Matter to launch one EV bike each year; targets 60 dealerships in FY26
, an Ahmedabad-based electric motorcycle startup, plans to launch one new model every year for the next three years as part of its expansion strategy, said Co-founder and COO Arun Pratap Singh, as reported by PTI.
Speaking at the launch of the company's first geared electric bike, AERA, Singh said Matter aims to scale operations nationwide, targeting 50–60 dealerships by the end of FY26. Of these, 20 outlets are expected to be in South India, a key region for premium motorcycle demand.
'There are products planned, at least a new launch every year,' Singh said, adding the company remains focused on
electric motorcycles
, with no immediate plans for scooters.
The company began deliveries of the AERA in October 2024, after nearly six years of development. Sales were initially limited to Ahmedabad to gather feedback before rolling out nationally.
Matter expects to sell around 10,000 vehicles in FY26, ramping up to 50,000–60,000 units in the following year. Its Ahmedabad plant has a capacity of 10,000 units per month.
Strategy to resolve supply chain issue
The company has so far raised $80 million and plans to secure an additional $200 million in the next couple of years, ahead of a potential IPO in 3–4 years. On supply chain concerns, Singh acknowledged challenges around sourcing rare earth magnets and said the company is working with Chinese suppliers while also exploring non-Chinese alternatives that use magnets without rare earth materials.
'We're actively looking at alternatives to avoid future supply disruptions,' Singh said.
Matter's expansion and product roadmap signals its ambition to emerge as a key player in India's growing
electric two-wheeler market
, with a clear focus on technology, scale, and regional reach.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
44 minutes ago
- Time of India
Recover excess payment for imported ITI panels: Govt
Mumbai: The state govt issued an order on Monday to recover Rs 2.13 crore paid for Made in China interactive panels, a year after TOI reported on how norms favoring indigenous products were violated to procure devices for smart classrooms in Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs). An inquiry has also been initiated against 13 officers in the procurement section of the Department of Vocational Education and Training (DVET). The vendor, who acknowledged to the inquiry committee that it supplied Made in China panels, is now replacing them at no extra cost. The govt's order says Rs 2.13 crore was paid over and above the right price. That excess amount will have to be recovered from the vendor in 15 days. In two of the four purchase orders, price per panel ballooned by 151% with a warranty period of 5 years. In the remaining two, the markup soared to a staggering 227%, with a warranty period of merely one year. You Can Also Check: Mumbai AQI | Weather in Mumbai | Bank Holidays in Mumbai | Public Holidays in Mumbai TOI had reported on Dec 18, 2023 about the procurement of interactive panels at an inflated cost as part of a plan to install smart classrooms in ITIs. The majority of the Chinese-made panels were procured through funds received under Strive, a skills strengthening project of the World Bank and Govt of India. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo The tender was floated on the govt e-marketplace portal after disabling the "Make in India" purchase preference, contrary to what procurement agencies are encouraged to choose. The manufacturer was subsequently blacklisted on the portal and no state govt could purchase any of these panels. The govt inquiry, while acknowledging the allegations, found that all the bidders submitted their bids from the same IP address, thus inferring that there was no real competition: "it is clear that all the tenderers who are suppliers of BenQ submitted their tenders from the same IP address in both the tenders." Other observations include that "the period of warranty published in the tender was reduced in the supply and re-warranty orders and financial benefits were given to the suppliers". Moreover, "the tenderers were given illegal exemption in Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) and they were given financial benefit". "The country of origin was deliberately ignored. Therefore, it was possible for the supplier to provide the Chinese-made interactive panels." Additionally, the report said, "BenQ manufacturer was biased towards other manufacturers by conducting a tender process which was favourable and materials were procured at exorbitant prices reducing competition." Also, "an assembled OPS was purchased from another manufacturer, Digital Audio Video Solutions, Nagpur, pretending to be an OPS manufactured by BenQ. OPS or Open Pluggable Specification is a slot in interactive panels that allows for quick access to various applications and features. " The connivance between DVET and the manufacturers was clear as the inquiry report said, "The specifications prepared by the technical specifications committee were exchanged at the directorate level in both tenders published and thereby assisted BenQ suppliers in qualifying." The report concluded: "As per the detailed investigation as above, it is pointed out that there was a serious irregularity in the procurement process carried out through both the tender processes. "
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
OECD Tax Framework Collapses as G7 Bows to Trump's reciprocal tax threat
