How will Trump's tariffs impact India?
What did Mr. Trump announce?
Taking to social media, Mr. Trump cited India's tariff and non-tariff measures on trade, and its dealing with Russia on energy and military equipment, as the main reasons behind imposing the 25% tariffs and the penalty. There is no clarity yet on what the penalty will look like, but Mr. Trump has in the past threatened a 10% additional tariff on BRICS countries. If this comes to pass, then effective tariffs on Indian imports would be 35%. There is also a legislation in the U.S. in the process of being passed that could see an additional 500% tariff on India, China, and Brazil for their dealings with Russia.
What does it mean for India?
Tariffs are paid by importers. Therefore, tariffs on Indian imports would be paid by those in the U.S. that are importing Indian goods. That is, Indian goods will become more expensive for them. Therein lies the true problem for India.
On a macro level, the tariffs and the impact they will have on Indian exports are expected to only lower India's GDP by 0.2%, according to research by the Bank of Baroda. So, if India's growth forecast had been 6.6%, then these tariffs — if they are imposed — could lower growth to 6.4%. However, the issue arises in individual sectors. According to the Bank of Baroda, sectors such as garments, precious stones, auto parts, leather products, and electronics (although their inclusion is uncertain) could face the pinch and would have to rework their strategies. 'The issue really is that some of the competing nations like Vietnam (20%), Korea (15%) and Indonesia (19%) have lower tariffs compared with India,' the Bank of Baroda added in its research note.
How did things come to such a pass?
While most trade deals are negotiated over years, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Mr. Trump in February 2025 announced that they would conclude the first tranche of a trade deal by fall. To put this in perspective, the recently-signed Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement between India and the U.K. took about three years to negotiate.
What made the announcement by Mr. Modi and Mr. Trump notable was that it came before the latter's big moves on reciprocal tariffs, which is what pushed other countries to start negotiating with the U.S. The announcement was thus a strong and positive commitment towards strengthening ties between the two countries. But then, on April 2, Mr. Trump announced his Liberation Day reciprocal tariffs. These included a 10% baseline tariff for all countries, and additional tariffs on a country-by-country case. For India, this total was 26%. However, just a week later, Mr. Trump announced a 90-day pause on these tariffs so that bilateral deals could be struck so as to reduce the U.S.'s trade deficit with most of its trading partners. The 90-day pause was to end in July, but Mr. Trump extended it to August 1.
What are the points of friction?
It's hard to pinpoint any single recent development that has soured relations, but there have been several points of friction between the two countries in the past few months. The matter of India's tariffs and non-tariff barriers has been something Mr. Trump has been highlighting since his first term as President. It was no surprise that he would take up the issue in his second term.
Soured relations: The Hindu editorial on Trump's 25% tariff, 'penalty'
Mr. Trump has brought up India's engagement with Russia, too, saying countries like India are partly financing Russia's war with Ukraine. India, however, has reiterated that it will secure its national and energy security, and if that means buying cheap Russian oil, then that is what it would do. Russia currently accounts for about 35-40% of India's oil imports, making it a significant partner. In addition, India has remained adamant about keeping core parts of its agriculture and dairy sectors out of trade deals, including with the U.S. This has upset negotiators on the U.S. side, but it is a 'red line' India will not cross. Opening up these sectors would expose India's relatively low-productivity farmers to global competition, which will likely have devastating impacts on their livelihoods.
Then, there is the fact that Mr. Trump has repeatedly stated that it was him, and his trade talks, that encouraged India and Pakistan to agree to a ceasefire following the launch of Operation Sindoor by India. The fact that the Indian government has refuted it has only further angered Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump's claims have irked the Indian establishment as well, since it has provided the Opposition a means to attack the government.
India has informed the World Trade Organization that it reserves the right to impose additional tariffs on imports from the U.S. to retaliate against its higher tariffs on items like steel, aluminium, and automobiles.
Taking these things together, Mr. Trump's tariff announcement comes as a confirmation that at least one, if not all of these factors, worked toward souring relations.
Will India continue paying these tariffs?
Although there has been a lot of talk about a 'mini-deal' between India and the U.S. to walk back the reciprocal tariffs, Indian officials have been cagey about the date for such a deal. The tariff announcement by Mr. Trump confirms that such a deal is not coming.
