India's April-June finished steel imports fall nearly 30% as China, Japan shipments slow
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
India's finished steel imports dropped nearly 30% in the first three months of the financial year that started in April, due to a persistent fall in shipments from China and Japan, according to provisional government data reviewed by Reuters on Tuesday.The world's second-biggest crude steel producer imported 1.4 million metric tons of finished steel during April-June, down 28.8% from a year earlier, the data showed.Shipments from China fell 45.8%, while those from Japan declined 65.2%. China shipped 0.3 million tons of finished steel into India during the period, while Japan exported 0.2 million tons, the data showed.In April, India imposed a 12% temporary tariff on some steel imports, locally known as a safeguard duty, to curb a surge in cheap shipments primarily from China.South Korea was the biggest exporter to India, with shipments reaching 0.5 million tons, down 6.5%.India remained a net importer during the period, with exports easing 5.1%.Belgium was the top destination for finished steel exports from India , with shipments rising 40.8%.Shipments to the United States, Spain and Nepal climbed, while exports to Italy dropped.Volume-wise, galvanised plain or corrugated sheets or coils were India's biggest exports.Domestically, crude steel production was at 40.6 million tons, up 11.2%. Finished steel consumption was at 38.3 million tons, up 7.9%.Indian domestic rebar prices edged lower as underlying market sentiment remained weak amid sluggish demand and the onset of monsoon, the government said in its report.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
3 minutes ago
- Time of India
Qualcomm's premium smartphone chip reliance, Apple modem loss overshadow upbeat forecast
By Stephen Nellis and Akash Sriram Qualcomm 's reliance on high-end smartphone chip sales and the looming loss of Apple as a modem customer overshadowed the company's optimistic quarterly forecast on Wednesday, driving shares down more than 6%. The San Diego-based company is the world's largest supplier of modem chips that enable smartphones to connect to wireless data networks. Qualcomm reported its chip segment revenue from non-Apple customers has risen more than 15% so far this fiscal year. Its chip segment sales increase, excluding Apple, "is largely driven by ASP (average selling price) uplift from flagship Android launches rather than broad-based volume recovery," said William McGonigle, analyst at Third Bridge. Taiwan's MediaTek has surpassed Qualcomm this year to become the global leader in smartphone chipset market share, driven by its dominance in affordable and mid-range segments and strong growth in major markets like India, according to Counterpoint Research . Qualcomm reiterated its warning that Apple's shift to its own modem chips in future devices will hit its chip segment revenue. The iPhone 16e, launched earlier this year, was the first Apple smartphone to house a modem developed in-house. Qualcomm forecast September quarter revenue of $10.3 billion to $11.1 billion, compared with analysts' estimates of $10.64 billion, according to LSEG data. The company has not seen signs of customers ordering chips ahead of normal seasonal schedules to try to get ahead of possible tariffs, Chief Financial Officer Akash Palkhiwala told Reuters in an interview. U.S. President Donald Trump's tariff policies have so far provided exemptions for smartphones and semiconductor chips from these levies. But Trump has issued warnings about potential sector-specific tariffs targeting the industry, saying this month that he would "soon announce tariffs on semiconductors." The tariff situation remains highly fluid and complex, with existing Chinese electronics tariffs still in effect despite the exemptions granted for certain categories. Global smartphone shipments climbed 1% in the second quarter, according to research firm IDC, as Apple, a key Qualcomm customer, accelerated shipments to avoid potential tariff impacts. Qualcomm CEO Cristiano Amon said he expects the company's business to supply chips to augmented-reality glasses such as Meta Ray-Bans to expand. "We have all the designs that matter right now - the number of designs like the Meta glasses is now up to 19, and that continues to accelerate," Amon told Reuters. Qualcomm forecast fiscal fourth-quarter chip segment sales at a midpoint of $9.3 billion, compared with analyst estimates of $9.19 billion, according to Visible Alpha data. The chipmaker reported sales of $10.37 billion for its third quarter ended June 29, beating estimates of $10.35 billion. The company's third-quarter adjusted profit of $2.77 per share topped Wall Street estimates by 6 cents. Qualcomm expects adjusted profit in the fiscal fourth quarter of about $2.85 per share, above estimates of $2.83 per share.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
3 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump tariffs taking a toll on Americans, draining their wallets: Reports paint a gloomy picture
