'Only allows you to text in caps': Trump enters telecom market with Gold T1 Phone; netizens react - The Economic Times Video
Donald Trump has launched Trump Mobile, a self-branded mobile service offering a $499 gold-colored smartphone and a $47.45 monthly plan called "The 47 Plan." The service promises U.S.-based support, telemedicine, and global texting, but has sparked mixed reactions and online mockery.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
29 minutes ago
- Indian Express
‘It's time for a full tariff overhaul and aligning them with broader economic goals': Ajay Srivastava at explained.Live
Tariffs are essentially taxes that countries impose on imports to protect their domestic industries. When a country wants to shield local producers from foreign competition, it puts a tax on imported goods. Under the World Trade Organization (WTO), every member country submits a tariff schedule. This schedule outlines the maximum tariff a country can impose on each product. These are called 'bound tariffs.' Once negotiated and finalised, countries agree not to exceed these limits. For example, if India commits in its WTO schedule that the tariff on glass is 40 per cent, that becomes the bound tariff. India can lower it in the future but it cannot raise it above 40 per cent. Until recently, most countries abided by their WTO commitments and operated within those agreed limits. The problem started when US President Donald Trump began openly violating these rules. The tariffs he imposed broke at least two major WTO principles, first by exceeding the bound tariffs on a wide range of goods and second, by imposing country-specific tariffs, applying different rates on different sources. The WTO requires countries to treat imports from all member nations equally, so this step is a clear violation undermining the very foundation of the WTO system. Today, every country talks about free trade agreements (FTAs) as if they are the driving force behind global trade. In reality, less than 20 per cent of global trade happens through the preferential route, through Free Trade Agreements or FTAs. The remaining 80 per cent happens under the WTO's Most-Favoured Nation (MFN) tariffs. For countries like India, we need to focus on the 80 per cent trade that doesn't depend on FTAs to grow our exports meaningfully. India has increasingly positioned FTAs as a key tool to boost exports. Initially, our strategy was 'Look East.' We began signing FTAs with our neighbouring countries under SAFTA (South Asian Free Trade Area), then moved on to ASEAN, Japan, South Korea and later Australia. At one point, we were close to signing a deal with China through the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) but we withdrew at the last minute. After covering most of the East, we shifted our focus westward. We signed FTAs with Mauritius, the UAE, Switzerland and Norway. We've now announced the completion of negotiations with the UK and it's expected that we'll sign agreements with the US and the EU in the near future. Once these are finalised, India will have FTAs with more than 75 countries, covering roughly 75 per cent of global trade. So while we started late, compared to Europe or the UK, we're catching up fast. On the surface, countries like the US have average tariffs of around four per cent while India's average is closer to 17 per cent. However, this is the result of a larger, negotiated settlement under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and the WTO, which the US helped broker and now conveniently ignores. During these negotiations, developed countries like the US, EU and Japan, then global leaders in global production of industrial and high-tech goods, wanted two things: One, to lower global tariffs to make it easier to sell their high-end goods. Two, to expand the scope of the global trading system beyond just goods to include intellectual property rights and services, such as finance, telecom and IT and agricultural subsidies. Developing nations, like India and China, were seen as producing low-end goods and having weaker intellectual property frameworks. Thus, the developed nations drafted the Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights, or TRIPS, to bring Intellectual Property (IP) enforcement under the WTO, given its strong dispute settlement mechanism. The result was a trade-off: Developing countries accepted stricter rules on IP and services. In exchange, they were allowed to maintain somewhat higher tariff levels for a longer period. As part of this agreement, every country submitted a 'schedule of commitments' to the WTO for each product. For example, for glass, India might have said its maximum tariff, or 'bound tariff,' would be 40 per cent. These schedules were negotiated and accepted by all WTO members. Once the scope is set, the actual negotiations begin. Each country studies its domestic industries and identifies products and industries it would like to protect, which it considers sensitive sectors. For India, these include certain agricultural