However, the two sides have been remarkably consistent about their commitment of having some sort of trade deal finalised by the fall 2025 deadline. So far, negotiators from the two sides have met in New Delhi and Washington five times, including the first meeting in March where the Terms of Reference for the negotiations were finalised. The team from the U.S. will visit India in late August to take forward the talks. Things have, however, become trickier for Indian negotiators because Mr. Trump has now directly linked India's dealings with Russia to India's trade relationship with the U.S.
The tariffs will come into effect soon. According to an Executive Order dated July 31, Mr. Trump said that his duties on India and other countries would come into effect '7 days after the date of this order'.
What about deals with other countries?
Over the last month, Mr. Trump has concluded deals with the U.K., Indonesia, the Philippines, Japan, the EU, and South Korea. The deal with the U.K. does not specify a general tariff level, but it will see British car exports to the U.S. attract a 10% tariff, down from the earlier 27.5% and a removal of tariffs on aerospace exports to the U.S. Japan negotiated lower tariffs of 15% for its exports to the U.S., the same as the EU.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
20 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
A 1988 jet crash, 133 deaths and an unending struggle
Aam Aadmi Party MP Ashok Kumar Mittal condemned President Trump's announcement of a 25% tariff on Indian products, labeling it "illogical" and highlighting US double standards in trade. He defended India's oil purchases from Russia and expressed confidence in the Indian industry's resilience, suggesting potential growth opportunities despite the tariffs. India's Ministry of External Affairs criticized the move as "unfair" and vowed to protect national interests.
Hindustan Times
20 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
'Who's he to stop us?' AAP MP on Trump tariffs, penalty for buying oil from Russia
Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MP Ashok Kumar Mittal on Wednesday strongly criticised United States President Donald Trump's announcement of a 25% additional tariff on Indian products, calling it "illogical" and accusing Washington, DC, of applying "double standards" in its trade policies. Aam Aadmi Party MP Ashok Kumar Mittal also suggested that the current situation could also open up new avenues for the Indian economy.(File/Sansad TV) Mittal defended India's purchase of oil from Russia and questioned the legitimacy of US criticism. Mittal said, "Yes, we are purchasing oil from Russia. Who is he to stop us? He himself is purchasing uranium, certain critical metals from Russia. His allies, European countries, are purchasing oil from Russia. China is purchasing oil from can't have double standards, double policies. He will have to withdraw his illogical orders, illogical tariffs." Mittal asserted that Indian industry is "competent enough" and will find "alternative ways to sell the products." He said, "The US has imposed a 50% total tariff on Indian products. Of course, this will hurt the Indian industry in the short term. But our entrepreneurs, our businessmen, our industrialists are competent enough, strong enough. They will find alternative ways to sell the products." He suggested that the current situation could also open up new avenues for the Indian economy. "We may increase consumption in India, we are 1.4 billion populations and we can find some more markets. Rather, it may give us opportunities. Indian economy is growing 6 to 8 % per year, and its effect on GDP will be maximum 0.2, meaning nothing as per our growth, and we will easily absorb this deficiency in our growth and find other ways." His reaction comes after, US President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed an Executive Order imposing an additional 25 per cent tariff on imports from India. According to the order issued by the White House, Trump cited matters of national security and foreign policy concerns, as well as other relevant trade laws, for the increase, claiming that India's imports of Russian oil, directly or indirectly, pose an "unusual and extraordinary threat" to the United the order, the total tariff on Indian goods will be 50 per cent. While the initial duty becomes effective on August 7, the additional levy will come into effect after 21 days and will be imposed on all Indian goods imported into the US, except for goods already in transit or those meeting specific exemptions. The Executive Order also allows for modifications based on changing circumstances, including potential retaliation by other countries or steps taken by Russia or India to address the national emergency." Accordingly, and as consistent with applicable law, articles of India imported into the customs territory of the United States shall be subject to an additional ad valorem rate of duty of 25 per cent," the order stated. India has termed the United States' move to impose additional tariffs on India over its oil imports from Russia as "unfair, unjustified and unreasonable." Ministry of External Affairs said New Delhi will take "all actions necessary to protect its national interests." In an official statement, the MEA said, "The United States has in recent days targeted India's oil imports from Russia. We have already made clear our position on these issues, including the fact that our imports are based on market factors and done with the overall objective of ensuring the energy security of 1.4 billion people of India." "It is therefore extremely unfortunate that the US should choose to impose additional tariffs on India for actions that several other countries are also taking in their own national interest," the statement added. We reiterate that these actions are unfair, unjustified and unreasonable. India will take all actions necessary to protect its national interests," the MEA stressed. (ANI)
