In US Trade Deal Race, India Seeks Lower Tariff Than Indonesia: Report
Trump said Tuesday the US will impose a tariff rate of 19% on imports from Indonesia, down from a threatened 32%, and will be able to ship American goods to the country tariff-free. The US president later told reporters that the India deal would be "along that same line" and "we're going to have access into India." On Wednesday, he again said the US was "very close" to a deal with India.
India is seeking more favourable rates than Indonesia and the 20% tariff Trump has said he'll impose on Vietnam, officials in New Delhi said, asking not to be identified because the discussions are private. The US and India are working toward a deal that would reduce proposed tariffs to below 20%, Bloomberg News previously reported, with a negotiating team currently in Washington to advance the talks.
New Delhi is hoping for a tariff that would give it a competitive advantage against its peers in the region, officials said. India believes the US doesn't view it as a transhipment hub like Vietnam and other Southeast Asian nations, and negotiations so far suggest India's tariff rate would be better than those countries, one of the people said.
The Ministry of Commerce and Industry didn't immediately respond to an email seeking further comment.
GLOBAL INSIGHT: Delhi's Trade Math in Talks with Trump
Soumya Kanti Ghosh, chief economist of State Bank of India, and a member of the prime minister's Economic Advisory Council, said the negotiating team would be hoping to bring the tariff down to below 10%. "And in the bargain, the US will expect significant concessions for its goods when they decide to enter India," he said.
While India is unwilling to open up the agricultural and dairy sectors, it may give concessions in non-agricultural sectors, he said.
India has already proposed to reduce tariffs on American industrial goods to zero if the US does the same. New Delhi has also offered greater market access to some American farm products, and has also raised the possibility of buying more Boeing Co. planes.
Aside from Indonesia, Trump has also announced trade deals with the UK and Vietnam, and a truce with China. Trump said Jakarta had agreed to purchase $15 billion in US energy and $4.5 billion worth of agricultural products along with Boeing planes.
The latest development shows that tariff rates are gravitating toward 15%-20%, a range that Trump himself has indicated as his preferred level, said Brian Tan, Barclays Plc's economist in Singapore. The tariff letters sent to trading partners so far are likely a negotiating tactic to bring governments back to the table with better offers for the US, he said, "allowing the Trump administration to secure superior 'deals'."
Malaysia's trade minister said he's waiting to see the details of the Indonesia agreement and the country is still in negotiations with the US on its own tariffs, The Star reported.
"Most importantly, we must ensure that this is a negotiation beneficial to both countries," Tengku Zafrul, minister of investment, trade and industry, was quoted by the newspaper as saying. "It must be win-win."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
20 minutes ago
- Mint
Why it has never been better to be a big company
For all the unwieldiness it entails, scale has always brought enormous benefits in business. Fixed costs are set against more revenue, raising profits and supporting investment. Heft brings greater bargaining power with suppliers and financiers. From the early 2000s, the advantages of scale became even more pronounced. Intangible assets, including software and intellectual property, gave the upper hand to companies that could afford to invest in them. Globalisation provided big companies with more room to grow, as well as access to larger—and cheaper—pools of labour. In America, the gap in profitability between big and small firms widened (see chart 1). Economists began to speak of 'superstar" firms racing ahead of the competition. Now size is conferring advantages in new ways. Artificial intelligence (AI) is reinforcing the dominance of big firms over small ones. So is the presidency of Donald Trump, which has raised the importance of resilience and political sway. Yet these same disruptions could spell danger for America's corporate giants. Already companies from Apple to Walmart are discovering how their size can make them a target of Mr Trump's wrath. Start with AI. You might imagine that lumbering leviathans would be too tied up in bureaucracy to make use of the technology. In fact, their scale allows them to invest far more in it than smaller rivals. According to a survey in December by Bain, a consultancy, American companies with more than $5bn in revenue had an average annual budget for generative-AI projects of $27m, five times the level in the preceding February. Those with between $500m and $5bn in revenue, by contrast, had set aside $9m, up by two-thirds over the same period (see chart 2). JPMorgan Chase, America's biggest bank, says it has rolled out AI tools to most of its 320,000 employees. UnitedHealth, the country's biggest health insurer, claims to have 1,000 different applications for the technology. Sanjin Bicanic of Bain notes that getting AI to work well is proving more expensive than for other types of digital technology, as it requires companies to organise their data and tinker with models. Big firms have the added advantage of larger data sets that can be used to refine the AI systems they build. It is not only technology, but politics, too, that is making it even better to be big. Although many of Mr Trump's tariffs now face legal uncertainty, those that remain will hammer sales and profits for businesses. Big firms, though, tend to be more resilient to such shocks. Among listed American firms, those in the top quintile by revenue have fatter operating margins and a healthier ratio of debt to operating profits (before depreciation and amortisation) than the average, and hold a lot more cash, too. That means they are less likely to get into financial trouble during a downturn. It also allows them to bounce back more quickly, as happened following the covid-19 pandemic. We examined the profitability of listed American companies, as measured by their return on invested capital, in nine non-financial sectors before and after the pandemic. For seven of the nine, the biggest firms—those in the top quintile by revenue—were, on average, more profitable across 2023 and 2024 than they were across 2018 and 2019. The bottom quintile, by contrast, became less profitable in the same number of sectors. Bigness tends also to bring increased supply-chain resilience—just as important in a trade war as it was amid covid-19. 