Uyghurs: Forced Labour and Supply Chains

Summary

The US and EU have each built legal regimes banning imports linked to forced labour in Xinjiang, while investigations tie the region's cotton, solar and seafood industries to Uyghur labour transfers.

What it argues

1. US-China clash over Xinjiang

   Biden signed the UFLPA into law in December 2021 after unanimous votes in Congress, banning Xinjiang-linked imports. The US launched a diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Olympics and sanctioned Chinese officials and institutions over Xinjiang. China rejected the allegations as "slanderous attacks" and imposed retaliatory sanctions on US officials. The forced-labour dispute sits inside a wider US-China diplomatic confrontation.

2. UFLPA's legal presumption

   The UFLPA, implemented in June 2022, creates a rebuttable presumption that all goods from Xinjiang are made with forced labour. Goods from listed entities are barred from entry under 19 U.S.C. §1307, with no minimum-quantity exemption. Customs and Border Protection also traces shipments routed through third countries back to listed entities. US law treats Xinjiang-origin goods as forced-labour products unless proven otherwise.

3. Entity list keeps growing

   In July 2026 the US added 43 entities to the UFLPA Entity List in its largest expansion yet, bringing the total to 187. New additions span pharmaceuticals, food, textiles and metals, with 19 of the 43 located outside Xinjiang itself. Xinjiang Tianyun, a major salmon producer, was listed in August 2026 for sourcing from Xinjiang and using labour-transfer programmes; it denies the claims. US enforcement now reaches companies and sectors well beyond Xinjiang's borders.

4. EU regulation takes shape

   The EU's Forced Labour Regulation, adopted in November 2024, bans forced-labour products from sale or export in the EU from December 2027. The Commission's June 2026 guidelines point companies to the OECD's due diligence framework but leave penalty formulas to member states. Key elements remain unresolved: the risk database has no launch date, and the threshold for a 'substantiated concern' is undefined. The EU's regime is taking shape but key enforcement tools are still unbuilt.

5. Persecution of Uyghurs

   Rights groups and UN experts estimate over a million Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities have been held in camps in Xinjiang. An independent UK tribunal ruled the Chinese government committed genocide, crimes against humanity and torture against Uyghurs. CAIR called the UFLPA a tool to stop American firms profiting from what it termed Uyghur slave labour. Forced-labour enforcement is framed by campaigners as a response to mass detention and genocide findings.

6. Seafood supply chain

   Xinjiang's aquaculture industry, dubbed the 'Blue Miracle,' has grown roughly 85% in dollar value since 2017, led by salmon producer Xinjiang Tianyun. Through intermediaries, Tianyun's salmon reached Sysco, which supplies US public schools, federal prisons, military bases and Congressional cafeterias. Tianyun says claims of forced labour are "factually unfounded" and calls the UFLPA politically motivated. Xinjiang seafood reached sensitive US institutions despite a federal import ban.

7. Cotton and solar chains

   A 2021 Sheffield Hallam University report, 'In Broad Daylight,' documented Uyghur forced labour across global solar supply chains. According to Global Voices, a new Chinese cotton law deepens state control over Uyghur farmers' land and labour. Forced-labour allegations extend across Xinjiang's cotton and solar industries, not only seafood.

8. Trade enforcement pressure

   Over four years, roughly $4 billion in shipments have been detained under the UFLPA, at about 900 detentions a month, often routed via Malaysia, Vietnam and Thailand. Since January 2025 the US has detained over 13,000 shipments worth nearly $229 million, denying entry to 63% of them. A US Section 301 investigation of roughly 60 economies, including EU states, carries potential tariffs up to 12.5% for failing to block forced-labour imports. US tariff threats are adding pressure on trading partners, including the EU, to tighten their own enforcement.