India worried about Chinese 'dumping' as trade tensions with Trump escalate
The pace at 64-year-old Thirunavkarsu's spinning mill in southern India's Tamil Nadu state has noticeably slowed down.
The viscose yarn – a popular material that goes into making woven garments – he produces, now sits in storage, as orders from local factories have dropped nearly 40% in the last month.
That's because Chinese import of the material has become cheaper by 15 rupees ($0.18; £0.13) per kilo and has flooded Indian ports.
With Donald Trump imposing tariffs of up to 145% on Chinese goods going into the US, manufacturers in China have begun looking for alternative markets.
India's textiles makers say they are bearing the brunt of the trade tensions as Chinese producers are dumping yarn in key production hubs.
While China is the leading producer of viscose yarn, India makes most of the viscose yarn the country needs locally with imports only bridging supply gaps.
Mill owners like Thirunavkarsu fear their yarn won't survive the onslaught of such competition.
"We can't match these rates. Our raw material is not as cheap," he says.
Jagadesh Chandran, of the South India Spinners Association, told the BBC nearly 50 small spinning mills in the textile hubs of Pallipalayam, Karur and Tirupur in southern India are "slowing production". Many say they'll be forced to scale down further if the issue isn't addressed.
China's Ambassador to India, Xu Feihong has sent assurances to India that his country will not dump products and in fact wants to buy more high-quality Indian products for Chinese consumers.
"We will not engage in market dumping or cut-throat competition, nor will we disrupt other countries' industries and economic development," he wrote in an opinion piece for the Indian Express newspaper.
But anxieties about dumping are spread across sectors in India, as China - Asia's biggest economy - is the world's largest exporter of practically all industrial goods, from textiles and metals, to chemicals and rare minerals.
While pharmaceuticals - and later phones, laptops, and semiconductor chips - were exempted from steep tariffs, large chunks of Chinese exports still run into Trump's 145% tariff wall. It is these goods that are expected to chase other markets like India.
Their sudden inflow will prove "very disruptive" to emerging economies in Asia, according to Japanese broking house Nomura, whose research earlier revealed that China was flooding global markets with cheap goods even before Donald Trump took office earlier this year.
In 2024, investigations against unfair Chinese imports rose to a record high. Data from the World Trade Organisation (WTO) shows, nearly 200 complaints were filed against China at the forum - a record - including 37 from India.
India in particular, with heavy dependencies on Chinese raw materials and intermediate goods, could be hit hard. Its trade deficit with China - the difference between what it imports and exports - has already ballooned to $100bn (£75bn). And imports in March jumped 25%, driven by electronics, batteries and solar cells.
In response, India's trade ministry has set up a committee to track the influx of cheap Chinese goods, with its quasi-judicial arm probing imports across sectors, including viscose yarn.
India also recently imposed a 12% tax on some steel imports, locally known as a safeguard duty, to help halt an increase in cheap shipments primarily from China, which were pushing some Indian mills to scale down.
Despite such protections - and a loud marketing campaign by Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government to boost manufacturing locally - India has found it hard to reduce its reliance on China, with imports rising even when border tensions between the two neighbours peaked after 2020.
That's because the government has only had "limited success" with its plans to turn India into the world's factory through things like the production linked subsidies, says Biswajit Dhar, a Delhi-based trade expert. And India continues to depend heavily on China for the intermediate goods that go into manufacturing finished products.
While western multi-national companies like Apple are increasingly looking towards India to diversify their assembly lines away from China, India is still dependent on Chinese components to make these phones. As a result, imports in sectors like electronics have risen significantly, pushing up its trade deficit.
India's burgeoning deficit is a "worrying story", says Ajay Srivastava, founder of the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) think tank, all the more so because its exports to China have dropped to below 2014 levels despite a weaker currency, which should ideally help exporters.
"This isn't just a trade imbalance. It's a structural warning. Our industrial growth, including through PLI (production linked incentive) schemes, is fuelling imports, not building domestic depth," Srivastava wrote in a social media post. In other words, the subsidies are not helping India export more.
"We can't bridge this deficit without bridging our competitiveness gap."
India needs to get its act together quickly to do that, given the opportunity US trade tensions with China have presented. But also because countries with a large rise in imports from China generally tend to see the sharpest slowdown in manufacturing growth, according to Nomura.
Akash Prakash of Amansa Capital agrees. A key reason why Indian private companies were not investing enough, was because they feared being "swamped by China", he wrote in a column in the Business Standard newspaper. A recent study by the ratings agency Icra also corroborates this view.
