Australia to toughen modern slavery penalties after US tariff threat

Australia is set to impose criminal liability on large companies for modern slavery within their supply chains, a significant legal shift announced by Attorney General Michelle Rowland. This toughening of laws comes weeks after the United States warned of potential trade tariffs over the issue.

“

Australians rightly expect that the products they buy are not made on the back of modern slavery.

The new legislation will introduce a criminal offense for companies with annual revenues exceeding Aus$100 million if they fail to prevent modern slavery, which includes forced labor and debt bondage, in their global supply chains. "Australians rightly expect that the products they buy are not made on the back of modern slavery," Rowland stated.

“

There is no credible evidentiary basis for a finding that Australia's lack of a US-style prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labour is unreasonable, or burdens or restricts US commerce.

Australia's embassy had previously contested a U.S. Trade Representative listing that placed it among countries potentially facing a 12.5 percent tariff for not adequately stopping the import of goods produced with forced labor. The embassy argued there was no "credible evidentiary basis" to suggest Australia's approach burdened U.S. commerce.

“

Australia was once a world leader with its anti-slavery rules, but had fallen behind as other countries took tougher action.

Chris Evans, Australia's Anti-Slavery Commissioner, noted that while Australia once led globally in anti-slavery regulations, it has since fallen behind as other nations enacted stricter measures. Justine Nolan, Director of the Australian Human Rights Institute, described the existing laws, enacted eight years prior, as "not fit for purpose." She believes the upcoming changes are substantial and will compel companies to actively address and prevent slavery in their operations. Nolan also suggested a "correlation" between the timing of these legislative changes and the U.S. tariff threat.

“

the laws enacted eight years earlier were not fit for purpose, and the changes were significant and would force companies to take action to prevent slavery.