Donald Trump's new India tariffs could hit American household kitchen cabinet. Here's how, why?
FAQs
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
A dash of this and a pinch of that could cost more in American kitchens with new tariffs on goods from India. Many spices used by home chefs, restaurants and large manufacturers are imported from India, and the 50 per cent tariffs on the country imposed by President Donald Trump could drive costs higher, a trade association warned Wednesday.Last year, the United States imported more than $410 million in spices from India, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.Several essential spices, including cinnamon, pepper, nutmeg and cloves, require tropical climates and, therefore, cannot be grown in the United States on a large enough scale to meet demand, Laura Shumow, executive director of the American Spice Trade Association, said in a statement.The spice industry is one of many sectors that are tallying up the potential costs of Trump's trade wars with various partners, warning that the fallout could hit either profits at American companies or consumers' wallets.In late June, executives at McCormick warned that Trump's tariff policy could cost the spice company $90 million a year."Tariffs on these products -- including additional new tariffs announced this week -- do not incentivize U.S. production or create American jobs," Shumow said. "Instead, they place an undue financial burden on U.S. food manufacturers, restaurants and, ultimately, American consumers."The spice association noted that in the framework of a trade deal with Indonesia, the Trump administration had created the potential for exemptions or reductions in tariffs for commodities not naturally available or produced in the United States. The trade group said it hoped a similar framework could be put into agreements with other nations."We firmly believe that smart, targeted trade policies can support the U.S. spice industry and other American businesses," Shumow said, "while helping to keep grocery costs down for families."A1. President Donald Trump has imposed 50 per cent tariffs on India.A2. Last year, the United States imported more than $410 million in spices from India, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
5 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump tariff a low point in India-US ties, but Delhi remains Washington's best bet
Targeting India with a 50 per cent tariff will only push it closer to Russia and China—a move counterproductive to the US' interests read more What started out as reciprocal tariff negotiations by Trump 2.0 has now snowballed into an almost isolated attack by the US leadership on India. India was one of the first countries that Trump 2.0 got into trade negotiations with, signifying the deep ties and strategic potential of the US-India relationship. Prime Minister Narendra Modi was one of the first world leaders to have an audience with President Donald Trump, only a few weeks into the latter taking office. It is pertinent to evaluate circumstances which catalysed the deterioration of this relationship. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Soon after the trade negotiations between India and the US began, India avenged the attack by Pakistani terrorists on Hindu tourists in Kashmir by striking Pakistan's terror camps. The skirmish further escalated as India struck Pakistani airbases as Pakistan attempted to send armed drones and loaded missiles towards Indian cities. The Indian strikes halted when Pakistan requested a ceasefire from India in direct, bilateral communication with the Indian military. Had Pakistan not called India directly, in the absence of a bilateral request, India would have continued its mission to wipe out all terror infrastructure in Pakistan. This is because of India's unflinching policy of not accepting international mediation on any Kashmir-related issue in particular or India-Pakistan matters in general. India burnt its hands in the early days of its birth when the first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, took the Kashmir issue to the United Nations on the insistence of the outgoing British government. India witnessed how the international frameworks and multilateral bodies were manipulated by Pakistan and other vested powers to disturb India's internal peace and security. Thus, at the first chance it got after the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War with Pakistan, the then Indian prime minister, Indira Gandhi, along with the Pakistani leadership, negotiated and signed the Simla Agreement of 1972, confirming that any issues between India and Pakistan would henceforth only be solved bilaterally. This agreement also confirmed all previous international interventions as closed, established an agreed-upon Line of Control (LoC) and stipulated that all future solutions would only be discussed and sought after in bilateral negotiations. While Pakistan repeatedly violated this agreement, with no real success, once again in 1999 the Lahore Declaration between the leadership of both countries enforced the understanding of solving conflicts only through bilateral mechanisms. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In this context, when President Trump made repeated claims about having successfully mediated the India-Pakistan conflict, it put India in a difficult spot. While Prime Minister Modi and President Trump shared a warm camaraderie since Trump 1.0, India simply could not accept the US' mediation in its most sensitive Kashmir issue. As India began to clarify its stance that there was no US mediation, Pakistan used its international lobbies to use this opportunity to create distrust amongst the US leadership towards India. India's reluctance to accept mediation was not personal, but its long-standing national policy. Pakistan offered its strategic assets to the United States; its field marshal, Asim Munir, dined with Trump, particularly when the US was in a direct conflict with Iran. And Islamabad, in a few weeks, also closed the trade deal with Washington. With new negative emotions created within the US' leadership circles compounded with the roadblocks that the US and India teams negotiating the trade deals were hitting, the relationship between the two countries became mired in complexities. A 50 per cent tariff announcement by Trump and his recent statements on the Indian economy being 'dead' hit a new low point in the US-India relationship, which has taken decades of work on both sides to build. India and the US are strategic partners — both need each other for several security, trade and other important objectives. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India is a reliable partner for the US in the Asia-Pacific, and India has increasingly looked to the US as a strong ally. Targeting India, which has cautiously increased its business with the US gradually, with a 50 per cent tariff will only push it closer to Russia and China—a move counterproductive to the US' interests. If the US wants to maintain its foothold in the Global East, India is its best bet because only India has the size and consumption power to purchase and use the US' goods and services in significant volumes. While Nato and the EU, as well as the US, continue to consume Russian goods and energy, the Trump administration's punitive tariffs on India don't seem fair. They certainly seem biased and almost personal. The leadership of both countries needs to consider the impact of interpersonal emotions driven by lobbies surrounding them and act in a responsible manner in the interest of global stability and growth. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The author is the director and founder of the VishwaMitra Research Foundation – a geo-economic, foreign policy think tank in Mumbai. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
Time of India
5 minutes ago
- Time of India
ET Leadership Dialogues: The evolution of AI adoption in India
Tune in as industry leaders decode how Indian enterprises can go beyond cost optimisation to tap into AI's transformative potential. As Neural Language Models (NLMs) gear up for mainstream use in 2025, hear how organisations can drive innovation, reimagine operations, and build new-age business models. @deloitteindia @economictimes Show more Show less
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
5 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump's Ukraine truce deadline for Russia ends today amid US growing tiff with oil buyers
US President Donald Trump's deadline to Russian leader Vladimir Putin to agree to a ceasefire will end today. If no deal is reached, then Trump will be under increased pressure to take punitive steps. read more US President Donald Trump's deadline for Russian leader Vladimir Putin to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine will end on Friday. But he is busy in waging tariff wars on India and other countries than broker peace in the war in Ukraine. Trump on Wednesday raised tariffs on India by slapping 25 per cent additional tariffs for the purchase of Russian oil on top of 25 per cent tariff originally imposed on July 31 — taking the overall tariffs to 50 per cent. His stated objective for the additional penalty was to stop funds to the Russian war machine. But he has not taken any punitive decision on China, which buys more Russian oil than India. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD With such a piecemeal approach, hopes are not high that Trump will impose any real costs on Putin. There are already signs that he is about to endorse the Russian leader's position in the war — as he has done for the past six months. Contradicting the previous stance that the proposed meeting between with Putin regarding the war in Ukraine will not take place without Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's presence, Trump changed course on Thursday and said he was open to meeting Putin directly as well. A Putin-Trump meeting without Zelenskyy will be a victory for Russia. Putin does not want to sit across the table from Zelenskyy as that would legitimise him as the head of state that he cannot afford — he rejects Ukraine as a nation and Zelenskyy as its leader. Will Putin impose sanctions and tariffs on Russia? For months, Ukraine's supporters —including some in Trump's Republican Party— have urged the US president to impose sanctions and tariffs on Russia for the failure to make peace. If no ceasefire is announced today, such calls are set to increase. But Trump is unlikely to budge. So far, Trump has not indicated he is interested in sanctions or tariffs on Russia. In the name of Russia, Trump has sought to punish India. But he has not punished other parties that buy Russian oil and gas, such as China, Turkey, and the European Union (EU), who buy more Russian energy than India. Their purchases of Russian energy are so high that EU members last year paid Russia more for energy imports than they gave to Ukraine in aid. As Putin refuses to slap sanctions or tariffs on Putin and does not impose any real costs, it remains to be seen if the passing of Friday deadline would mean anything. It would not be the first time, however, that Putin would have defied Trump. In fact, Putin has defied Trump at every step: Putin has rejected all three Trump-endorsed ceasefire proposals, he has rejected Trump's public pleas to not attack civilians, and he has rejected a comprehensive peace proposal that included most of the Russian demands. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
