India beats China and Bangladesh to become biggest player in…, shocks Pakistan due to…
According to data from the industry organization CITI, apparel exports increased by 11.3% in May. Western buyers also now consider India as a more reliable partner as compared to Bangladesh and China. This has boosted India's exports.
In August last year, political instability started in Bangladesh after a government change under Sheikh Hasina. This situation led to India's export growth. According to The Economic Times , apparel exports surged by 17.3% in September and 24.35% in October. Several buyers from developed nations are asking Indian suppliers to boost their capacity and get necessary certifications. After tariffs were imposed by the Trump administration on China also helped India to gain a duty advantage over Chinese exports.
This surge in exports is good news for the textile industry, which was struggling for two years after the COVID-19 pandemic. The political tussle in Bangladesh led to a shift in global supply chains. Industry leaders believe that buyers prioritize stability and continuity in the supply chain, avoiding any form of uncertainty.
Although Bangladeshi manufacturers are in high capacity and can fulfill large orders in short periods, Indian manufacturers are optimistic about maintaining their export growth, driven by duty advantages over China.
India holds a $10 billion share in the U.S. apparel market as compared to China's $30 billion. While apparel exports are rising, the import of raw cotton is also increasing, as domestic cotton prices are higher than international rates.
The Cotton Association of India estimates that cotton imports will more than double in 2024-25, reaching 3.3 million bales (170 kilograms each) compared to 1.52 million bales last year.
Paksitan's export were far less than Indian, according to media reports, In fiscal year 2024-25, Pakistan's exports were $24 billion.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
26 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Online gaming companies move to shut paid operations as gaming Bill gets Rajya Sabha nod
The Rajya Sabha's approval of the online gaming Bill Thursday has drawn the final curtain on India's booming real-money gaming industry. What was once a bustling digital arena of wagers and winnings now stands eerily silent, as leading platforms suspend paid play and others fold entirely. Lawmakers hail the measure as a shield against harm, but to thousands of workers and millions of players, it feels like the lights have dimmed on a once-thriving stage. Opinion trading platform Probo, in a message displayed on its app, said that 'in light of recent developments, we have paused all recharge activities in your best interest,' while requesting users to withdraw funds. Dream11, the country's biggest fantasy sports app and the Indian cricket team's main jersey sponsor, also communicated to its employees that it will wind down its real money operations. Zupee, another gaming platform, said it was discontinuing paid games, with users able to play free titles. 'Everyone will shut down paid operations for now, as the industry prepares a legal roadmap to challenge the law,' a senior gaming industry executive said. The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Bill, 2025, now passed by both houses of Parliament, outlaws online money gaming services and penalises their celebrity endorsers. The Bill has been drafted over national security concerns related to online gaming platforms, including the use of digital wallets and cryptocurrencies for money laundering and illicit fund transfers, these platforms serving as potential messaging and communication grounds for terror organisations, and offshore entities circumventing Indian tax and legal obligations, among others. The government will prohibit any person from offering online games in India, failing which they could be imprisoned for up to three years, and penalised Rs 1 crore. Those promoting such platforms, such as social media influencers, will also face jail time of two years, and a penalty of Rs 50 lakh. The government will also prohibit banks and financial institutions from facilitating financial transactions on such platforms. The Bill applies to all online money gaming platforms irrespective of whether they are games of skill or chance, a distinction the industry had lobbied hard for in the past. The Bill said that the unchecked expansion of online money gaming services has been linked to 'unlawful activities including financial fraud, money-laundering, tax evasion, and in some cases, the financing of terrorism, thereby posing threats to national security, public order and the integrity of the State'. The parallel proliferation of online money games accessible through mobile phones, computers and the internet, and offering monetary returns against user deposits has led to 'serious social, financial, psychological and public health harms, particularly among young individuals and economically disadvantaged groups,' it said.