With fears of Chinese dumping becoming more widespread and the likes of the European Union seeking firm guarantees from Beijing that its markets will not be flooded, pressure is mounting on China - which is now urgently looking to secure newer trading partners outside the US.
China wants to completely shift the narrative, says Mr Dhar, "It is trying to come clean amidst increased scrutiny".
Despite the reassurances from Beijing, Delhi should use thawing relations with its larger neighbour to kickstart a proper dialogue on its firm stance about dumping, says Mr Dhar.
"This is an issue that India must flag, like most of the Western countries have."
Follow BBC News India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Foxconn Ships 97% of India-Made iPhones to U.S.
Apple's (NASDAQ:AAPL) efforts to sidestep steep U.S. tariffs on China-made handsets are crystalizing in India, where Foxconn shipped roughly 97% of its $3.2 billion in iPhone exports to the U.S. between March and Mayup from a 50.3% U.S. share in 2024. May alone saw about $1 billion of India-made iPhones land stateside, the second-largest monthly tally after March's $1.3 billion, according to customs data. In the first five months of 2025, Foxconn has sent $4.4 billion worth of devices from India to Americaalready surpassing the full-year 2024 total of $3.7 billion. Apple CEO Tim Cook told investors that most iPhones sold in the June quarter in the U.S. would be built in India, part of a broader push to diversify manufacturing beyond China. Foxconn's plants and Tata Electronics' three South India facilitieswhere 86% of their March-April output also went to the central to that strategy. Apple has even lobbied Chennai airport officials to cut customs clearance times from 30 hours to six, smoothing the export pipeline. While India faces its own tariff negotiationsa baseline 10% import duty and a paused 26% surcharge proposed by the Trump administrationApple's shift underscores how global supply chains are realigning around tariff arbitrage. In parallel, former President Trump has threatened 25% levies on iPhones not made in the U.S. and floated 55% duties on Chinese goods, highlighting the political stakes. Why It Matters: With India becoming a primary export hub for U.S. iPhone sales, Apple could trim tariff drag and fortify its supply resiliencebut must navigate evolving duties and geopolitical headwinds. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


Washington Post
16 minutes ago
- Washington Post
US shifts military resources in Mideast in response to Israel strikes and possible Iran attack
WASHINGTON — The United States is shifting military resources, including ships, in the Middle East in response to Israel's strikes on Iran and a possible retaliatory attack by Tehran, two U.S. officials said Friday. The Navy has directed the destroyer USS Thomas Hudner to begin sailing toward the Eastern Mediterranean and has directed a second destroyer to begin moving forward, so it can be available if requested by the White House. President Donald Trump is meeting with his National Security Council principals to discuss the situation. The two U.S. officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to provide details not yet made public. The forces in the region have been taking precautionary measures for days, including having military dependents voluntarily depart regional bases, in anticipation of the strikes and to protect those personnel in case of a large-scale response from Tehran. There are typically around 30,000 troops based in the Middle East. However, that number surged as high as 43,000 last October amid the ongoing tensions between Israel and Iran as well as continuous attacks on commercial and military ships in the Red Sea by the Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen. The Hudner is an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer that is capable of defending against ballistic missiles. On Oct. 1, 2024, U.S. Navy destroyers fired about a dozen interceptors in defense of Israel as the country came under attack by more than 200 missiles fired by Iran.