The Hindu
20 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Germany, Ukraine's second biggest backer, is ready to play a larger role
Since June, the intensity of Russian attacks on Ukrainian territories has increased significantly, leading to a large number of civilian deaths. June 2025 recorded the highest civilian casualty since the start of the Russia-Ukraine war in February 2022. As per numbers by the UN Human Rights Mission in Ukraine, 232 people were killed and 1,343 were wounded. On 30 June, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul travelled to Kyiv to reiterate Germany's military, financial, economic and humanitarian support for Ukraine. 'In Ukraine, it will be decided whether our Europe remains a place where freedom and human dignity hold sway, or becomes a continent on which violence can be used to redraw borders,' said Mr. Wadephul. This follows visits by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to Berlin in May and German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius to Kyiv in mid-June. Mr. Pistorius announced a total German military aid worth €9 billion for 2025. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in the Bundestag on July 9 said that all diplomatic means to resolve the Russia-Ukraine war had been exhausted. 'When a criminal regime openly questions another country's right to exist with military force and sets out to destroy the political order of freedom on the entire European continent, the federal government I lead will do everything in its power to prevent this,' said Mr. Merz. Patrick Keller, the head of the Centre for Security and Defence at the Berlin-based German Society for Foreign Relations (DGAP), notes that Germany has been at the forefront in supporting Ukraine since 2022. However, he acknowledges that in the light of the increased Russian aggression, these efforts look insufficient. 'We have to continue to increase our efforts. With the change in the German government, there has been a new focus on defence and security policy overall. It is understood that the Ukrainian effort also serves as a deterrent for Europe in the era of an aggressive Russia,' said Mr. Keller. Niklas Balbon, Research Fellow with the Global Public Policy Institute (GPPi), a Berlin-based think tank, noted that while Germany has promised financial aid to Ukraine, the challenge is how soon Ukraine's weapons production can be scaled up. Trump's flip-flop Ever since U.S. President Donald Trump's infamous White House meeting with Ukraine's Mr. Zelenskyy in February this year, Europe has been on tenterhooks. The U.S. remains one of the largest members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), but Mr. Trump has made it clear that European countries must increase their defence spending. Mr. Trump's views on Russian President Vladimir Putin have also gone from being positive following some 'respectful conversations' earlier this year to outright criticism in the last month. Mr. Keller notes that one cannot change the fundamental attitude of the current state of affairs with the U.S. government, but can make the most of it. 'In the current situation, Mr. Trump is getting increasingly critical of Mr. Putin and is willing to support Ukraine in innovative ways. Europe has to jump at this opportunity. We really need to get going with increased capacity in Ukraine and helping them to produce weapons on their own. The German defence industry is more than ready to build in Ukraine and help them scale and build weapons-making factories,' said Mr. Keller. Ukraine does produce close to 40% of the weapons it uses in the war at home, as of mid-2025, and U.S. support covers 30%. There are plans to increase domestic weapons production to 50% within the next six months, as per Mr. Zelenskyy. This is where Germany is expected to help out. In 2024, drones manufactured in Ukraine made up 96% of all unmanned aerial vehicles used in combat. Ukraine is approaching a capacity to make 4 million drones annually by this year. Mr. Balbon notes that even though Europe would like to be more independent from the U.S., it does not have the capabilities to be more autonomous or produce the weapons needed in Ukraine quickly enough. 'European decision makers are thinking about how to game the U.S. administration to support Ukraine, while also allowing Mr. Trump to sell it as a victory to his voter base. The NATO countries buying weapons from the U.S. to donate to Ukraine is one such way,' said Mr. Balbon. As per NATO General Secretary Mark Rutte, Germany, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Britain, the Netherlands, and Canada are ready to buy weapons from the U.S. to be donated to Ukraine. The weapons include Patriot missile batteries and air defence systems, F-16 fighter jets, Howitzer artillery systems and more. Patriot is the world's most advanced air-defence system. In May, Mr. Merz had said that there would be no range restrictions for weapons that would be delivered to Ukraine. However, Defence Minister Mr. Pistorius has said that Germany won't be providing Kyiv with the long-range Taurus cruise missiles that can strike targets that are 500 km away. 