India.com
26 minutes ago
- India.com
Is Trump Ready To Risk Key Ally India For His America-First Agenda? Nikki Haley Sounds Alarm
Washington: 'To achieve America's foreign policy goals of outcompeting China, few objectives are more critical than getting relations between Washington and New Delhi back on track,' wrote Nikki Haley, U.S. President Donald Trump's fellow Republican and former U.N. ambassador, in an op-ed for Newsweek. She urged that India must be treated 'like the prized free and democratic partner that it is, not an adversary like China, which has thus far avoided sanctions for its Russian oil purchases, despite being one of Moscow's largest customers'. She warned that undoing decades of diplomatic momentum with the only Asian power capable of balancing Beijing would be a 'strategic disaster'. She also highlighted India's role in shifting supply chains away from China. 'While the Trump administration works to bring manufacturing back to our shores, India stands alone in its potential to manufacture at a China-like scale for products that cannot be quickly or efficiently produced here, like textiles, inexpensive phones and solar panels,' she said. Add Zee News as a Preferred Source Haley described New Delhi as a 'crucial asset to the free world's security', stressing that unlike authoritarian China, a rising democratic India strengthens the global order. Trump, however, has unsettled both allies and critics by threatening to impose an additional 25 per cent tariff on India for importing discounted oil from Russia. The measure comes on top of a similar levy already rolled out this month, taking the total duty to 50 per cent. Once hailed as Washington's counterweight to China, New Delhi now finds itself grouped with Brazil, whose President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has already threatened retaliation. Beijing, the largest buyer of Russian crude, has been spared from similar penalties. 'Biggest Mistake' Geopolitical analyst Fareed Zakaria joined the wave of criticism. Speaking to CNN, he called the tariff push 'America's biggest foreign policy mistake', warning that even if Trump walks back the decision, 'the damage is done'. According to him, India now views the United States as 'unreliable, its willingness to be brutal to those whom it calls its friends' and may deepen its ties with Russia while easing tensions with China. 'Stupidest Tactical Move' Economist Jeffrey Sachs struck a similar note. On 'Breaking Points' with Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti, he said the White House is effectively binding the BRICS bloc closer together. He branded the tariffs 'the stupidest tactical move in U.S. foreign policy' and labelled Trump 'the great unifier of BRICS'. 'Tariff Tantrum' The pushback has reached Capitol Hill as well. Senior Congressman Gregory Meeks, a Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, denounced the policy as a 'tariff tantrum' that risks dismantling over two decades of strategic, economic and cultural ties. 'We have deep strategic, economic and people-to-people ties. Concerns should be addressed in a mutually respectful way consistent with our democratic values,' he said.
News18
37 minutes ago
- News18
US court throws out massive civil fraud penalty against President Trump
Agency: PTI Last Updated: New York, Aug 22 (AP) A New York appeals court has thrown out President Donald Trump's massive financial penalty while narrowly upholding a judge's finding that he engaged in fraud by exaggerating his wealth for decades. The Thursday's ruling spares Trump from a potential half-billion-dollar fine but bans him and his two eldest sons from serving in corporate leadership for a few years. Trump, in a social media post, claimed 'total victory" in the case, which stemmed from a civil lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. 'I greatly respect the fact that the Court had the Courage to throw out this unlawful and disgraceful Decision that was hurting Business all throughout New York State," the Republican wrote. James, a Democrat, focused on the parts of the decision that went her way, saying in a statement that it 'affirmed the well-supported finding of the trial court: Donald Trump, his company, and two of his children are liable for fraud." The ruling came seven months after Trump returned to the White House, his political fortunes unimpeded by the civil fraud judgment, a criminal conviction and other legal blows. A sharply divided panel of five judges in the state's mid-level Appellate Division couldn't agree on many issues raised in Trump's appeal, but a majority said the monetary penalty was 'excessive". A lower-court judge, Arthur Engoron, had ordered Trump last year to pay $355 million in penalties after finding that he flagrantly padded financial statements provided to lenders and insurers. With interest, the sum has topped $515 million. Additional penalties for executives at his company, the Trump Organisation, including sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr, have brought the total to $527 million with interest. 