Indian shares inch lower as investors assess Trump's tariff threat
The Nifty 50 (.NSEI), opens new tab fell 0.31% to 24,646.95 points and the BSE Sensex (.BSESN), opens new tab lost 0.36% to 80,737.93 as of 9:38 a.m. IST.
Trump on Monday threatened higher tariffs on imports from India, prompting New Delhi to call the move "unjustified" and pledge to safeguard its economic interests, further straining trade ties between the two nations.
Analysts said the ongoing trade tensions have dampened market sentiment, keeping benchmarks rangebound until there is clarity on U.S. tariffs. Ten of the 16 major sectors declined, while broader small-cap and mid-cap indexes were little changed.
Index heavyweights HDFC Bank (HDBK.NS), opens new tab fell 1.1% while Reliance Industries (RELI.NS), opens new tab and ICICI Bank (ICBK.NS), opens new tab lost about 0.8% each.
"Markets have seen a subdued start as the fresh threat by the U.S. government to substantially raise tariffs on India weighed," said Prashanth Tapse, senior vice president of research at Mehta Equities.
Trump's threat to raise tariffs on India over Russian oil is a major risk, which could hit exports harder than expected, dent fiscal year 2026 growth and earnings, said three analysts.
"Domestic markets will likely continue to see bouts of intraday volatility and nervousness amongst the investors," Tapse said.
Among individual stocks, private lender IndusInd Bank climbed 4.7% after naming industry veteran Rajiv Anand as its chief executive for a three-year term.
Siemens Energy (SIEM.NS), opens new tab rose 2% after posting a rise in the June quarter profit.
Butterfly Gandhimathi Appliances (BUTT.NS), opens new tab jumped 8% after its first-quarter profit more than doubled on a year-on-year basis.
On the flipside, Triveni Turbine <TRVT.NS dropped 7% after reporting a fall in the June quarter profit.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
20 minutes ago
- The Independent
Harvard scientists say research could be set back years after funding freeze
Harvard University professor Alberto Ascherio's research is literally frozen. Collected from millions of U.S. soldiers over two decades using millions of dollars from taxpayers, the epidemiology and nutrition scientist has blood samples stored in liquid nitrogen freezers within the university's T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The samples are key to his award-winning research, which seeks a cure to multiple sclerosis and other neurodegenerative diseases. But for months, Ascherio has been unable to work with the samples because he lost $7 million in federal research funding, a casualty of Harvard's fight with the Trump administration. 'It's like we have been creating a state-of-the-art telescope to explore the universe, and now we don't have money to launch it,' said Ascherio. 'We built everything and now we are ready to use it to make a new discovery that could impact millions of people in the world and then, 'Poof. You're being cut off.'' Researchers laid off and science shelved The loss of an estimated $2.6 billion in federal funding at Harvard has meant that some of the world's most prominent researchers are laying off young researchers. They are shelving years or even decades of research, into everything from opioid addiction to cancer. And despite Harvard's lawsuits against the administration, and settlement talks between the warring parties, researchers are confronting the fact that some of their work may never resume. The funding cuts are part of a monthslong battle that the Trump administration has waged against some the country's top universities including Columbia, Brown and Northwestern. The administration has taken a particularly aggressive stance against Harvard, freezing funding after the country's oldest university rejected a series of government demands issued by a federal antisemitism task force. The government had demanded sweeping changes at Harvard related to campus protests, academics and admissions — meant to address government accusations that the university had become a hotbed of liberalism and tolerated anti-Jewish harassment. Research jeopardized, even if court case prevails Harvard responded by filing a federal lawsuit, accusing the Trump administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university. In the lawsuit, it laid out reforms it had taken to address antisemitism but also vowed not to 'surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.' 'Make no mistake: Harvard rejects antisemitism and discrimination in all of its forms and is actively making structural reforms to eradicate antisemitism on campus," the university said in its legal complaint. 'But rather than engage with Harvard regarding those ongoing efforts, the Government announced a sweeping freeze of funding for medical, scientific, technological, and other research that has nothing at all to do with antisemitism.' The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the demands were sent in April. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel federal contracts for policy reasons. The funding cuts have left Harvard's research community in a state of shock, feeling as if they are being unfairly targeted in a fight has nothing to do with them. Some have been forced to shutter labs or scramble to find non-government funding to replace lost money. In May, Harvard announced that it would put up at least $250 million of its own money to continue research efforts, but university President Alan Garber warned of 'difficult decisions and sacrifices' ahead. Ascherio said the university was able to pull together funding to pay his researchers' salaries until next June. But he's still been left without resources needed to fund critical research tasks, like lab work. Even a year's delay can put his research back five years, he said. Knowledge lost in funding freeze 'It's really devastating,' agreed Rita Hamad, the director of the Social Policies for Health Equity Research Center at Harvard, who had three multiyear grants totaling $10 million canceled by the Trump administration. The grants funded research into the impact of school segregation on heart health, how pandemic-era policies in over 250 counties affected mental health, and the role of neighborhood factors in dementia. At the School of Public Health, where Hamad is based, 190 grants have been terminated, affecting roughly 130 scientists. 'Just thinking about all the knowledge that's not going to be gained or that is going to be actively lost," Hamad said. She expects significant layoffs on her team if the funding freeze continues for a few more months. "It's all just a mixture of frustration and anger and sadness all the time, every day." John Quackenbush, a professor of computational biology and bioinformatics at the School of Public Health, has spent the past few months enduring cuts on multiple fronts. In April, a multimillion dollar grant was not renewed, jeopardizing a study into the role sex plays in disease. In May, he lost about $1.2 million in federal funding for in the coming year due to the Harvard freeze. Four departmental grants worth $24 million that funded training of doctoral students also were cancelled as part of the fight with the Trump administration, Quackenbush said. 