions for policymakers to support wider adoption.
Why it matters: The barriers the IEA identifies are interoperability and information transmission across tiers, which is best solved through n-tier mapping. The minerals scope also sits outside the agricultural and forced-labour regimes above, which is a useful counterweight when the regulatory news is EU/US-heavy.
Source: https://www.iea.org/reports/critical-mineral-traceability-for-energy-and-economic-security
