
Indian fuel exports escape Trump's tariff net, no Russian penalty yet
India's exports of petroleum products like diesel and jet fuel to the US continue to be exempted from the levy of any import duty or tariff, and President Donald Trump has, for now, not indicated the penalty he plans to impose to deter New Delhi's energy trade with Russia. On Wednesday, Donald Trump had announced plans to impose a 25 per cent tariff on India, along with an additional penalty, citing concerns over the country's energy and defence ties with Russia, as well as existing trade barriers. However, the executive order he signed thereafter only gives effect to the 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods coming to the US. Even this has an exclusion list that includes finished pharmaceutical products (tablets, injectables and syrups), active pharmaceutical ingredients, electronics and ICT goods (semiconductors, smartphones, SSDs and computers), and petroleum products (crude oil, LNG, refined fuels, electricity and coal). The executive order also does not indicate any penalty that is to be levied for Russian trade. According to official data, India exported 4.86 million tonnes of petroleum products to the US in fiscal year 2024-25 (April 2024 to March 2025) for over USD 4 billion.
Reliance Industries Ltd is the biggest exporter of fuel to the US. With fuel exports continuing to be on the exemption list, it means business as usual for India and companies like Reliance, analysts said. Also, a relief would be if no penalty is imposed to punish India for its oil imports from Russia, they said, adding that for now, the US administration has not indicated any penalty. "For now, there is nothing but you never know," an analyst said. From just 0.2 per cent before the Russia-Ukraine war to now accounting for 35-40 per cent of total crude imports, India's reliance on Russian oil has surged -- drawing fresh scrutiny with Trump announcing a penalty on top of a 25 per cent tariff, or tax, on all goods going to the US. India historically bought most of its oil from the Middle East, including Iraq and Saudi Arabia. However, things changed when Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022. India, the world's third-largest crude importer after China and the US, began snapping up Russian oil that was available at a discount after some in the West shunned it as a means to punish Moscow for its invasion of Ukraine. From a market share of just 0.2 per cent in India's import basket before the start of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Russia overtook Iraq and Saudi Arabia to become India's No.1 supplier, with a share as high as 40 per cent at one point of time. This month, Russia supplied 36 per cent of all crude oil, which is converted into fuels like petrol and diesel, that India imported. Announcing the imposition of 25 per cent tariff or tax on all Indian goods going to the US, Trump had said New Delhi "always bought a vast majority of their military equipment from Russia, and are Russia's largest buyer of energy, along with China, at a time when everyone wants Russia to STOP THE KILLING IN UKRAINE." "India will therefore be paying a tariff of 25 per cent, plus a penalty for the above (Russian purchases), starting on August First," he said in a post on social media. India bought 68,000 barrels per day of crude oil from Russia in January 2022, according to global real-time data and analytics provider Kpler. That month, Indian imports from Iraq were 1.23 million bpd and 883,000 bpd from Saudi Arabia. In June 2022, Russia overtook Iraq to become India's largest oil supplier. That month, it supplied 1.12 million bpd as compared to 993,000 bpd that came from Iraq and 695,000 bpd from Saudi Arabia. Russian imports peaked to 2.15 million bpd in May 2023 and have varied since then, depending on the discount at which the oil was available. But the volumes never slipped below 1.4 million bpd, which is more than what India was buying from its top supplier Iraq before the Russia-Ukraine conflict. In July, imports from Russia averaged 1.8 million bpd, almost double of 950,000 bpd imports from Iraq. Saudi imports stood at 630,000 bpd, according to Kpler. After the Ukraine war, Western energy sanctions against Russia pushed it to cut prices for those buyers still willing to purchase its crude. The discounts on Russia's flagship Urals crude to Brent -- the world's most well-known benchmark -- were as high as USD 40 per barrel at one point but have been trimmed since to less than USD 3. G7 countries in December 2022 imposed a USD 60 per barrel price cap on Russian crude. Under the mechanism, European companies were permitted to transport and insure shipments of Russian oil to third countries as long as it is sold below the capped price -- an effort to limit the impact of the sanctions on global oil flows but ensure Russia earns less from the trade. Last month, the European Union decided to lower the price cap to USD 47.6 and introduced an automatic and dynamic mechanism for its review in the future. The idea is to keep the cap at 15 per cent lower than the average market price. In addition to stoking India's economy, cheap Russian oil gave refiners lucrative business -- refining that crude and exporting the products to deficit countries. These included the European Union, which had banned direct crude oil purchases from Russia.
This month, the European Union decided to ban the import of refined oil produced from Russian crude.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hindu
15 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Army says no ceasefire violation along LoC
The Army on Tuesday (August 5, 2025) said there has been no ceasefire violation along the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir. 'There have been some media and social media reports regarding ceasefire violation in Poonch region. It is clarified that there has been no ceasefire violation along the LoC. Please avoid spreading unverified information,' the Army said in a statement in New Delhi. Earlier, official sources in Jammu said the Pakistan Army had on Tuesday evening (August 5, 2025) indulged in 'unprovoked' firing on forward Indian posts along the LoC, prompting strong retaliation by the Indian Army. The exchange of small arms firing between the two sides continued for nearly 15 minutes in the Mankote sector but there was no immediate report of any casualties, the sources had said, adding it was the first instance of ceasefire violation since Operation Sindoor. Indian and Pakistani militaries engaged in intense clashes between May 7 and 10 after India launched missile strikes targeting terror infrastructure across the border under Operation Sindoor to avenge the Pahalgam terror attack.