As US President Donald Trump announces 25 per cent tariffs on Indian imports, experts and multiple budget reports paint a gloomy picture about the impact of the tariffs on American wallets read more US President Donald Trump holds a chart next to US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick as Trump delivers remarks on tariffs in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, DC, US, April 2, 2025. File Image/Reuters As US President Donald Trump introduced high tariffs on key allies like India and South Korea, experts continue to warn that these tariffs would take a major toll on Americans, who will end up paying high prices for essential goods. A latest report from Yale University shows that Americans are set to pay a heavy price for Trump's trade policies. It is pertinent to note that the report was released on the day the US president announced 25 per cent tariffs on Indian imports and went on to threaten additional penalties for buying Russian oil, gas and military equipment. As per the report, the US tariffs implemented by the Trump administration are estimated to cost an average short-run income loss of about $2,400 per American household. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This will be due to the higher prices on consumer goods. The report assumes that the Federal Reserve does not counteract the inflationary effects, so the income loss mostly reflects higher prices rather than nominal income reductions. What makes the matter concerning is that the Trump tariff led to an average effective tariff rate of 18.4 per cent on affected products, which is the highest the US has seen since the 1930s. How Americans will end up paying the price The jump in average effective tariff would lead to an increase of about 1.8 per cent in the short term across the economy, the Yale report warned. Interestingly, the research argued that the impacts of the Trump tariffs are unequally distributed among American households. Households in the lowest income bracket face a burden approximately three times greater (about $1,300 loss) as a share of income compared to the wealthiest bracket, whose losses average around $5,000. Not only this, but certain product categories experience especially steep price increases. Clothing and textiles see short-run price rises of 40 per cent for leather goods (like shoes and handbags), 38 per cent for apparel, and 19 per cent for textiles. Meanwhile, food prices could go up by 3.4 per cent, with fresh produce initially 7 per cent more expensive. Motor vehicles increase in price by roughly 12.3 per cent in the short run, adding about $5,900 to the cost of a new car on average. The researchers raised an alarm about the wide-ranging consequences of the Trump tariffs. Beyond prices, the tariffs and the retaliatory measures that are presumed to be followed would lower the US Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth by about 0.5 percentage points in 2025-2026. Not only this, unemployment is predicted to rise by 0.3 percentage points in 2025 and further in 2026, with an estimated loss of 500,000 payroll jobs by the end of 2025. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A separate analysis conducted by JP Morgan confirmed that the tariffs contribute to inflation, slower consumer spending and put pressure on the American GDP. The tariffs also represent a large federal revenue source, but at the cost of economic growth and consumer welfare. One study estimates Trump's tariffs will raise federal revenue by $167.7 billion in 2025 but will reduce US GDP and impose an average tax increase of nearly $1,300 per household that year. How Trump's tariffs are already impacting Americans While most of the tariffs threatened by Trump have been paused, Americans are facing the wrath of Trump with his decision to impose tariffs on particular commodities and goods such as automobiles and steel. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the independent US fiscal watchdog, warned that the tariffs would shrink the size of the US economy relative to how it would perform without them. Interestingly, they also pointed out that the additional revenues generated from the tariffs will be more than offset by the revenue lost due to the Trump administration's tax cuts over the next decade. One of the standout impacts of Donald Trump's trade war, so far, has been to increase US goods imports, which completely goes against his agenda of reducing the trade deficit. This increase in imports has been because American firms stockpiled supplies in advance out of fear that the tariffs would increase the prices of their desired goods. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD US exports, on the other hand, have seen only a modest increase amid the chaos. Ultimately, the net result is that the US goods trade deficit has widened, not fallen. These price increases and economic disruptions confirm that the tariffs are directly 'draining American wallets' by raising living costs, disproportionately impacting lower-income families, causing job losses, and slowing economic growth in 2025.
