logo
Breakingviews - US tariff keeps India in China plus one, for now

Breakingviews - US tariff keeps India in China plus one, for now

Reuters2 days ago
HONG KONG, July 31 (Reuters Breakingviews) - Donald Trump's shake-up of the world's China-plus-one trade is not creating any decisive winners or losers. The U.S. president's decision on Wednesday to impose a 25% tariff on imports from India is a blow to the South Asian country, but the rate, if it sticks, could still allow it to remain a desirable manufacturing destination for global companies like Apple (AAPL.O), opens new tab.
Unlike other world leaders, Narendra Modi did not secure a reduction on Trump's threatened tariff rate for his country, which sent $87 billion of goods to the U.S. last year. The prime minister's apparent refusal to open up India's agriculture and dairy markets to U.S. imports may be why. Doing so would have risked another showdown with millions of poor and politically powerful farmers.
Whether India wins or loses, though, will depend on other factors. The $4 trillion economy has sought to court companies that want to diversify their supply chains away from the People's Republic. Here India's rivals include Bangladesh, Vietnam and the rest of Southeast Asia, and to some extent, Mexico. These competitors currently face U.S. import tariffs ranging from 19% to 40%.
On the face of it, India will now be less competitive as a manufacturing destination than Vietnam, which Trump slapped with a 20% tariff. India's weighted average tariff rate would be five to 10 percentage points higher than Asian peers, Citi economists estimate.
Its status as a top buyer of Russian energy and weapons is also a negative, with Trump now threatening an unspecified penalty for participating in such trade. Russia accounts for up to 40% of India's crude oil imports and offers it an implied discount of up to $4 per barrel. Giving up that benefit would be economically and politically disadvantageous for India.
But Southeast Asia's deep links to Chinese exporters and investment mean the bloc faces stiff penalty tariffs, too, if the U.S. president follows through on his threat to crack down on tariff evasion, or transshipment, by Chinese exporters.
In this scenario, Trump would double the levy for goods they send through Vietnam, for example. This risk will only increase with any deterioration of the Sino-American relationship. Some companies may ignore the tariff differential and stick with India because it offers access to a large domestic consumer market, and it is less exposed to China.
Whether Trump cares more about brokering peace in Ukraine or containing the world's second-largest economy is anyone's guess. The upshot is that he has negotiated or unilaterally declared trade pacts that set diverging tariffs on all the major China-plus-one countries. Ideally, that ought to have provided some clarity for companies currently stuck in limbo to resume capital expenditure. But the U.S. president's outstanding promises to penalise transshipment and those who deal with Russia will leave global companies in no better position to decide how, if at all, to reconfigure their supply chains.
Follow Una Galani on Linkedin, opens new tab and X, opens new tab.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Barclays follows HSBC out of the Net Zero Banking Alliance
Barclays follows HSBC out of the Net Zero Banking Alliance

Finextra

time17 minutes ago

  • Finextra

Barclays follows HSBC out of the Net Zero Banking Alliance

Barclays has followed HSBC in withdrawing from the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA), claiming that the departure of a host of other global lenders means the organisation "no longer has the membership to support our transition". 1 Founded in 2021, the UN-convened NZBA requires members to commit to "transition the operational and attributable greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from their lending and investment portfolios to align with pathways to net-zero by 2050 or sooner". At its peak it had around 150 members, including most of the world's largest banks. However, that number has dwindled in the last few months. At the beginning of 2025, ahead of Donald Trump's return to the White House, a host of US banks, including JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citi, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo, pulled out of the global climate-focused alliance. The American banks quit amid attacks from Republicans on "woke" capitalism, with the House Judiciary Committee, led by Republican Jim Jordan, claiming that financial environmental alliances have created "a climate cartel". Now, UK-headquartered HSBC and Barclays have joined their US counterparts. Barclays says it is committed to its "ambition" to be a net zero bank by 2050. Says a statement: "Our targets to mobilise $1 trillion of Sustainable and Transition Financing and for financed emissions remain unchanged. We continue to work with our clients on their transition, finance the transition and scale climate tech, while helping to ensure energy security for our customers and clients." Earlier this week, the CEO of Standard Chartered, Bill Winters, hit out at banks that have rowed back on their climate commitments. 'People that said a lot of stuff, but [when] it was fashionable to say it, [and] who are saying either nothing or the opposite now: shame on them,' said Winters, according to the Guardian.