Indian Express
15 minutes ago
- Indian Express
US to initially impose ‘small tariff' on pharma imports, Trump says
President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that the United States would initially place a 'small tariff' on pharmaceutical imports before hiking it to 150% within 18 months and eventually to 250% in an effort to boost domestic production. 'In one year, one and a half years maximum, it's going to go to 150% and then it's going to go to 250% because we want pharmaceuticals made in our country,' Trump told CNBC in an interview. He did not specify the initial tariff rate on pharmaceuticals. Trump said last month that pharmaceutical tariffs could reach as high as 200%. He said in February that sectoral tariffs on pharmaceuticals and semiconductor chips would start at '25% or higher,' rising substantially over the course of a year. Trump said on Tuesday that he plans to announce tariffs on semiconductors and chips in the 'next week or so,' but gave no further details. The United States has been conducting a national security review of the pharmaceutical sector, and the industry has been preparing for possible sector-specific tariffs. The administration has not announced when the results of that probe will be released. Several drugmakers have pledged multibillion-dollar investments in U.S. manufacturing as Trump threatens import tariffs, with AstraZeneca recently committing $50 billion to expand its American operations. PhRMA, the main lobbying group for the industry, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A framework agreement between the United States and the EU sets out that tariffs on pharmaceuticals and semiconductors are currently zero, but if the United States raises tariffs following its import investigation, they will be capped at 15%.


Indian Express
15 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Trump says banks discriminate against his supporters while White House prepares order
US President Donald Trump on Tuesday said he believes that banks discriminate against him and his supporters, adding that Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase had previously refused to accept his deposits. 'They totally discriminate against, I think, me maybe even more, but they discriminate against many conservatives,' he told CNBC in an interview. 'I think the word might be Trump supporters more than conservatives.' Trump made the comments when asked about a report by the Wall Street Journal that said he planned to punish banks that discriminated against conservatives, but did not address the order specifically. The order instructs regulators to review banks for 'politicized or unlawful debanking' practices, according to a draft reviewed by Reuters. 'Well, they did discriminate,' Trump said of actions taken by JPMorgan Chase after his first term in office. 'I had hundreds of millions, I had many, many accounts loaded up with cash … and they told me, 'I'm sorry sir, we can't have you. You have 20 days to get out.'' Trump said, without providing evidence, that he believed that the banks' refusal to take his deposits indicated that the administration of former President Joe Biden had encouraged banking regulators to 'destroy Trump.' Trump said he subsequently tried to deposit funds with Bank of America and was also refused, and eventually split the cash among a number of smaller banks. 'The banks discriminated against me very badly,' he said. In a statement, JPMorgan did not address the president's specific claim that it had discriminated against him. 'We don't close accounts for political reasons, and we agree with President Trump that regulatory change is desperately needed,' JPMorgan said. 'We commend the White House for addressing this issue and look forward to working with them to get this right.' Bank of America also did not address Trump's specific claims in the CNBC interview. 'REPUTATIONAL RISK' ISSUE During President Joe Biden's administration, regulators could have asked the banks why they were providing banking services to Trump because of the 'reputational risk' issue, a source familiar with the matter said. Another source said that banks were under intense scrutiny and pressure with regards to what qualified as a reputational risk for banks and they needed to be careful due to Trump's legal entanglements. The source also added that at present JPMorgan continues to have a banking relationship with members of the Trump family that dates back to years ago and that they also bank a number of campaign accounts related to Trump. After President Trump took power, the Federal Reserve announced in June it was directing its supervisors to no longer consider 'reputational risk' when examining banks, scrapping a metric that had been a focus of industry complaints. The Wall Street Journal reported late Monday that the expected executive order would instruct regulators to investigate whether any financial institutions breach the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, antitrust laws or consumer financial protection laws by dropping customers for political reasons. It said the order could be signed as early as this week, authorizing monetary penalties, consent decrees or other disciplinary measures against violators. The White House had no immediate comment on the reported order. 'What the White House is doing is telling the banks not to hide behind regulations to deny loans or banking relationships,' said Wells Fargo bank analyst Mike Mayo. 'The banks can use their normal underwriting standards and deny services, but not blame regulators or use reputational risk as a justification.' Bank of America said it welcomed the Trump administration's efforts to provide regulatory clarity to banks. 'We've provided detailed proposals and will continue to work with the administration and Congress to improve the regulatory framework,' the bank said. Trump in January said the CEOs of JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America denied services to conservatives. At the time, the two banks denied making banking decisions based on politics. 'This seems to be rhetoric that will likely be forgotten by lunchtime,' said David Wagner, head of equities at Aptus Capital Advisors. 'I don't see any material impact on banks, as there are many other drivers that will ultimately presage performance for banks, such as deregulation.' JPMorgan and Bank of America shares both fell over 1%, in line with a decline for the broader S&P Bank index. Banks have consistently argued that any complaints about 'debanking' should be aimed at regulators, as they argue onerous rules and bank supervisors policing firms can discourage them from engaging in certain activities. 'The heart of the problem is regulatory overreach and supervisory discretion,' the Bank Policy Institute, an industry group, said in a statement. 'The banking agencies have already taken steps to address issues like reputational risk, and we're hopeful that any forthcoming executive order will reinforce this progress by directing regulators to confront the flawed regulatory framework that gave rise to these concerns in the first place.'