The State Department’s Trafficking in Persons Report: Scope, Aid Restrictions, and Methodology

Summary

The State Department’s annual release of the Trafficking in Persons report (commonly referred to as the TIP Report) has been closely monitored by Congress, foreign governments, the media, advocacy groups, and other foreign policy observers. The 109th Congress first mandated the report’s publication in the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA; Div. A of the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000, P.L. 106-386).

Over time, the number of countries covered by the TIP Report has grown, peaking at 188 countries, including the United States. In the 2017 TIP Report, the State Department categorized 187 countries. Countries were placed into one of several lists (or tiers) based on their respective governments’ level of effort to address human trafficking between April 1, 2016, and March 31, 2017. An additional category of special cases included three countries that were not assigned a tier ranking because of ongoing political instability (Libya, Somalia, and Yemen).

Its champions describe the TIP Report as a keystone measure of government efforts to address and ultimately eliminate human trafficking. Some U.S. officials refer to the report as a crucial tool of diplomatic engagement that has encouraged foreign governments to elevate their own antitrafficking efforts. Its detractors question the TIP Report’s credibility as a true measure of antitrafficking efforts, suggesting at times that political factors distort its country assessments. Some foreign governments perceive the report as a form of U.S. interference in their domestic affairs.

Continued congressional interest in the TIP Report and its country rankings has resulted in several key modifications to the process. Such modifications have included the creation of the special watch list, limiting the length of time a country may remain on a subset of the special watch list, expanding the list of criteria for determining whether countries are taking serious and sustained efforts to eliminate trafficking, establishing a list of governments that recruit and use child soldiers, and prohibiting the least cooperative countries on antitrafficking matters from participating in authorized trade negotiations. These modifications were often included as part of broader legislative efforts to reauthorize the TVPA, whose current authorization for appropriations expires at the end of FY2017.

Recent Developments

On June 27, 2017, the U.S. Department of State released the 17th edition of the TIP Report—the first for the Administration of President Donald J. Trump. In spite of State Department efforts to alleviate congressional concerns that the report’s methodology is susceptible to political pressure, several Members in the 115th Congress have introduced legislation to further modify key aspects of the annual country ranking and reporting process.

The most significant changes to the TIP Report methodology are contained in H.R. 2200, the Frederick Douglass Trafficking Victims Prevention and Protection Reauthorization Act of 2017, which passed the House on July 12, 2017. If enacted, the changes could reduce State Department flexibility and discretion in assigning tier rankings to countries and increase the number of countries that would fall into the worst category (Tier 3)—while also making it potentially more difficult for countries to attain the best category (Tier 1). Other proposed changes to the TIP Report methodology are contained in S. 377, S. 952, H.R. 436, H.R. 1191, and H.R. 2219.

While some observers may anticipate that changes to the TIP Report’s methodology will improve its overall credibility and country ranking process, others may question whether such changes will confuse foreign governments and be perceived as too complex. The reputational harm of a poor ranking in the TIP Report has motivated some countries to improve their antitrafficking efforts. It is not clear, however, if this scenario will hold true indefinitely. If the prospect of achieving a top ranking in the TIP Report begins to appear unattainable, could the TIP Report’s ability to motivate countries to improve their antitrafficking efforts—and thus its value as a policy tool for international engagement to combat human trafficking—diminish?