Published : Jul 07, 2025 16:03 IST - 6 MINS READ Developments that have occurred in quick succession have crushed the successful efforts made in recent years to increase global cooperation aimed at raising tax revenues to take on a host of global challenges. Late in June, the non-US six (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the UK) in the G7 announced that they had agreed to a 'side-by-side solution' that amounts to a retreat from the existing global agreement to cooperate on corporate taxation. They have decided to exempt US multinationals from being subject to a minimum tax on their profits of 15 per cent, as required under an agreement sealed in 2021. To recall, after years of negotiation, an agreement titled the 'OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS)' was arrived at in 2021 under the auspices of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), with non-OECD countries too joining the discussion. That agreement was a commitment on the part of over 140 governments to work towards implementing a common framework to tax the global profits of transnational companies that find ways to transfer to and record their profits in low tax locations where they often have little economic activity. The BEPS framework was a means to combat such tax avoidance practices that reduce national and aggregate global tax revenues, and help governments tax profits in jurisdictions where economic activity actually occurs and value creation takes place. Also Read | A summit of subordinates The core of the agreement, which recommended 15 actions, was named Pillar Two of the framework. This was by no means far-reaching. It merely set a 15 per cent floor rate of tax on the profits of multinationals in all the cooperating jurisdictions, which was much lower than the 25-30 per cent considered reasonable by those looking to raise resources for meeting various financing challenges. Dissatisfaction over this and the tardy move to implement the OECD agreement set off demands for a global tax convention under the auspices of the UN, which would give less developed countries more of a say in determining the terms of the agreement and a greater role in its implementation. Some progress has been achieved on this, with a UN General Assembly decision to constitute an ad hoc committee to draft the terms of reference for a UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation. Negotiations on the convention were to occur over 2025 to 2027. Weaponised tariffs However, from the very start the US—though a party to the OECD agreement—has been expressing reservations about a number of the proposed measures, especially the Pillar Two global minimum tax. With US multinationals being the principal adopters of profit-shifting strategies, they would have been the main targets of any such minimum tax, however low. So, the US, while committed to the inclusive framework, campaigned during Donald Trump's first term as President of the US, for a much-diluted version of the minimum tax proposal. And, in Trump's more aggressive second term, in which he has chosen to weaponise tariffs and taxes, Pillar Two seems to be under attack. Going on the offensive, the original version of Trump's so-called 'big beautiful' budget Bill included a section—Section 899—that authorised the US government to impose 'revenge taxes' on foreign investments emanating from countries that 'discriminated' against US firms in their tax practices. Support for a minimum corporate tax on global profits in locations were they were actually earned was seen as an instance of such discrimination. In the face of that threat, the non-US members of the G7 caved in and agreed to a side-by-side solution that exempts US multinationals from the global minimum tax provision, which amounts to dumping Pillar Two and with it the OECD agreement. That would also undermine efforts to institute an effective UN convention on international taxation, since leading countries are now likely to opt out of the convention. The link between the decision on the minimum tax and the proposed revenge taxes was clearly revealed when the US Treasury Department asked the US Congress to drop Section 899 because, in Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's words, the US had secured concessions exempting US companies from the OECD's global minimum tax regime. In fact, the Trump administration seems set to destroy all efforts at combating tax avoidance by threatening action against any international taxation measures that target multinational profits. Days after the 'side-by-side solution' was announced by non-US G7 members, Canada declared that it was scrapping a proposed tax on digital services companies that was to come into effect on June 30. The tax involved was a paltry levy of 3 per cent, which was to apply on revenues earned by firms like Meta, Netflix, and Amazon from cross-border provision of services to Canadian clients. But even that small levy was expected to increase Canada's federal government revenues by $5.3 billion over five years. Trump declared the tax a 'direct and blatant' attack on US firms, and suspended negotiations on a deal on reciprocal and special tariffs. Fearing that the tax would upend discussions on that deal, Canadian Prime Minister Mike Carney said that his government had decided to scrap the levy in order to facilitate resumption of trade talks. Global repercussions This too is likely to be a precedent with global repercussions. Many countries, especially in the EU like France have digital services taxes in place. Germany has been considering imposing a 10 per cent tax on global digital platforms like Meta and Google. And the European Commission has been talking of imposing a tax on the advertising revenues of tech firms. All of these are now under threat, as revoking them may be made a precondition for any deal on tariffs, even though there are signs that a baseline 10 per cent reciprocal tariff on imports into the US will remain and only special tariffs above these are up for negotiation. Also Read | Trade is very central to Trump's world view: Navtej Sarna One of Trump's slogans is that he wants to 'Make America Great Again' by bringing back manufacturing that had moved abroad, not least by relying on import tariffs. That could affect the profits of US firms if they are forced to withdraw from low-cost production locations abroad. Simultaneously, he seems intent on fighting discrimination against US multinationals to protect the profits of US firms. The possibility that the two objectives might be in contradiction seems lost on the President. C.P. Chandrasekhar taught for more than three decades at the Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. He is currently Senior Research Fellow at the Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts Amherst, US.
Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
Xi Jinping losing his grip? Signs emerge of chaos in China's military and political circles
President Xi Jinping's absence from the BRICS summit sparks speculation of internal turmoil in China, despite official claims of a scheduling conflict. Experts suggest Xi may be facing challenges to his leadership and control, while widening rifts within BRICS, fueled by trade disputes and China-India tensions, further complicate the situation. Premier Li Qiang is attending instead. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Xi Jinping Skips BRICS Summit for First Time Experts See Signs of Turmoil at Home Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Premier Li Qiang Steps In Widening Rifts Within BRICS China-India Tensions Add Pressure FAQs Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads For the first time since it was started, Chinese President Xi Jinping is not attending the BRICS summit , a move that's raising speculations that something must be going terribly wrong within China, as per a official explanation from Beijing is simple, a 'scheduling conflict,' and that Xi had already met with Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva earlier this year, but experts are convinced, as per Fox sudden absence from this week's gathering of major emerging economies in Brazil for BRICS is prompting questions about the stability of his leadership at home, according to the Fox News expert on US-China relations, Gordon Chang said, "That doesn't make sense," adding, "There are many other countries at the BRICS summit, not just Brazil. To me, it's extremely significant that Xi Jinping is not going. It suggests turbulence at home — there are signs he's lost control of the military and that civilian rivals are reasserting power. This is a symptom of that," as quoted in the READ: Keir Starmer on the way out? This surprise contender could be the UK's next Prime Minister According to a Fox News report, Premier Li Qiang is attending the summit in Brazil instead of Xi, continuing a recent trend of Xi scaling back his appearances on the global Burack of the Heritage Foundation also pointed out that Xi's absence might indicate deeper issues, saying, "It's another indication that BRICS is not going to be China's vassalization of the Global South," as quoted in the explained that countries like Brazil and Indonesia have recently imposed tariffs on China over industrial overcapacity and dumping, which reflect widening rifts within the group. Burack pointed out that, "China is actively harming all those countries for the most part, maybe with some exceptions, through its malign trade policies and dumping and overcapacity," as quoted by Fox READ: Nvidia just dropped a game-changer — CEO Jensen Huang calls it a miracle for AI supercomputing While a few analysts have also cited rising China-India friction as a possible reason for Xi's decision to not attend the summit, according to the pointed out that, "China has been at war with India for decades, essentially," adding, "These are fundamentally opposing interests. It's difficult to see China changing its behavior in the near term, and that will keep tensions high," as quoted by Fox to the report, Indian prime minister Narendra Modi is expected to take a leading role at the summit, which could have been another deterrent for Xi's attendance. The author of The Red Emperor, a biography of Xi, Michael Sheridan said, Xi, as the Red Emperor, does not want to be overshadowed,' as quoted in the due to a scheduling conflict and because he already met Brazil's president this year. But many experts suspect political turmoil at unclear, but experts suggest he may be facing internal challenges or strategic shifts.