products to protect farmers and some industrial items. After industry-wide consultation, the country prepares an 'offer list', based on which tariff lines are listed in an Excel sheet. (India has around 12,800 of them.) In that list, it indicates which tariffs we'll reduce and the timing and extent of these reductions. Items to be excluded completely will be recorded in the negative or exclusion list. After both countries exchange their offer lists, they may choose to send each other request lists, asking the other to reconsider. The process continues over multiple rounds, often taking months or even years. Only after these are resolved do they announce the completion of negotiations, after which the legal teams finalise the text and the leaders of the countries sign the agreement. The agreement itself, typically, becomes effective two to three months after the signing. That's when the actual trade benefits — like lower tariffs and improved market access — start kicking in. We need to take a comprehensive look at our entire tariff structure. Right now, in every Union Budget, we make incremental changes — raise tariffs here, reduce them there — but what we haven't done is a full review of all 12,800 tariff lines. When I did a simple analysis, I found that over 90 per cent of our total Customs revenue comes from less than five per cent of our tariff lines. Meanwhile, the bottom 60 per cent of tariff lines contribute less than three per cent of revenue. So we have to ask why we are maintaining tariffs on those lines at all. A thorough review could also help us fix other long-standing issues, like inverted duty structures, where the import duty on raw materials is higher than on finished goods. That discourages domestic manufacturing because it makes local production less competitive. It has been over 25 years since we last did a full tariff overhaul. Now is the time to revisit the structure holistically. Given the number of FTAs we've signed and the structural issues in our system, it's time to conduct a proper, data-driven review. It's not just about revenue, it's about making tariffs more logical, targeted and aligned with our broader economic goals. In the late 1980s, India was ahead of China in several areas. We were exporting more computer hardware. Our pharmaceutical exports, APIs and formulations, were stronger than China's. In textiles and garments, we were neck and neck. When liberalisation came, we focussed more on deregulation without simultaneously building real manufacturing capacity. China, on the other hand, used that same period to build, sector by sector, with vision and intent. They began with textiles and garments, moved into machinery and then into electronics. They scaled up across industries methodically. Importantly, they had strong backing from American companies. What did China do differently? They applied highly strategic, foresighted policies and executed them well. In contrast, we continue to talk about increasing the share of manufacturing in our GDP, while importing the most basic items — knives, nail cutters, nuts, bolts. It's not for a lack of advanced technology, we've just never drilled down deep into the product level to build competitiveness. We need long-term commitment. We need to stop putting bureaucrats in charge of this transformation and instead identify people who have hands-on experience and empower them, set clear goals and get moving. That's how we change the trade equation, by building from the ground up.
India Gazette
2 hours ago
- India Gazette
G7 summit continues in Canadian Rockies amid Israel-Iran tensions
BANFF, Alberta: The recent G7 summit has convened for the second and final day in the picturesque Canadian Rockies amidst escalating tensions stemming from the ongoing Israel-Iran conflict. As the world leaders gathered, Canada made significant efforts to steer clear of any potential confrontations, particularly with President Donald Trump, who abruptly left the summit on Monday night. Prime Minister Mark Carney says his summit priorities are enhancing peace and security, building critical mineral supply chains, and creating jobs. However, pressing issues such as U.S. tariffs along with conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine are dominating discussions. In a striking turn of events, just hours before the leaders' meeting, Israel and Iran exchanged fresh hostilities that inflicted heavy casualties. This alarming backdrop heightened the urgency for a unified response, which resulted in the issuing of a joint statement advocating for de-escalation in Iran. A statement President Trump agreed to sign on to prior to his departure. "We, the leaders of the G7, reiterate our commitment to peace and stability in the Middle East," the statement issued Monday night said. "In this context, we affirm that Israel has a right to defend itself. We reiterate our support for the security of Israel." "We also affirm the importance of the protection of civilians," the G7 leaders