Whisky sales: Indian liquor cos seek end of discrimination in UK
NEW DELHI: Scotch and British gin makers may have been successful in gaining lower duty access to the Indian market, but domestic players are miffed and allege discrimination against Indian brands when they ship their products to the UK.
"The UK and even the European Union do not allow fair imports of most Indian-Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) products due to non-tariff barriers related to maturation and ingredients. We only wish that the Indian govt had stood firm on the issue of non-tariff barriers," said Anant S Iyer, director general of Confederation of Indian Alcoholic Beverage Companies (CIABC) told TOI here.
Norms in the UK allow a product to be classified as whisky if it has been matured for at least three years, the same yardstick that the UK applies for brands produced and sold in their country.
Iyer, however, described it as unfair, arguing that in cold weather it takes time to mature. "In India, the maturation is much faster. A longer maturity period, say, three years, means that around one-third of our spirit will evaporate due to the hotter climate which will not only result in losses but also impact the quality of the product."
He said that the rules force Indian companies to classify their whisky as 'Indian spirits', effectively keeping them off bounds in the UK market.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
The boy meets a dog on the street - no one expected what happened next.
Women's Method
Learn More
Undo
"We would like to label our products as Indian Whisky or Indian Rum/Brandy and sell the same in the UK/EU and allow the market and consumer to decide."
CIABC is petitioning that govt takes up "the issue of discrimination" with the UK govt to ensure that Indian brands, which fiercely compete with the western products here, are allowed the same opportunity abroad.
The lobby group has also suggested a minimum import price (MIP) on Bottled-in-Origin (BIO) products coming in from Scotland to ensure that the Scotch whiskies are not imported to India at lower rates.
Stay informed with the latest
business
news, updates on
bank holidays
and
public holidays
.
AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
10 minutes ago
- The Hindu
How will Trump's tariffs impact India?
The story so far: On July 30, U.S. President Donald Trump announced 25% tariffs on imports from India 'plus a penalty'. While this puts to rest months of speculation over what the tariffs would be on Indian imports into the U.S., it opens up fresh uncertainties with respect to a potential bilateral trade agreement between India and the U.S. What did Mr. Trump announce? Taking to social media, Mr. Trump cited India's tariff and non-tariff measures on trade, and its dealing with Russia on energy and military equipment, as the main reasons behind imposing the 25% tariffs and the penalty. There is no clarity yet on what the penalty will look like, but Mr. Trump has in the past threatened a 10% additional tariff on BRICS countries. If this comes to pass, then effective tariffs on Indian imports would be 35%. There is also a legislation in the U.S. in the process of being passed that could see an additional 500% tariff on India, China, and Brazil for their dealings with Russia. What does it mean for India? Tariffs are paid by importers. Therefore, tariffs on Indian imports would be paid by those in the U.S. that are importing Indian goods. That is, Indian goods will become more expensive for them. Therein lies the true problem for India. On a macro level, the tariffs and the impact they will have on Indian exports are expected to only lower India's GDP by 0.2%, according to research by the Bank of Baroda. So, if India's growth forecast had been 6.6%, then these tariffs — if they are imposed — could lower growth to 6.4%. However, the issue arises in individual sectors. According to the Bank of Baroda, sectors such as garments, precious stones, auto parts, leather products, and electronics (although their inclusion is uncertain) could face the pinch and would have to rework their strategies. 'The issue really is that some of the competing nations like Vietnam (20%), Korea (15%) and Indonesia (19%) have lower tariffs compared with India,' the Bank of Baroda added in its research note. How did things come to such a pass? While most trade deals are negotiated over years, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Mr. Trump in February 2025 announced that they would conclude the first tranche of a trade deal by fall. To put this in perspective, the recently-signed Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement between India and the U.K. took about three years to negotiate. What made the announcement by Mr. Modi and Mr. Trump notable was that it came before the latter's big moves on reciprocal tariffs, which is what pushed other countries to start negotiating with the U.S. The announcement was thus a strong and positive commitment towards strengthening ties between the two countries. But then, on April 2, Mr. Trump announced his Liberation Day reciprocal tariffs. These included a 10% baseline tariff for all countries, and additional tariffs on a country-by-country case. For India, this total was 26%. However, just a week later, Mr. Trump announced a 90-day pause on these tariffs so that bilateral deals could be struck so as to reduce the U.S.'s trade deficit with most of its trading partners. The 90-day pause was to end in July, but Mr. Trump extended it to August 1. What are the points of friction? It's hard to pinpoint any single recent development that has soured relations, but there have been several points of friction between the two countries in the past few months. The matter of India's tariffs and non-tariff barriers has been something Mr. Trump has been highlighting since his first term as President. It was no surprise that he would take up the issue in his second term. Soured relations: The Hindu editorial on Trump's 25% tariff, 'penalty' Mr. Trump has brought up India's engagement with Russia, too, saying countries like India are partly financing Russia's war with Ukraine. India, however, has reiterated that it will secure its national and energy security, and if that means buying cheap Russian oil, then that is what it would do. Russia currently accounts for about 35-40% of India's oil imports, making it a significant partner. In addition, India has remained adamant about keeping core parts of its agriculture and dairy sectors out of trade deals, including with the U.S. This has upset negotiators on the U.S. side, but it is a 'red line' India will not cross. Opening up these sectors would expose India's relatively low-productivity farmers to global competition, which will likely have devastating impacts on their livelihoods. Then, there is the fact that Mr. Trump has repeatedly stated that it was him, and his trade talks, that encouraged India and Pakistan to agree to a ceasefire following the launch of Operation Sindoor by India. The fact that the Indian government has refuted it has only further angered Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump's claims have irked the Indian establishment as well, since it has provided the Opposition a means to attack the government. India has informed the World Trade Organization that it reserves the right to impose