Bill C-35: Canada Moves To Strengthen Its Forced Labour Import Regime

On June 12, 2026, the federal government tabled Bill C-35, An Act respecting the prohibition of the importation of goods produced by forced labour, also known as the Ban on Importing Goods Made with Forced Labour Act.¹ The Bill stipulates that goods produced by forced labour are prohibited from importation, authorizes the Minister of Foreign Affairs to maintain a list of suspect goods, and directs importers of listed goods to provide evidence upon request that their products are not a result of forced labour.²

Bill C-35 represents the latest development in Canada’s evolving forced labour regulatory framework.

The Rationale for Reform

In July 2020, Canada implemented an import ban under the Customs Tariff, making it illegal to import goods produced wholly or in part by forced labour. This change aimed to fulfill Canada’s commitment under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA).³

Canada’s regulatory approach to forced labour in supply chains has developed incrementally. On January 1, 2024, the Fighting Against Forced Labour and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act (commonly referred to as the “Supply Chains Act” or “S-211”) came into force.⁴ S-211 requires certain government institutions and private-sector entities that meet prescribed thresholds, based on assets, revenue, and number of employees, to report annually on the measures they have taken to prevent and reduce the risk that forced labour or child labour is used at any step of the production of goods in Canada or goods imported into Canada.⁵ Notably, S-211 is a transparency and reporting statute; it does not, on its own, prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labour. Bill C-35 is intended to address this gap by strengthening enforcement at the border.⁶ Indeed, enforcement has been criticized as inadequate and Prime Minister Carney publicly acknowledged that Canada has not been effective in fully enforcing its forced labour legal framework.⁷ According to publicly available reports, since 2020, the CBSA has intercepted and detained approximately 50 shipments on forced labour grounds, of which only two, one involving textiles and another containing frozen seafood, were ultimately found to have been produced using forced labour.⁸

Prior to the introduction of Bill C-35, the selection of shipments for inspection at the border was largely unstructured, driven by general risk assessments and random sampling rather than any defined legislative framework. Bill C-35 changes this by directing CBSA officials to a Minister-maintained list of goods considered to carry a higher risk of having been produced with forced labour. The federal government has indicated that the composition of this list will be informed by intelligence gathered through diplomatic and other official channels, though the precise methodology for assessing and designating risk has not yet been publicly detailed.

The perceived shortcomings in Canada’s enforcement regime have not only drawn domestic criticism but have also attracted scrutiny from Canada’s largest trading partner.

1. A Direct Response to the USTR

The enactment of Bill C-35 also likely serves as a direct response to the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) recent findings from 60 Section 301 investigations.

On June 2, 2026, the USTR published these findings, concluding that sixty economies had failed to effectively enforce a prohibition on goods produced with forced labour.⁹ The United States has stated that the failure to do so has undermined the goal to eliminate forced labour and puts U.S. businesses at a competitive disadvantage by undermining the profitability of firms that do not employ such practices.¹⁰ Canada was among those identified, and as a result, a 10% additional tariff was imposed on Canadian goods, not including those that qualify for a CUSMA preferential tariff.

These new tariffs will be subject to public comment and review beginning July 7, when public hearings on the proposed duties are expected to commence.¹¹ Bill C-35 is directly aimed at enforcement and its introduction may alleviate the specific concerns raised by the USTR. However, whether it will be sufficient to influence the elimination of the new additional tariff remains to be seen. Notably, these developments are unfolding against the backdrop of the ongoing CUSMA renewal negotiations, adding further complexity to an already demanding bilateral trade environment.

2. Implications for Canadian Importers

Section 6 of Bill C-35 stipulates that the Minister may formulate a list of goods that are suspected to have been produced, whether wholly or in part, by forced labour.¹² Further, certain countries or regions may also be specified on the list.¹³

In effect, this creates a form of “reverse onus” for the importer: where the goods, or their origin, fall within the scope of the list, the importer may be required to provide information to the CBSA demonstrating that the goods were not produced with forced labour.¹⁴ Any failure to comply with the required provision of information will render such goods prohibited from importation.¹⁵ This is a significant departure from the current regime as under the existing framework, the CBSA must generally establish that goods were produced with forced labour before applying tariff item 9897.00.00. Under Bill C-35, failure to provide prescribed information may itself result in inadmissibility.