WIRED
17 minutes ago
- WIRED
Here's What Federal Troops Can (and Can't) Do While Deployed in LA
Jun 13, 2025 9:48 AM Pentagon rules sharply limit US Marines and National Guard activity in Los Angeles, prohibiting arrests, surveillance, and other customary police work. Marine recruits march during a training exercise at Camp Pendleton, California. Photograph: Michael Macor/AP Photo For the first time in decades, active-duty US Marines are rolling into Los Angeles—not for disaster relief or training drills, but to guard federal buildings during a protest crackdown that legal experts say threatens long-standing limits on military power at home. The deployment, announced by President Donald Trump on Monday, involves more than 700 Marines from the 2nd Battalion, 7th Regiment of the 1st Marine Division, based at Camp Pendleton and Twentynine Palms. Mobilized under Title 10 orders, the Marines have been commanded to protect federal property and personnel from mounting protests over aggressive immigration raids and neighborhood sweeps. It is a rare and forceful use of federal military power on US soil. The mobilization follows Trump's June 7 order that federalized as many as 4,000 California national guardsmen, overriding the objections of state officials and igniting a national debate over the constitutional limits of his authority and igniting a high-stakes legal fight. A US district judge on Thursday ordered Trump to return control of the guardsmen to the state of California, saying the takeover was unlawful, only likely to inflame tensions in the city, and had deprived the state of resources necessary 'to fight fires, combat the fentanyl trade, and perform other critical functions.' The injunction was quickly stayed, however, by a federal appeals court, pending a hearing next week. Protests began Friday in Westlake, an immigrant-heavy neighborhood near downtown LA, where residents rallied in response to sweeping ICE raids that targeted day laborers outside local businesses. Demonstrators marched, held signs, and chanted for several hours before tensions escalated after police declared an unlawful assembly and advanced on the crowd. LAPD officers and federal agents deployed a range of crowd control weapons, including batons, tear gas, pepper spray, and flash-bang grenades. Reports from journalists and observers describe nonviolent protesters—and members of the press—being struck by rubber bullets and stun devices during the crackdown. Widespread protests are expected in LA and at some 2,000 other locations around the US this weekend. While the president holds broad emergency powers, legal scholars say that without invoking the Insurrection Act—a statute that permits domestic troop deployments only in cases of a rebellion or civil rights violations—federal law sharply limits what active-duty forces can do. Marines may not act as a posse comitatus , or function as law enforcement. They're barred from arrests, surveillance, and crowd control, and may only support police in narrowly defined ways, according to Defense Department rules. Pentagon directives governing 'civil disturbance operations' reinforce these limits. Federal troops are prohibited from arresting civilians, searching property, and collecting evidence. They may not conduct surveillance of US persons. That includes not just individuals but vehicles, locations, and 'transactions.' They may not serve as undercover agents, informants, or interrogators. Unless a crime is committed by a service member or on military property, Title 10 forces are likewise banned from engaging in any kind of forensics for the benefit of civilian police—unless they are willing to put in writing that such evidence was obtained by consent. That said, there are numerous scenarios in which the military can provide assistance to police, including by giving them 'information' obtained 'in the normal course' of their duties, unless applicable privacy laws prohibit it. Military members can also provide police with a wide variety of assistance so long as it's in a 'private capacity' and they're off duty. Additionally, they can provide 'expert advice,' so long as it doesn't count as serving a function core to civilian police work. The Department of Defense did not immediately respond to a request for comment; however, a staff member in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy confirmed for WIRED by phone the current set of policies under which deployed federal troops must operate. There is one major caveat to the military's restrictions. During an 'extraordinary emergency,' military commanders may take limited, immediate action to prevent massive destruction or to restore critical public services, but only so long as presidential approval is 'impossible' to obtain in advance. And while military personnel are naturally expected to maintain order and discipline at all times, under no circumstances are they required to stand down when their lives, or the lives of others, are in immediate danger. Still, enforcement of these rules in the field is far from guaranteed. Legal experts warn that adherence often varies in chaotic environments. Trump administration officials have also demonstrated a willingness to skirt the law. Last week, homeland security secretary Kristi Noem asked the Pentagon to authorize military assistance in conducting arrests and to deploy drone surveillance, according to a letter obtained by The San Francisco Chronicle—a move experts say directly contradicts standing legal prohibitions. At a press conference on Thursday, Noem stated the federal government was on a mission to 'liberate' Los Angeles from 'socialists' and the 'leadership' of California governor Gavin Newsom and LA mayor Karen Bass. US Senator Alex Padilla, who represents the citizens of California, was forcibly removed from the press conference after attempting to question Noem. Outside the press conference room, federal agents forced the senator to the ground, where he was temporarily placed in handcuffs. Unlike the National Guard, which is well trained for domestic crowd control, active-duty Marines generally receive relatively little instruction in handling civil unrest. Those who do typically belong to military police or specialized security units. Nonetheless, the Marine Corps has published footage online showing various task forces training with riot-control tactics and 'nonlethal' weapons. Constitutional concerns do not arise, however, when Marines face off against foreign mobs—such as in civilian zones during the Afghanistan war or on the rare occasion protesters breach the perimeter of a US embassy. And wartime rules of engagement are far more lenient than the rules of force by which Marines must adhere domestically. In a statement on Wednesday, US Northern Command, which oversees military support to nonmilitary authorities in the contiguous 48 states, confirmed the Marines had undergone training in all 'mission essential tasks,' including 'de-escalation' and 'crowd control.' They will reportedly be accompanied by legal and law enforcement experts. Constitutional experts warn that deploying military forces against civilian demonstrators blurs the line between law enforcement and military power, potentially setting a dangerous precedent for unchecked presidential authority. The risk deepens, they say, if federal troops overstep their legal bounds. If lines are crossed, it could open a door that may not close easily—clearing the way for future crackdowns that erode Americans' hard-won civil liberties.