'If one looks at the Patriot systems, the U.S. has 60 ready, whereas Germany just has 4-6. It is a question of scale and timing, as it takes months to build them. If Ukraine needs these systems now, the most effective way is to buy them from the U.S.,' said Mr. Keller, noting that despite all the challenges posed by the Trump government, Europe cannot give the impression that it wants the U.S. out – it's in no one's interest. Modern warfare While Germany has announced billions in aid for helping Ukraine build weapons, experts say that investments have to be made in the right capabilities, keeping in mind the nature of future warfare. 'The warfare of the future will rely a lot on unmanned drones, AI technology, space-based systems and so on, so you would need a smart combination of various factors to succeed,' said Mr. Keller, noting that a large part of defence spending has to go to nimble industries and startups over large defence contractors. German defence startups such as Helsing, Quantum Systems, Stark Defense have been at the forefront of providing drones to Ukraine alongside large defence players like Rheinmetall. 'It is important to keep in mind that the biggest innovator and driver in drone warfare is Ukraine. NATO countries are learning from this and playing catch-up. German military is also learning how Ukrainians are using drones, so there is a flow of knowledge in both directions,' said Mr. Balbon. Political challenges Even before the new government led by the coalition between the conservative Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) and centre-left Social Democrats (SPD) assumed office, Germany had agreed on a €500 billion budget to be spent on civilian, climate, economic and defence needs. This special budget is over and above Germany's annual budget. For sectors like infrastructure and defence spending, Germany also exempted the conservative 'debt brake' that only allowed it to borrow 0.35% of its GDP. 'The lifting of the debt brake allows the German government to balance defence spending with other forms of spending when it comes to lifting the economy, improving domestic infrastructure and so on. In the ruling coalition, the CDU also wants to reform social spending and lower expenditure, as they argue that the German government is spending too much money. For Social Democrats, that's not in their interest. This is the key tension,' said Mr. Balbon. 'The increased defence spending isn't just key for Germany, but also largely for Europe, as it is a deterrence against Russia in the mid-term. The capabilities that are being acquired with this money, in theory and practice, can be sent to Ukraine as well,' said Mr. Keller. But it does come with some political backlash from the far right and far left parties within Germany. According to Mr. Balbon, the far left parties are opposed to military spending in general, as they don't want Germany to invest in armed forces. 'The far right (namely, Alternative for Germany or AfD) are more interested and aligned ideologically with Russia. But there's a paradox – they want Germany to stop supporting Ukraine, but they also want a stronger German military whilst negating the very reason there is a need for larger German defence spending - namely, Russian aggression,' said Mr. Balbon. 'Given German history, there's an inherent criticism of militarisation and spending on military purposes as opposed to spending on social benefits, childcare, rent and so on. It will be important for defence planners and the industry representatives to get this mix right,' said Mr. Keller. Neighbours perception Given Germany's history, especially in the Second World War, it is generally wary of taking any leadership position within Europe. When it comes to Ukraine, Germany has been the second-largest supporter, after the US, in terms of weapons and aid. Germany's increased spending isn't scaring its neighbours but is being welcomed, noted Mr. Keller. 'Historically difficult neighbours, such as the Baltic countries, Poland, and the Czech Republic, feel that Germany is finally living up to its responsibility. It has prompted other wealthy EU countries, such as France, to increase their own defence spending,' said Mr. Keller. Mr. Balbon concurs. 'The predominant fear in Europe and Germany is that at some point in the future, Russia will attack the Baltic countries. It's not so much a fear of massive on-ground invasion, but that Russia will try out some smaller level attack to see how NATO responds – whether it will trigger Article 5 or which members will come to help,' said Mr. Balbon. Article 5 is a cornerstone of NATO, which states that an armed attack against any one NATO member is an attack against all. Meaning if any NATO member is attacked, other members are obligated to assist by 'such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force'. At the recent NATO Summit in The Hague on June 24-25, all 32 member countries agreed to increase their defence spending to 5% of their GDP by 2035. Germany now has a permanent brigade (to have 5,000 troops by 2027) in Lithuania, which is one of the three Baltic countries bordering Russia. Estonia and Latvia are also expected to get a European multinational battlegroup presence. Mr. Keller notes that there are no guarantees that all NATO members would fulfil the 5% target, given past record when many countries failed to fulfil the 2% target. 'Domestic political pressure and economic reasons may cause individual countries to lag behind. That should not happen, and it is the responsibility of wealthy countries to lead by example. This is why it is important for Germany to fulfil its obligations. There is a shared perception among the NATO members that they are stronger united,' said Mr. Keller. (Nimish Sawant is an independent journalist based in Berlin)