Importantly, businesses that are already subject to reporting obligations under S-211 may find that the due diligence processes they have implemented to comply with that legislation will serve as a useful foundation for responding to information requests under Bill C-35. However, the two regimes are distinct: S-211 requires annual public reporting on measures taken to identify and mitigate forced labour risks, whereas Bill C-35 may require importers to affirmatively demonstrate, on a shipment-by-shipment basis, that specific goods were not produced with forced labour.

As a result, importers should be ready to provide documentation that can effectively and accurately depict their supply chain processes; the CBSA may detain goods for a period of up to 90 days or more in order to make a determination, during which time importers will be liable for detention, storage, transportation and/or disposal costs.¹⁶ In advance of the new regime coming into force, businesses should consider implementing the following measures:

• supply chain mapping;
• sourcing information and supplier identification;
• traceability records;
• audit reports; and
• labour compliance programmes

Goods which are perhaps at a higher risk of being placed on the list include those whose supply chains often revolve around inputs that are sourced from higher-risk regions and countries. Sectors that have been the subject of heightened forced labour scrutiny internationally include:

• textiles and apparel;
• seafood;
• agricultural products;
• critical minerals;
• solar energy components; and
• other goods involving complex multi-tiered supply chains

While the precise scope of Canada’s approach under Bill C-35 remains to be determined, it may differ from that of the United States, whose Uyghur Forced Labour Prevention Act operates on a blanket prohibition applying to all goods traceable to the Xinjiang region of China or to other listed entities, unless proven otherwise.¹⁷ The extent to which Canada’s regime will be narrower or broader in practice will depend on the composition of the Minister’s list and the evidentiary standards imposed on importers.

Taken together, S-211 and Bill C-35 signal a clear trajectory toward more rigorous oversight of forced labour in Canadian supply chains. While S-211 established a baseline transparency obligation, Bill C-35 introduces a substantive enforcement mechanism that may have immediate operational consequences for importers. Businesses should monitor the development of the Minister’s list closely, as its composition will determine which goods and regions are subject to heightened scrutiny. We will continue to track the progress of Bill C-35 through the legislative process and will provide further updates as additional details, including the criteria for the Minister’s list and the specific evidentiary standards expected of importers, become available.

Footnotes

1. Bill C-35, An Act respecting the prohibition of the importation of goods produced by forced labour (Ban on Importing Goods Made with Forced Labour Act), 1st Sess, 45th Parl, 2025 [Ban on Importing Goods Made with Forced Labour Act].

2. Ban on Importing Goods Made with Forced Labour Act, Summary.

3. Global Affairs Canada, “Canada tables legislation to strengthen prohibition on goods produced with forced labour” (June 12, 2026) [Global Affairs Canada].

4. Fighting Against Forced Labour and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act, SC 2023, c 9 [Supply Chains Act].

5. Supply Chains Act, SC 2023, c 9, 6(1), 11(1).

6. This legislative development also coincides with the elimination of the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise (CORE), announced by Prime Minister Carney on June 11, 2026. Established in 2019, CORE was mandated to investigate allegations of human rights abuses linked to Canadian companies operating abroad but was widely criticized for lacking sufficient investigative powers and, over its existence, launched only five investigations. CORE’s elimination further underscores the need for more effective, enforceable mechanisms to address forced labour in Canadian supply chains.

7. Dylan Robertson, “Ottawa moves to tighten ban on imports made with forced labour after U.S. tariff threat“, CBC News (June 12, 2026).

8. Ibid.

9. Office of the United States Trade Representative, “USTR Makes Findings and Proposes Action in 60 Section 301 Investigations Relating to Failures to Take Action on Trade in Forced Labor Goods” (2 June 2026) [USTR Press Release].

10. McMillan LLP, “Tariff Risk Ahead: U.S. Section 301 Forced Labour Investigations and Canadian Supply Chains” (March 21, 2026) discussing the USTR Section 301 investigations into forced labour enforcement failures and their implications for Canadian importers and supply chains.

11. USTR Press Release.

12. Ban on Importing Goods Made with Forced Labour Act, s 6(1).

13. Ibid, s 6(2).

14. Ibid, s 8.

15. Ibid, s 9.

16. Ibid, s 5(3).

17. U.S. Department of State, Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) Fact Sheet (January 20, 2025).