additional tariffs on imports from the U.S. to retaliate against its higher tariffs on items like steel, aluminium, and automobiles. Taking these things together, Mr. Trump's tariff announcement comes as a confirmation that at least one, if not all of these factors, worked toward souring relations. Will India continue paying these tariffs? Although there has been a lot of talk about a 'mini-deal' between India and the U.S. to walk back the reciprocal tariffs, Indian officials have been cagey about the date for such a deal. The tariff announcement by Mr. Trump confirms that such a deal is not coming. However, the two sides have been remarkably consistent about their commitment of having some sort of trade deal finalised by the fall 2025 deadline. So far, negotiators from the two sides have met in New Delhi and Washington five times, including the first meeting in March where the Terms of Reference for the negotiations were finalised. The team from the U.S. will visit India in late August to take forward the talks. Things have, however, become trickier for Indian negotiators because Mr. Trump has now directly linked India's dealings with Russia to India's trade relationship with the U.S. The tariffs will come into effect soon. According to an Executive Order dated July 31, Mr. Trump said that his duties on India and other countries would come into effect '7 days after the date of this order'. What about deals with other countries? Over the last month, Mr. Trump has concluded deals with the U.K., Indonesia, the Philippines, Japan, the EU, and South Korea. The deal with the U.K. does not specify a general tariff level, but it will see British car exports to the U.S. attract a 10% tariff, down from the earlier 27.5% and a removal of tariffs on aerospace exports to the U.S. Japan negotiated lower tariffs of 15% for its exports to the U.S., the same as the EU.
Time of India
37 minutes ago
- Time of India
SC backs mother's right to gift self-acquired property to son
Hyderabad: In a ruling that strengthens the property rights of Hindu women, the Supreme Court has brought closure to a bitter family dispute by upholding a mother's decision to gift her self-acquired property to one of her sons. The apex court dismissed a special leave petition filed by her youngest son, who had challenged the validity of the gift deed on the grounds that the property was joint family property. At the heart of the dispute lies a prime three-storeyed residence in Jubilee Hills, spread across 1,182 square yards. The property was purchased in 1988 by Susheela Agarwal in her own name, a key fact that ultimately shaped the outcome of the legal battle. You Can Also Check: Hyderabad AQI | Weather in Hyderabad | Bank Holidays in Hyderabad | Public Holidays in Hyderabad Calling the verdict a landmark moment, advocate Dishit Bhattacharjee—representing the second son—said, "This judgment is a clear affirmation of women's autonomy over their property and a strong deterrent against baseless partition claims." In 2022, Susheela gifted the property through a registered deed to her eldest son. Her youngest son, Bajranglal Agarwal, objected, claiming that the property had been bought by their late father in the mother's name and that she had no independent means to finance such a purchase. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 15 Most Beautiful Female Athletes in the World Click Here Undo He sought a partition, asserting that the asset formed part of the joint family property. However, both the trial court and the Telangana high court summarily rejected the suit under Order VII, Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, stating it failed to establish a valid cause of action and was barred under section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act. The high court bench, headed by Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya, observed that the petitioner had previously accepted his mother's authority over the property when she had drafted a will in August 2022, dividing it equally among her three sons. The twist came when the mother revised her will and executed a gift deed in December 2022, granting the entire property to her eldest son. While the second son respected her decision, the youngest son launched a legal challenge, reversing his earlier stance and contending that the property belonged to the joint family. During the proceedings, the mother's counsel produced clear documentation showing that the purchase in 1988 was made from her personal funds, with payments made via her own cheques—establishing her exclusive ownership. Invoking section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, which grants Hindu women full ownership over property acquired by them, the courts consistently upheld her right to deal with the property as she pleased. With the Supreme Court's refusal to admit the appeal, the ruling now stands as final. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Friendship Day wishes , messages and quotes !
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
HC stays govt notice on creation of STF police stns
1 2 Kolkata: A division bench of Calcutta High Court's Jalpaiguri circuit bench has stayed a Bengal govt gazette notification announcing the creation of two Special Task Force (STF) police stations and tying them up with two existing courts in two parts of the state. The state had set up the designated police stations — one in north Bengal and the other in south — to register FIRs and investigate offences under special acts like Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Arms Act, Unlawful Activities Prevention Act and Prevention of Money Laundering Act. "The entire scheme of BNSS has been sought to be frustrated, prima facie" by such a notification, said a bench of justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Uday Kumar, ordering an interim stay on it till Sept 15 or until further orders. You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata "Access to justice is not a fancy right. If the notification is to be given force, then a person living in a remote area will never report an offence," Justice Bhattacharyya observed. The bench, however, held that FIRs already registered with the two STF police stations and the investigation thereafter would not be affected by the stay order but their fate shall depend on the outcome of the writ petition. The state, by a notification on Jan 31, created one STF police station at the STF HQ in Salt Lake for all south Bengal districts from Murshidabad to East Midnapore, other than areas under the jurisdiction of Kolkata Police, and the other at Ambikanagar in Siliguri for all north Bengal districts. 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 By a subsequent notification on May 16, the govt tied up these police stations with the ACJM court, Bidhannagar and ACJM court, Siliguri. The additional advocate general pleaded that the executive action was well within the powers of state govt. However, the bench underscored the distinction between "local jurisdiction" of courts and determination of "local area" of police stations under BNSS. Having referred to the distinction, the bench held that the state had "picked and chosen" the local limits of police stations "at its whims". Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Friendship Day wishes , messages and quotes !