Donald Trump's latest Liberation Day means another dark day for America
Donald Trump's latest Liberation Day means another dark day for America

The Independent

time17 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Donald Trump's latest Liberation Day means another dark day for America

Precisely what poor, benighted Syria and prosperous, neutral Switzerland have done to deserve US tariffs of 41 per cent and 39 per cent respectively is hard to discern. Neither is the kind of industrial superpower that represents a threat to America's economic hegemony, and both would, in their different ways, prefer to stay on reasonably good terms with the Trump White House. It is, sadly, easier to see why Canada got whacked with a 35 per cent levy on some of its exports – and Donald Trump's tariff tactics do have a hint of the mob about them. Mr Trump suggested that Canada's decision to recognise the state of Palestine as a sovereign nation would make it harder to achieve a trade deal, and he also mentioned the scourge of fentanyl. But then again, Mexico, which has also recognised Palestine and is by far the more important source of the drug, has been granted a 90-day tariff reprieve. Ever since the opening salvo in the Trump tariff war on 2 April – so-called Liberation Day – the shifting schedules and random pauses have lacked both rhyme and reason. Even at the time, their supposed 'reciprocity' was ridiculed. They have generated huge uncertainty, and, for a time, did so much damage to the dollar and US Treasuries on the capital markets that even Mr Trump had to make a tactical retreat. In fact, the US president's observed tendency to cave in whenever a trading 'partner' showed any sign of resistance led to the unwelcome 'Taco' sobriquet – 'Trump Always Chickens Out'. Some countries, such as the UK, Japan and the EU member states, have breathed a sigh of relief that they have escaped the worst, while others – often impoverished ones with no diplomatic leverage, such as Bangladesh and Lesotho – will find it difficult to cope with tariffs that are now considered moderate, but would have seemed shocking even a few years ago. Yet the game, even now, is not over. China – the second-largest economy in the world, and America's most formidable rival – has been left out of this supposedly final list of tariff increases. The trade talks between the two economic giants in Stockholm are dragging on, the prohibitive mutual tariffs having been abandoned, and they may well be extended past the next deadline of 12 August. President Trump met his match in Xi Jinping, and will not be imposing any further punitive trade sanctions on China for fear of another tit-for-tat escalation. Thus far, the markets have received the latest news of tariffs with some equanimity, but a collapse in trade between the world's two greatest economies would generate the kind of turmoil Mr Trump doesn't need right now. Even assuming that the eventual trade truce with China avoids disaster, these US tariffs are, in broad terms, the highest since 1934 and the era of the notorious Smoot-Hawley Act, which helped to strangle world trade and exacerbated the Great Depression. The Trump tariffs are no less damaging to world trade, and thus to economic growth, including that of the United States. But these restrictions on trade are what Mr Trump's Maga 'base' voted for, the folk memory of the previous disastrous experiment with tariffs having faded. The president's winning slogan was 'America First', epitomising a zero-sum, nationalistic view of the world, and unfortunately, he has proved as good as his word on inauguration day: 'Instead of taxing our citizens to enrich other countries, we will tariff and tax foreign countries to enrich our citizens.' Words that were both misguided and economically illiterate, naturally – but a promise kept. Many of the worst fears of America's friends and allies are coming true in these early months of Mr Trump's second term. With far more preparation than took place prior to his first term (which followed an election that, reputedly, he never expected to win), the US president has pressed on with his protectionist, isolationist, natalist agenda with speed and determination, surrounded by mostly underqualified, grotesquely sycophantic cronies. The judiciary is increasingly cowed, and Congress is listless in defending the constitution. The tendency to Caesarism is apparent in everything from the theatrical executive orders to the grandiose golden remodelling of the White House, and the contempt for the chair of the US Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell – a 'moron', apparently. Mr Trump thinks he can, with a stroke of a Sharpie, abolish the birthright to citizenship enshrined in the 14th amendment, passed in 1868. His conception of 'America First' is more America Alone, yet everything he does weakens American power and prosperity. It is an inward-looking, selfish, exclusionary approach. Undoubtedly it enjoys a political constituency, but ultimately it will prove self-defeating.

Corporation behind funds for PBS and NPR says it's ending operations after Trump cuts
Corporation behind funds for PBS and NPR says it's ending operations after Trump cuts

The Independent

time17 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Corporation behind funds for PBS and NPR says it's ending operations after Trump cuts

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting says it will wind down its operations after the Trump administration and Congress slashed its funding. The organization funds PBS and NPR, as well as more than 1,500 local TV and radio stations. 'Despite the extraordinary efforts of millions of Americans who called, wrote, and petitioned Congress to preserve federal funding for CPB, we now face the difficult reality of closing our operations,' Corporation for Public Broadcasting President and CEO Patricia Harrison said in a statement.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store