'During the pandemic, I kept getting calls from small and medium-sized businesses saying that they could not get shipping capacity. The big companies were, by and large, at the front of the queue," says Philip Damas of Drewry, a shipping consultancy. Such prioritisation pays when companies are rushing to import products into America before tariff deadlines. It helps, in addition, that big companies tend to have more suppliers in more places. A study by the World Economic Forum and Kearney, a consultancy, found that firms which grew their market share in the wake of the pandemic were more likely to have back-up suppliers in a variety of countries for a significant share of the products they procured. Last, with scale comes an increasingly valuable asset: political capital. We examined data from OpenSecrets, a non-profit organisation, on the lobbying activities of American firms in the S&P 500 index. The median company in the smallest half of the index by revenue spent nothing on lobbying in 2024, relying solely on groups such as the US Chamber of Commerce to champion its interests. The median firm in the top quartile, by contrast, spent $3.3m on lobbying, five times as much as for the next quartile and twice as much as a share of operating expenses (see chart 3). It also hired a greater number of lobbyists relative to its number of employees. Mr Trump likes to talk directly with the bosses of many of America's largest companies. In April those of Home Depot, Target and Walmart, three retail giants, met the president to discuss their concerns over tariffs. Smaller retailers have received no such attention. Mr Trump seems particularly receptive to firms that promise to invest large amounts in America. 'So many companies want to come to the White House...[They offer] $10bn or more and I am there," he said in a speech in February. Such direct access is even more important than usual, notes Jorge Guajardo of DGA, a political-advisory firm, because many mid-level positions in the administration have still not been filled. All this helps explain why, since Mr Trump's inauguration, the Russell 2000 index of America's smallest listed companies is down by 11%, compared with a drop of only 3% in the S&P 100 index of America's largest firms. Yet the shifting business landscape also presents dangers for corporate giants. As with all new technologies, incumbents that are too timid in using AI will be exposed to newcomers that have built themselves around it. Then there is the risk that Mr Trump's tariffs result in a lasting reversal of globalisation which limits companies' access to foreign markets. That scenario would hit big companies harder than small ones. America's top quintile of listed non-financial firms by revenue derive 23% of their combined sales abroad, compared with just 7% for the bottom quintile. More attention from politicians may not always be welcome, either. Walmart recently angered Mr Trump by suggesting on an earnings call that it would need to raise prices in response to higher tariffs. Or consider Apple. In April the iPhone-maker won a partial reprieve from tariffs on Chinese-made smartphones. Two weeks later it said that it would shift the production of its America-bound iPhones to India. Mr Trump was not pleased. On May 23rd he threatened a tariff of 'at least 25%" on iPhones sold in America but made elsewhere. Even if the courts make Mr Trump's tariff threats toothless, he has plenty of other means at his disposal to make life difficult for companies. America's corporate giants have enjoyed super-sized advantages. They should be prepared for some super-sized headaches, too. To stay on top of the biggest stories in business and technology, sign up to the Bottom Line, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter.
Mint
20 minutes ago
- Mint
Demand for American degrees is sinking
SOME OF AMERICA'S most valuable companies were built by people who came to America as students. Elon Musk was born in South Africa and lived in Canada before studying physics at the University of Pennsylvania. Patrick and John Collison moved from Ireland to attend MIT and Harvard, respectively, before founding Stripe, a digital payments company. All told, more than half of America's billion-dollar start-ups were founded by at least one immigrant; a quarter have a founder who arrived as a student. That pipeline of talent is now under heavy pressure. On May 22nd the Trump administration abruptly stripped Harvard University of its ability to enroll foreign students. A judge blocked the move the following day. But the administration only tightened its squeeze: on May 27th it suspended all new visa interviews for foreign students hoping to study in America. Officials say the pause is temporary. The damage might not be. Attracting global talent has long been one of American academia's greatest strengths. The country draws more international students than any other; over the past two decades the share of foreign students has nearly doubled, reaching almost 6% in 2023 (see chart 1). Most pursue degrees in fields such as science, engineering and maths. Nearly a third come from India; a quarter from China. America's top private universities attract the lion's share of foreign talent (see chart 2). International students make up 14% of the intake at the country's 158 most selective research institutions—more than double the national average. At the dozen 'Ivy-plus" universities—including the Ivy League and peers such as Stanford and MIT—the share reaches 28%. Columbia and Harvard, two institutions that President Donald Trump has recently targeted in his broader assault on elite universities, rely heavily on international enrolment, at 40% and 28% respectively. Public universities, although less exposed in terms of headcount, face other risks. They tend to depend more on foreign tuition, which is often several times higher than the rates charged to local students, and lack the endowments that cushion private institutions. Prospective students are already looking elsewhere. Studyportals, an online directory for degree programmes around the world, says clicks on American courses are now at their lowest level since the covid-19 pandemic (see chart 3). Weekly page views halved between January 5th and the end of April. First-quarter traffic to American undergraduate and master's degrees was down by more than 20% year on year; traffic to PhD courses fell by a third. The biggest drop was from India, where interest fell by 40%. The data suggest that British universities would be the most likely beneficiaries. The financial stakes are high. In the 2023-24 academic year foreign students added $43.8bn to America's economy, according to the National Association of International Educators, a non-profit—mostly in Democratic-leaning areas (see map). They also supported jobs at universities and in other sectors, such as food services and health care. But the heaviest cost to America will be in talent. Around three-quarters of international PhD students say they intend to stay in America after graduating. Blocking the next generation of students may punish the Ivies. Over time, though, it is America's edge in science, business and innovation that will suffer.