said. "Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror. We have been consistently clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon." "We urge that the resolution of the Iranian crisis leads to a broader de-escalation of hostilities in the Middle East, including a ceasefire in Gaza," the G7 statement said. "We will remain vigilant to the implications for international energy markets and stand ready to coordinate, including with like-minded partners, to safeguard market stability." German Chancellor Friedrich Merz articulated that his key objectives include preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, supporting Israel's right to self-defense, and fostering an environment conducive to diplomatic solutions. He stated at the start of the summkit, "This issue will be very high on the agenda of the G7 summit." The summit is taking place in Kananaskis, a stunning resort located approximately 90 kilometers west of Calgary. During Canada's last summit in 2018, tensions with Trump led to his abrupt departure on that occasion too, and subsequent public disparagement of then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. This history adds pressure on the current summit to proceed without further significant interruptions. International affairs scholar Roland Paris speculated, before the start of the conference "This will be a successful meeting if Donald Trump doesn't have an eruption that disrupts the entire gathering. Anything above and beyond that is gravy." As Trump arrived in Canada, Prime Minister Carney faced the challenge of negotiating sensitive topics, including U.S. import tariffs on steel and aluminum. Carney has warned of potential retaliatory actions if these tariffs are not lifted. Josh Lipsky from the Atlantic Council highlighted the best possible outcome as avoiding significant conflicts as the leaders engaged in dialogue. Amidst these discussions, Canada opted for a more streamlined communication strategy, opting out of a traditional comprehensive joint communique. Instead, chair summaries will be used to prevent diplomatic mishaps and maintain engagement with the U.S. Ottawa's focus will be on collective actions among the G7 nations—Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Veteran diplomat and Senator Peter Boehm indicated that this summit might extend longer than usual to facilitate more extensive bilateral talks, particularly with President Trump. Various leaders from nations such as Ukraine, Mexico, India, Australia, South Africa, South Korea, and Brazil are participateing each eager to discuss their unique concerns directly with Trump. Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba was particularly keen on persuading Trump to reconsider the trade tariffs that threaten Japan's automotive industry following recent high-level trade discussions in Washington. A senior U.S. official expressed that topics including international security, energy security, and issues surrounding critical minerals would be key elements of the discussions. Given the challenges faced by other world leaders in their interactions with the Trump administration, the G7 summit represented a significant opportunity for coalition-building, particularly regarding Ukraine. Canada has consistently been a strong ally of Ukraine. This pivotal gathering comes at a time when the necessity for cohesive strategies among global allies is more crucial than ever, with the G7 summit serving as a litmus test for the continuity of U.S. engagement in multilateral settings.
News18
2 hours ago
- News18
Donald Trump Says Pharma Tariffs 'Coming Soon'; Indian Drug Stocks Fall Up To 4%
Last Updated: US Pharma Tariffs: Granules India becomes the top loser falling up to 4%, while Aurobindo, Natco and Lupic was down 3% each. US President Donald Trump on June 17 said tariffs on the pharmaceutical sector are 'coming soon". Following comments, which Trump made while speaking to reporters on board the Air Force One, India's pharma stocks declined up to 4%. The Nifty Pharma index declined as much as 2.5% following the Trump comments. Granules India became the top loser falling up to 4%, while Aurobindo, Natco and Lupic was down 3% each. This isn't the first warning — back in April, after imposing reciprocal tariffs on 60 countries (excluding pharma at the time), Trump had hinted that pharma tariffs would come in at 'never seen before" levels and were under active review. 'Pharma tariffs are going to come in at levels you haven't really seen before. We are looking at pharmaceuticals as a separate category. We will be announcing that sometime in the near future, and not too distant future. It's under review right now," Trump had said back in April. The US Commerce Department is currently investigating pharma imports under Section 232, which evaluates the impact of imports on national security. If such tariffs are imposed and companies are unable to pass on the cost, analysts at Citi estimate Indian firms with high exposure to the US generics market could see a 9%-12% one-time hit to their Ebitda.