'I'm in a position where I have to really think about, 'Can I revive this research?'' he said. 'Can I restart these programs even if Harvard and the Trump administration reached some kind of settlement? If they do reach a settlement, how quickly can the funding be turned back on? Can it be turned back on?' The researchers all agreed that the funding cuts have little or nothing to do with the university's fight against antisemitism. Some, however, argue changes at Harvard were long overdue and pressure from the Trump administration was necessary. Bertha Madras, a Harvard psychobiologist who lost funding to create a free, parent-focused training to prevent teen opioid overdose and drug use, said she's happy to see the culling of what she called 'politically motivated social science studies.' White House pressure a good thing? Madras said pressure from the White House has catalyzed much-needed reform at the university, where several programs of study have 'really gone off the wall in terms of being shaped by orthodoxy that is not representative of the country as a whole.' But Madras, who served on the President's Commission on Opioids during Trump's first term, said holding scientists' research funding hostage as a bargaining chip doesn't make sense. 'I don't know if reform would have happened without the president of the United States pointing the bony finger at Harvard," she said. 'But sacrificing science is problematic, and it's very worrisome because it is one of the major pillars of strength of the country.' Quackenbush and other Harvard researchers argue the cuts are part of a larger attack on science by the Trump administration that puts the country's reputation as the global research leader at risk. Support for students and post-doctoral fellows has been slashed, visas for foreign scholars threatened, and new guidelines and funding cuts at the NIH will make it much more difficult to get federal funding in the future, they said. It also will be difficult to replace federal funding with money from the private sector. 'We're all sort of moving toward this future in which this 80-year partnership between the government and the universities is going to be jeopardized,' Quackenbush said. 'We're going to face real challenges in continuing to lead the world in scientific excellence.'
Daily Mail
21 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump's final tariffs doomsday is HERE as Americans brace for price hikes on favorite everyday items
President Donald Trump 's tariffs on over 60 countries go into effect at midnight after 18 weeks of tough negotiations following his dramatic 'Liberation Day' tariff threats in April. Last week, he gave a last-minute extension to some countries that were still working on a deal with the United States. But now doomsday is finally here. Tariffs on over 60 countries range up to as high as 50 percent - for those considered to have 'unfair' trading policies with the U.S. Trump recently slapped a 50 percent tariff on most Brazilian goods after Brazil 's president continues to defy the president's demands to end a 'witch hunt' prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro. The executive order, however, exempted some Brazil exports from the tariffs such as aircraft, pig iron, precious metals, wood pulp, energy, orange juice, and fertilizer. Major Brazilian exports such as beef and coffee were not exempted. One major country facing steep tariffs is India, after the president on Wednesday implemented an additional 25 percent tariff that will go into effect on August 27, after the United States already set a 25 percent tariff on the country on August 1. The president said the decision to level additional tariffs was due to India purchasing Russian oil, which he told CNBC on Tuesday was 'fueling the war machine' as Russian President Vladimir Putin continues his war in Ukraine. Mexico was granted a 90-day extension as officials continue to negotiate. But the president imposed a 35 percent tariff on Canada. Imported goods from Canada that fall under the USMCA trade deal, however, are not affected by the additional tariffs. Other countries that have yet to make a trade deal with the United States include Switzerland, South Africa, Brunei, Cambodia, Bolivia, Ecuador, Iceland, Nigeria, Sri Lanka, New Zealand, Turkey, Norway, Iran, North Korea, and Russia. The United States and China agreed to extend trade talks to August 12, following successful negotiations in July with American and Chinese officials in Stockholm. Ahead of sharp deadlines in August, Trump made major strides with his negotiations in late July after announcing trade deals with the United Kingdom and the European Union. Trump boasted of agreements with European officials that secured billions of dollars of investments into the United States. A $550 billion trade deal with Japan was also set earlier in July. The additional tariff hikes on some countries threaten to raise the cost of everyday goods such as food and produce, clothing, automobiles and parts, steel, copper, aluminum, and electronics. Many American importers are eating the costs of tariffs rather than pass them on to the consumer, but warn that they will not be able to continue long term. The United States has collected $152 billion in gross revenue for the calendar year so far as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has predicted that tariff revenue could generate as much as $300 billion by the year's end. President Trump defended his tariffs in an interview on CNBC on Tuesday, declaring that people in the United States 'love the tariffs.' 'They love their country, and they love that foreign countries aren't ripping us off. For years, they ripped us off. Friend and foe,' he said. 'And the friend was worse.'
Reuters
21 minutes ago
- Reuters
Indian auto dealers hopeful ahead of festive season, US tariff fears persist
Aug 7 (Reuters) - India's upcoming festive season is expected to lift near-term sentiment among auto dealers, but U.S. tariffs could dent consumer confidence, prompting higher household savings and weighing on discretionary spending, including vehicles, the Federation of Automobile Dealers Association (FADA) said on Thursday. Vehicle dealers expect major festivals, including Rakhi, Janmashtami, Independence Day and Ganesh Chaturthi, along with targeted promotional schemes and healthy stock levels to drive sales. However, the anticipated wealth erosion from fresh tariffs by the U.S. could erode consumer confidence, trigger a precautionary rise in household savings and exert pressure on discretionary spending, including on vehicles, FADA said.