Mint
20 minutes ago
- Mint
Tiger Global-backed Progcap expands beyond lending, pilots tech platform for MSMEs
Progcap, a fintech company focused on small businesses, is setting up a new vertical that will digitise their supply chains and offer them on-the-spot credit. It is building a full-stack software-as-a-service (SaaS) platform for brands, distributors and retailers, expanding from pure-play lending into embedded finance as a second revenue source, co-founders Pallavi Shrivastava and Himanshu Chandra told Mint. 'Large corporates have access to platforms like Salesforce but the actual sales process on the ground was still very analog. If you can place the order on the spot and initiate the payment process immediately, it leads to better conversion. Smaller brands and distributors lacked access to such tech," said Chandra. Progcap's new vertical will digitise this supply chain end-to-end and is already live with over 40 companies. Progcap plans to scale up embedded credit on this platform. Embedded credit means getting a loan right where you're buying or selling something, without going to a bank. 'We want to be the operating system for these brand-distributor-retailer ecosystems," said Shrivastava. This comes as Indian businesses such as Zepto's Atom, Big Basket's BB Matrix and InsuranceDekho's Heph launch their SaaS verticals to diversify revenue streams. Currently, Progcap's SaaS vertical offers credit only through Progfin, its non-banking finance company. The company aims to onboard over 200 brands and will open the SaaS platform to other banks and financial institutions by year-end, the founders said. Revenue contribution from the SaaS and embedded credit vertical is expected to be 10-15% over the next two to three years as lending will continue to be the main business. 'It is significantly reducing our customer acquisition cost. If the transaction is initiated on our platform, there's a high likelihood that we'll also be chosen to finance it," said Chandra. He added that it is helping reduce feet-on-the-street sales teams. 'Sales teams of our partner brands essentially became our onboarding channels, and we didn't need to send field teams," said Chandra. Automating processes This comes as companies actively think of further automating their processes and reducing costs to become leaner and turn profitable. Progcap's revenue from operations almost doubled to ₹139 crore in FY24 from ₹71 crore in FY23, while it managed to narrow its loss to ₹46 crore from ₹49 crore. The company is yet to file its FY25 financials. Founded in 2017 by Srivastava and Chandra, the financial service company, last valued at over $600 million, gets 95% of its revenue from lending to micro and small businesses. Within the SaaS platform, direct monetisation will come from subscription-based fees charged to brands and distributors. In addition, the new vertical opens up international expansion possibilities for Progcap. 'Lending is heavily regulated and requires deep market understanding. SaaS, however, is globally scalable," said Chandra. 'Some large brands are already asking us if we can deploy this in Bangladesh or Indonesia. So, once we prove the product in India, we will consider expanding it internationally." Though still at an early revenue stage, the SaaS platform is expected to be spun off as a separate entity company in two to three years as Progcomm, said Shrivastava. Co-founder Chandra leads this vertical fulltime, she added. Funding in the works Progcap is also preparing to raise a fresh round of equity capital to fund growth. The new round will include a secondary component to provide partial exits to early investors, the founders said. 'We haven't hit the market yet," said Shrivastava. 'But we're looking at capital to expand geographically, grow the team, scale the lending book, and double down on SaaS plus embedded credit. A portion may go into secured lending pilots as well." The company has been diversifying revenue outside of unsecured lending, an area that's come under greater scrutiny of the banking regulator. So far, Progcap has raised about $110 million across four funding rounds from marquee investors such as Tiger Global, Sequoia Capital India and Google. 'The valuation will depend on timing and market conditions. We're not chasing vanity milestones," Shrivastava said. Progcap aims to grow its assets under management to ₹3,000 crore by the end of FY26, riding on strong demand for formalised credit in India's underserved micro, small and medium enterprise sector.