Economic Times
3 minutes ago
- Economic Times
New-age tech may replace banks as market leaders: Sridhar Sivaram
"Once a consumer down-trades, it takes a long time for them to return to the original brand. A lot has been written about this. It's not that the middle class has shrunk—as one CEO claimed—it's that their pockets have shrunk," says Sridhar Sivaram, Enam Holdings. ADVERTISEMENT But does it have that kind of depth? The same question applies to pharma as well—does it really have the depth to rival banks purely in terms of market performance? Sridhar Sivaram: Yes, that's the question. If we go back, say 20 years, banks weren't 40% of the index. Index composition evolves over time—gradually. So, we don't know for sure if it has the depth yet. New sectors will emerge. As some participants believe, it could be the new-age economy that takes over. I don't know—maybe. People have different views. Personally, I find it hard to believe that financials will continue to be the leader. It could be another sector—maybe the new-age technology companies. A lot of them are going to get listed in the next few years; some have already made it to the index. So, they could lead. But at this point, it's all crystal-ball gazing. What within pharma interests you? Rationally, with an aging global population and India also getting there in about 30 years, pharma makes sense as a theme. But what specifically within pharma excites you right now? Sridhar Sivaram: Pharma is very bottom-up. Each company has its own dynamics. But CDMO—Contract Development and Manufacturing Organisations—is something we like. This whole segment that supports big pharma with research and manufacturing is quite attractive. A number of new companies have entered this space, and even older players are moving into it. There are also many opportunities arising due to the patent cliff in the US. A lot has been written about GLP-1 drugs and what might happen when those patents expire—that presents a huge opportunity. Many Indian pharma companies are linked to that. Now, there's good, bad, and ugly here. Some believe these drugs have side effects—but that's for the regulators to evaluate. Our point is that there's significant opportunity. Also, if you look at companies like Glenmark, which recently announced the out-licensing of one of its products using newer technologies, others are likely to follow. So, beyond CDMO and generics, Indian pharma could enter a whole new era of drug discovery. Because R&D has historically been a pain point for Indian pharma companies, right? Sridhar Sivaram: Yes, exactly. R&D investments have traditionally focused on short-term gains—next quarter or next year. But new drug discovery takes four to five years, sometimes even longer. However, with the recent successes of a few companies, we believe more players will begin investing in that space. That's how we're approaching it. ADVERTISEMENT We were just talking about new-age tech companies—some of them have already made it to the index. But on the consumption front, staples haven't shown great earnings so far. Do you think this signals a shift, where new-age companies might outpace staples? Sridhar Sivaram: On staples, my personal view is that they're too focused on protecting margins, and that's coming at the cost of volume growth. If you look at companies like DMart or Jio, they have their own private labels, which are taking away incremental growth. Go to any of these stores and you'll see clones of well-known brands in different forms. And the quality isn't bad. ADVERTISEMENT Once a consumer down-trades, it takes a long time for them to return to the original brand. A lot has been written about this. It's not that the middle class has shrunk—as one CEO claimed—it's that their pockets have shrunk. So they're down-trading, while these staple companies continue to obsess over margins. If you keep focusing on margins and give up market share, it's well documented that regaining that share is up to these companies to decide what they want to do. As investors, we have many options. I don't have to be invested in a company growing at 4-5% volume and trading at valuations north of 50 times. Why should I? Of course, there are investors with index benchmarks—they may not have a choice. But we don't have those compulsions. ADVERTISEMENT But as you say the middle class pockets are shrinking, we're also seeing a strong trend of premiumisation—whether it's autos, luxury real estate, or even within consumption. Luxury goods are outperforming staples. So how do you reconcile this argument—shrinking pockets but rising premiumisation? Sridhar Sivaram: If you look at the actual volume of premiumisation, it's largely confined to the top 3% of India. That's not India. The remaining 97% has completely different dynamics. You need to travel to rural India to understand this. Most of us live in cities and assume that's the whole picture, but it isn't. The average annual income in many parts of rural India is ₹1,00,000 to ₹1,20,000. You can't sell premium goods there. That's why local brands—offering lower price points—are eating into the sales and margins of larger companies. They understand the price sensitivity of these markets better and are delivering accordingly. (You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel)
