US tariffs to hit India's GDP growth, prompt more rate cuts
MUMBAI, April 3 (Reuters) - India's economic growth could slow by 20-40 basis points in the ongoing financial year due to the latest U.S. tariffs, which would prompt deeper interest rate cuts by the central bank, analysts said.
U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday slapped a 26% reciprocal tariff on India, threatening the Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) estimate of 6.7% economic growth in 2025-26 and the government's economic survey forecast of 6.3%-6.8%.
After the tariffs, Goldman Sachs lowered its growth estimate to 6.1% from 6.3%. Citi forecast a 40 bps drag on growth directly and indirectly, while Mumbai-based QuantEco Research estimated a 30 bps hit.
Moreover, with inflation expected to average 4.2% this financial year, close to the RBI's target, the central bank cut interest rates for the first time in five years in February. It is expected to follow that with another 25 bps cut to 6.00% at the conclusion of its April 7-9 meeting, per a Reuters poll.
However, while the poll showed that economists had expected just one more cut after that -- to a policy repo rate of 5.75% in August -- before a prolonged pause, the U.S. tariffs have prompted a rethink to those estimates.
Goldman, Citi and QuantEco Research had also predicted just one to two more cuts this year, but now expect 75 bps of cuts this financial year, taking the policy rate to 5.5%, which would be the lowest since August 2022.
"This would be an appropriate risk minimization strategy on the face of larger downside risks to growth compared to much lower upside risk to inflation," Citi's India chief economist Samiran Chakraborty said in a note late on Thursday.
The growth-inflation dynamics "open up policy space for the MPC (monetary policy committee) to support growth, while remaining focussed on aligning inflation with the target," the MPC said in February.
The Indian economy's growth is expected to have slowed to a four-year low of 6.5% in the financial year ended March 31, as urban demand weakened due to high inflation, tight liquidity and tougher RBI rules slowing loan growth across personal loans and credit cards.
The central bank has, however, significantly eased liquidity conditions since new Governor Sanjay Malhotra took over in December. Plans to further tighten banking regulations have also been pushed back.
Alongside this, the government announced a tax relief for all Indians earning up to 1.2 million rupees a year in its annual budget in February.
The tax cuts and monetary policy easing will help domestic demand, said a government source who asked not to be identified.
These should act as buffers for the economy, the source said, adding that India sees no need for an economy-wide stimulus at this stage but sector-specific stress could be addressed through targeted measures.
"Rewriting of trade rules would prompt policymakers globally to take a hard look at reviving domestic consumption and demand," said Vivek Kumar, economist at QuantEco Research.
For India, this could be through interest rate cuts and a weaker currency, he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
Trump-Musk feud shows what happens when unregulated money floods politics
Elon Musk said, very loudly and very publicly, what is usually the quiet part of the role of money in US politics. 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate. Such ingratitude,' he wrote on his X social media platform amid an ongoing feud with Donald Trump. When rightwing commentator Laura Loomer wrote that Republicans on Capitol Hill had been discussing whom to side with in the inter-party feud, Musk replied with a nod toward the long tail of his influence. 'Oh and some food for thought as they ponder this question: Trump has 3.5 years left as President, but I will be around for 40+ years … ,' Musk wrote on X. Billionaires in the US often seek to influence politics in big and small ways, throwing their money and influence around to extract what they want from the government. But few are as explicit and influential as Musk has proven in the past year – and it's showing just how transactional and broken US governance has become. The Trump-Musk battle exemplifies the post-Citizens United picture of US politics: the world's richest person paid handsomely to elect his favored candidate, then took a formal, if temporary, role with a new governmental initiative created for him that focused on dismantling parts of the government he didn't like. We're sitting ringside to a fight between the mega-rich president and the far richer Republican donor to see who can cut more services from the poor. As one satirical website put it: 'Aw! These Billionaires Are Fighting Over How Much Money to Steal From Poor People.' Fifteen years ago, the US supreme court ruled that corporations and outside groups could spend as much as they wanted on elections. In that ruling, conservative justice Anthony Kennedy said: 'The appearance of influence or access, furthermore, will not cause the electorate to lose faith in our democracy.' In the years since, it's become clear that these infusions of wealth have eroded democracy, with Musk's ostentatious example accelerating an already out-of-control level of money in politics. Musk spent nearly $300m to elect Trump in 2024. It's the billionaire's government now. 'Fifteen years after that decision, we're seeing the full culmination of living under a Citizens United world – where it's not just elections that are for sale, but it's that our entire government, and the apparatus of our government, is up for sale,' Tiffany Muller, the president of End Citizens United, told the Bulwark earlier this year. Musk isn't alone here: in races up and down the ballot, ultra-rich donors are throwing around their cash to get their favored candidates elected. This is the standard state of play for politics in the US now, in both political parties. Bernie Sanders confronted Democrats at their convention last year to say: 'Billionaires in both parties should not be able to buy elections, including primary elections.' Earlier this year, Musk poured big money into a Wisconsin judicial election, but lost to the Democratic candidate. And he's sent small-dollar donations to Republicans who wanted to go after judges who ruled against the Trump administration. The threat of his money, even if it is uneven and has an inconsistent success record, looms large for both political parties. But, by virtue of his unelected role, Musk couldn't do as much as he wanted to stop Trump's signature spending bill – or so it seems so far. Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' didn't cut enough spending or favor Musk enough or otherwise meet his litmus test for a budget. And when the administration stopped working for him, he turned on it, blazing out the door in a chaotic fashion. It's a fitting coda to the uneasy alliance between Trump and Musk that started with a warm embrace and front-row status for the ultra-wealthy when Trump took office. The fact that Musk holds such sway over the budget process is in itself corruption. Trump has said Musk knew what was in the bill, the undertone being that the administration sought his approval before the public explosion. Musk embraced a brawling style of political spending that is rare among the uber-wealthy, who tend to let their money speak louder than their public words. One expert in philanthropy previously told the Guardian Musk stood out because of his 'complete eschewal of discretion as a mode of political engagement'. Musk is now rallying his followers on X to reach out to their members of Congress and kill the bill, a quest that could be successful, depending on how Republican lawmakers shake out when they're forced to decide between their ideologue president and a megadonor known for his vindictiveness. In rightwing media, the feud has created a chasm. On Breitbart, one commentator noted how Trump was 'sticking his finger in the eye of his biggest donor and that never happens'. In the American Spectator, one writer opined that Musk did not elect Trump: 'the American people did.' But in the pages of the Washington Examiner, Musk's stance on the bill was praised because Trump's budget plan 'deserves to die'. 'I don't mind Elon turning against me, but he should have done so months ago,' Trump wrote to cap off a series of posts and public comments about Musk. Musk has 'lost his mind', the president said in a TV interview Friday. So far, Republican officials are lining up behind Trump. 'President Trump has done more than any person in my lifetime to earn the trust of the movement he leads,' JD Vance said. If Musk ultimately loses, he could take his money and run elsewhere. He floated the idea of creating a third political party, a prospect that's been tried many times before but without the wealth infusion and bully pulpit he'd offer to the cause. Democrats, themselves quite reliant on rich donors, will lobby for him to switch sides. The Democratic representative Ro Khanna suggested the party should 'be in a dialogue' with Musk. Although Khanna, who represents Silicon Valley and has called for the left to embrace economic populism, saw intense backlash against his comments from his party, he doubled down. 'If Biden had a big supporter criticize him, Trump would have hugged him the next day,' he wrote on X. 'When we refused to meet with @RobertKennedyJr, Trump embraced him & won. We can be the party of sanctimonious lectures, or the party of FDR that knows how to win & build a progressive majority.'
Daily Record
4 hours ago
- Daily Record
New Ryanair, easyJet and Wizz Air bag rules coming for Spain and Greece
The EU rule, which will apply to UK holidaymakers, will change the law on what you take onto a plane - and how much you pay The European Union is planning a change in the rules on carry-on bags on flights, which would cover planes flying between the UK and countries including Spain, Portugal, Greece, France and Italy. At the minute, some airlines charge passengers for each item they want to take aboard. Different airlines have different rules - meaning the size of the bag you can take aboard and how much it will cost you - is different each time. The new EU rule would set a specific size of bag you would be allowed to take on flights operated by companies like easyJet, Ryanair and Wizz Air. And the rule would stipulate that the take-on bag would be free, the airline would not be able to charge you extra to take a bag aboard the plane. The rule would change the confusion that see people being charged extra when they get to the airport for bags deemed too big, or too heavy. And people being charged for a bag by one airline but allowed to take it without additional fees by another. EU transport ministers this week proposed standardised sizing for free underseat baggage on EU airlines. It will become law if it is accepted by the European Parliament. The new rule would mean passengers are guaranteed one free personal item, measuring up to 40x30x15cm (including wheels and handles) - or which could reasonably fit under a plane seat. The rules would apply to EU-based airlines, including when they are carrying passengers from a non-EU country like the UK to an EU country and vice-versa. 11 years ago, an EU court ruled that hand baggage should not be subject to an additional fee so long as it is a reasonable size. But the ruling did not define 'reasonable'. Currently, Ryanair allows a free carry-on bag of 40x20x25cm, while easyJet's rules for a free bag are 45x36x20 cm, including wheels and handles. The new rule would cover under-seat bags, but does not currently mention bags you put in overhead lockers. In November, five airlines in Spain were fined £150million for 'abusive practices', including charging for hand luggage. Spain's Consumer Rights Ministry said it planned to ban charging extra for carry-on luggage. Ryanair told the BBC it fully complied with EU law. A spokesman said: "If airlines were forced to include additional carry-on bags as part of the basic fare, it would reduce choice and drive up air fares for all passengers, which would harm consumers." Industry group Airlines For Europe said charging different amounts depending on baggage "allows passengers to choose the exact services that best suits their needs". Travel consumer expert Jane Hawkes, told the BBC: "A one-size-fits-all kind of approach would make it a lot simpler for passengers."
Reuters
4 hours ago
- Reuters
ECB's Escriva sees scope for minor monetary policy easing
MADRID, June 8 (Reuters) - The path of monetary policy easing in the euro zone could require further adjustments if the current macroeconomic and inflation outlooks are confirmed, ECB policymaker Jose Luis Escriva said. Last week, the ECB cut interest rates and hinted at a pause after inflation in the euro zone returned to its 2% target. Escriva, who is also Bank of Spain Governor, said in an interview to newspaper El Pais on Sunday that he "was very comfortable" with the current, gradual approach of successive 25-basis-point rate cuts. "Our central scenario – GDP growth of around 1%, inflation of 2% – could require some fine-tuning if it is confirmed," Escriva. The ECB has cut rates 2 percentage points since last June, to prop up a euro zone economy also hit by erratic U.S. economic and trade policies. Escriva said confidence in the dollar and U.S. assets had decreased since U.S. President Donald Trump took office and that since April, the dollar had not been a "safe haven" and its dominance as a global reserve currency appeared to have peaked. He also said the Bank of Spain was expected to revise downwards on Tuesday the forecast for Spanish economic growth by a few decimal points from the current 2.7% for 2025.
