U.S. Points to Platform Law as Korea's Trade Barrier... Cites Salt Farm Labor for the First Time

USTR's "National Trade Estimate Report"

Highlights Recurring Big Tech Complaints Including Location Data Export Restrictions

Direct Reference to the Taepyeong Salt Farm Sanctions Case

On March 31 local time, the United States Trade Representative (USTR) once again identified frequent complaints raised by American big tech firms—such as Korea’s digital platform regulation bill, restrictions on the overseas transfer of location-based data, and network usage fee policies—as “non-tariff barriers.” For the first time, the USTR also cited labor at Korean salt farms as a case of forced labor. This criticism comes as the USTR has started a full-fledged investigation into goods suspected of being produced through forced labor, following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling invalidating the Trump administration’s reciprocal tariffs.

Jamieason Greer, United States Trade Representative (USTR), answering reporters' questions at the White House in October last year. Photo by Reuters Yonhap News

The USTR stated this in its “2026 National Trade Estimate Report” released that day. In the 534-page report, Korea took up a total of 10 pages, less than China (52 pages) and Japan (12 pages). The report criticized trade regulations by item—such as agricultural products, taxes, technical trade barriers, and sanitary and phytosanitary barriers. As in previous years, it also raised concerns about the opacity of auto emissions regulations and the lack of transparency in pharmaceutical price controls.

Criticism of Online Platform Regulation Measures

First, the report noted that the Korean government and National Assembly are discussing regulating online platforms and digital companies in a manner similar to traditional industries. It argued that the potential introduction of regulations, such as imposing additional obligations on platforms designated as market-dominant, could affect U.S. businesses. The report said, “While some regulations appear to formally apply to all companies, they may have a greater impact on global platform operators,” warning that this could ultimately distort the competitive environment. This refers to the Korean government’s platform regulation bills. The issue also came up in U.S.-Korea trade discussions last year in the wake of the Coupang incident.

The report also pointed out that, despite requests by foreign companies, there have been zero cases in which the Korean government has approved the export of map or data overseas. As a result, map services such as Google Maps and Apple Maps are only available in a limited manner in Korea, which the USTR characterized as “discrimination” against foreign companies compared to domestic firms like Naver and Kakao. The report also noted, “Korea is the only major market in the world that maintains such restrictions on the export of location data.” Korea has required conditions such as domestic data center installation as practical standards that disadvantage foreign companies. However, on March 3, the Korean government conditionally approved Google’s request to export high-precision map data at a 1:5,000 scale for the first time. This comes 19 years after Google’s initial request for such data in 2007. While the official justification was to support the tourism sector, analysts say it was more significant as a bargaining chip in U.S.-Korea tariff negotiations.

Google logo. Photo by Reuters and Yonhap News

The U.S. financial and cloud service companies’ concerns about cloud security certification were also cited as a “market entry barrier.” In Korea, companies must obtain at least an intermediate-level certification under the Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP)—which includes requirements for data localization and staff location—to participate in the public and financial markets. The report viewed this as discrimination against foreign firms. Under the section on service barriers, the report also expressed dissatisfaction with regulations on online video services (OTT). It mentioned ongoing discussions of OTT regulations affecting companies such as Netflix, as well as the potential for content obligations and funding burdens, and pointed out that network usage fee bills could prove burdensome for American companies providing digital services.

Forced Labor Example Mentioned... Expanding Trade Sanction Risks

In particular, the report cited the “Taepyeong Salt Farm” case as an example of forced labor. This means that what began as a labor issue could expand into a risk of trade sanctions. In April last year, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) blocked the import of salt produced at the Taepyeong Salt Farm in Sinan, South Jeolla Province. Based on information providing reasonable suspicion of forced labor, a Withhold Release Order (WRO) was issued, resulting in all sun-dried salt products from the farm being seized and banned from entering the U.S.

The fact that the USTR is currently investigating goods suspected of being produced by forced labor adds to concerns. Previously, the Supreme Court ruled the Trump administration’s reciprocal tariffs invalid; the USTR is now investigating suspicions involving forced labor goods. If the U.S. finds it has been unfairly treated, it can impose tariffs under Section 301 of the Trade Act. The report clearly stated, “Import restrictions may be applied to products related to forced labor, which could impact exports from the relevant industry.”

Regarding beef and beef products, the report emphasized, “Korea continues to prohibit the import of processed beef products such as ground beef patties, jerky, and sausages, as well as foods made with U.S. beef as an ingredient.”

Inclusion of $350 Billion Investment in the U.S.

The National Trade Estimate Report released by the USTR this day included, for the first time, information reflecting the outcome of the U.S.-Korea trade agreement. It also incorporated details of $350 billion in investment in the U.S., as well as commitments to ensure non-discriminatory digital services and improve the agricultural biotech approval process.

The USTR stated that Korea’s average Most-Favored Nation (MFN) applied tariff rate is 13.4% as of 2024, with agricultural products at 57.0% and non-agricultural products at 6.5%. It also noted that 94.9% of all Korean tariff lines are bound under World Trade Organization (WTO) commitments, with an average bound rate of 17%. However, the report pointed out that these figures have limited direct relevance to the United States, since MFN rates are applied to countries without a Free Trade Agreement (FTA). In fact, the effective tariff rate on Korean imports from the U.S. is 0.79% as of 2024, and when refunds are considered, tariffs on industrial goods are virtually zero.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.