'While harm certainly occurred, it was not the cataclysmic harm that can justify a nearly half billion-dollar award" to the state, Judges Dianne Renwick and Peter Moulton wrote in one of three opinions shaping the appeals court's ruling. They called the penalty 'an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution." Both were appointed by Democratic governors. Engoron's other punishments, upheld by the appeals court, have been on pause during Trump's appeal, and the president was able to hold off collection of the money by posting a $175 million bond. Donald Trump Jr celebrated the decision by mocking James, who had periodically posted a running tally of the fraud penalty, with interest. Over a post from James in February 2024, when the tally was nearly $465 million, Trump Jr wrote: 'I believe you mean $0.00. Thank you for your attention to this matter." The five-judge panel, which split on the merits of the lawsuit and Engoron's fraud finding, dismissed the monetary penalty in its entirety while also leaving a pathway for an appeal to the state's highest court, the Court of Appeals. In the meantime, Trump and his co-defendants, the judges wrote, can seek to extend the pause to prevent any punishments from taking effect. While the Appellate Division dispatches most appeals in a few pages in a matter of weeks, the judges weighing Trump's case took nearly 11 months to rule after oral arguments last fall and issued 323 pages of concurring and dissenting opinions with no majority. Rather, some judges endorsed parts of their colleagues' findings while denouncing others, enabling the court to rule. Two judges wrote that they felt James' lawsuit was justifiable and that she had proven her case but the penalty was too severe. One wrote that James exceeded her legal authority in bringing the suit, saying that if any lenders felt cheated, they could have sued Trump themselves, and none did. Another wrote that Engoron erred by ruling before the trial that James had proven Trump engaged in fraud. In his portion of the ruling, Judge David Friedman, appointed by a Republican governor, was scathing in his criticism of James for bringing the lawsuit. 'Plainly, her ultimate goal was not market hygiene' … but political hygiene, ending with the derailment of President Trump's political career and the destruction of his real estate business," Friedman wrote. 'The voters have obviously rendered a verdict on his political career. This bench today unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business." Trump and his co-defendants denied wrongdoing. At the conclusion of the civil trial in January 2024, Trump said he was 'an innocent man" and the case was a 'fraud on me". The Republican leader has repeatedly maintained the case and the verdict were political moves by James and Engoron, both Democrats. Trump's Justice Department has subpoenaed James for records related to the lawsuit, among other documents, as part of an investigation into whether she violated the president's civil rights. James' personal attorney Abbe D Lowell has said investigating the fraud case is 'the most blatant and desperate example of this administration carrying out the president's political retribution campaign". Trump and his lawyers said his financial statements weren't deceptive, since they came with disclaimers noting they weren't audited. The defence also noted bankers and insurers independently evaluated the numbers, and the loans were repaid. Despite such discrepancies as tripling the size of his Trump Tower penthouse, he said the financial statements were, if anything, lowball estimates of his fortune. During an appellate court hearing last September, Trump's lawyers argued that many of the case's allegations were too old and that James had misused a consumer protection law to sue Trump over private business transactions that were satisfactory to those involved. State attorneys said that while Trump insists no one was harmed by the financial statements, his exaggerations led lenders to make riskier loans and that honest borrowers lose out when others game their net worth numbers. The civil fraud case was just one of several legal obstacles for Trump as he campaigned, won and segued to a second term as president. On Jan 10, he was sentenced in his criminal hush money case to what's known as an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction on the books but sparing him jail, probation, a fine or other punishment. He is appealing the conviction. top videos View all And in December, a federal appeals court upheld a jury's finding that Trump sexually abused writer E Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and later defamed her, affirming a $5 million judgment against him. The appeals court declined in June to reconsider. Trump still can try to get the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. Trump also is appealing a subsequent verdict that requires him to pay Carroll $83.3 million for additional defamation claims. (AP) SCY SCY (This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed - PTI) view comments First Published: August 22, 2025, 04:45 IST News agency-feeds US court throws out massive civil fraud penalty against President Trump Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Loading comments...
