Trump Wins Big: Columbia to Pay Over $220M in Shocking Settlement
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
23 minutes ago
- Economic Times
India refuses to play 'dead economy'. Will Trump back off?
The United States' imposition of 25% tariffs on Indian goods has drawn a measured but clear response from India. Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal's remarks, issued in the wake of President Donald Trump's tariff announcement and disparaging comment calling India a 'dead economy,' were more than defensive. They were strategic, confident and unmistakably defiant. India has drawn its red line, and the message is clear: it will not be pressured into an unfavourable trade question now is whether the US will back off or recalibrate its approach, recognizing that India will not negotiate on unequal terms or under coercion. Goyal's statement, a quiet strategic assertionUnlike the rough words Trump used against India while announcing the tariffs, Goyal's statement that India gives 'utmost priority' to protecting farmers, labourers, entrepreneurs, exporters, and other industrial stakeholders was a quiet declaration of India's trade posture to the world, in addition to domestic assurance. By emphasising that India will not sign deals under deadlines or pressure, he framed the country's response not as reactive, but as anchored in policy consistency and sovereign also responded directly to Trump's calling India a "dead eocnomy" by asserting that India is not only the world's fastest-growing major economy, but will soon become the third-largest. This was a clear signal that India rejects the idea of being treated as a subordinate in global trade relations. It will engage but on equal rhetorical stance has important strategic consequences. In the realm of global diplomacy, perception is power. Goyal's articulation projected India not as a defensive partner on the backfoot, but as an assertive, confident global economy that deamnds respect and parity in negotiations. A red line, but not an unreasonable one While agriculture and dairy access remains a contentious issue, particularly the US push to export GM crops and meat-fed dairy, India's opposition is grounded in economic, regulatory, health and political logic. With vast numbers of small-scale farmers and a fragile rural economy, opening the gates to heavily subsidised US agri-products could destabilise a politically sensitive has not rejected trade reforms outright. It has signaled willingness to negotiate, but not on terms that threaten domestic livelihoods or regulatory autonomy. This is not blanket protectionism, but an insistence on fair trade rooted in local Read | India's $68 billion question: How to trade with Russia without making America unhappy Has Trump boxed the US into a corner?By publicly deriding India and slapping tariffs on its exports, Trump may have overplayed his hand. Rather than pushing India toward compromise, his comments have likely made it politically impossible for New Delhi to be seen as yielding. India now finds itself in a position where public perception, domestic politics and economic strategy all align in favour of resistance. Yielding to US demands would not only be unpopular at home, it would be interpreted as strategic weakness abroad US, too, has much to gain from deeper trade ties with India particularly as it seeks to diversify supply chains away from China and tap into India's growing consumer market. With India making it clear that unilateral pressure tactics won't work, Washington may be forced to rethink its strategy. The US could either entrench further, risking a prolonged standoff, or shift to a more diplomatic, respect-based dialogue to find common ground. Also Read | Pivot to Pakistan: Is Trump ditching Delhi for its enemy? The world may come to see India's firmness not as obstructionism or intransigence, but as a sign of a maturing power that cannot be steamrolled. If the US wants a meaningful, long-term economic relationship with India, it may have to abandon the current posture of economic intimidation. India has made its stance abundantly clear. It seeks trade partnerships based on fairness, mutual benefit and strategic respect. Goyal's statements underscore that India is no longer a pliant participant in global trade talks. It is assertive, self-assured and unafraid to walk away from deals that compromise core interests. The US now faces a decision -- either continue to press India with tariff threats and harsh rhetoric, or shift toward a cooperative approach that respects India's sovereign choices. If it chooses the latter, there remains strong potential for a new trade agreement that strengthens both economies. But if it clings to hardline demands, it risks isolating one of the world's fastest-growing markets and a critical geopolitical partner. The ball is now in America's court. India's response to Trump's tariffs has demonstrated that it is unwilling to buckle under pressure. Goyal's firm words reflect a broader shift in India's global stance: measured yet assertive. What remains to be seen is whether the US, recognising this new reality, is willing to adjust its tactics and engage India with the respect it demands. In the high-stakes world of global trade, coercion rarely works in the long term.
Hindustan Times
26 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
TCS layoffs row: Karnataka seeks clarity on reported termination of 12,000 employees
Karnataka Labour Minister Santosh Lad on Thursday said his department has asked Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) to explain the reasons behind the reported large-scale layoffs. The move is part of the company's broader realignment strategy to become a "future-ready organisation'.(REUTERS/ Representative) "Yesterday we got information that TCS has laid off 12,000 employees. Our department has called TCS officials just to have a consultation to know the reason," the minister told reporters in Bengaluru according to news agency PTI. He said that sunrise industries have been exempted from labour laws, but with conditions. "We have kept the sunrise companies outside the ambit of labour laws, and for the past five years, we have been giving them exemption year after year. But there are conditions attached," Lad noted. (Also Read: All of a sudden, 12,000 people…': Karnataka labour minister calls TCS layoffs 'alarming') "If they want to lay off somebody, they have to give us information. Accordingly, we are talking to them," he added. TCS has reportedly indicated that it plans to reduce around 2% of its global workforce, about 12,261 employees, this year, primarily affecting middle and senior-level staff. As of June 30, 2025, TCS had a workforce of 6,13,069 and added 5,000 new employees in the April–June quarter. The move is part of the company's broader realignment strategy to become a "future-ready organisation," with a focus on AI deployment, technology investments, market expansion, and organisational restructuring. Meanwhile, the Karnataka State IT/ITeS Employees Union (KITU) has raised a strong objection to the layoffs. The union has filed a complaint against TCS with the Additional Labour Commissioner G Manjunath. In a statement, the union said it is demanding legal action against the company's management for violating provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and for not complying with the conditions mandated by the Karnataka government concerning the reporting of employee status. Minister Lad further said that another reason for summoning TCS and other companies was to inform them that the state government is not accepting their request to extend working hours to 9–10 hours a day. "If employees are ready to work, then we will consider the request as per the guidelines and grant permission. But this is subject to employees' willingness. Those who reject the permission will not be forced to do it,' Lad clarified. He also said implementing longer working hours isn't practical given the time lost in traffic. "As a minister too, when I see the proposal of increasing working hours, I feel it's not scientific. Increasing hours might be feasible for a week or ten days, but not throughout the year given Bengaluru's traffic," Lad explained. He added that while the industry may claim longer hours benefit both employers and employees, such measures can't be imposed universally. "Employees who agree to increase working hours must give written consent, but we cannot implement it across the board,' the minister said. (With PTI inputs) (Also Read: Karnataka railway clerk suspended after ignoring passengers for 15-minute phone chat, video goes viral)
Hindustan Times
26 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Coming up Trumps against tariff threat
India's garments exports — that have stagnated in the $16-18 billion range over the last 10 years — now face an additional threat. Effective August 1, the Trump administration has more than doubled the tariff on Indian exports to 25%, with a threat of an additional penalty. Major apparel supplier Vietnam, on the other hand, recently secured a last-minute deal to cap US tariffs at 20% on many of its exports — giving it further advantage against India — while Bangladesh, another major competitor, is looking to secure a similar deal as Vietnam in the next few days. The apparel sector can lift millions out of poverty, as seen in Bangladesh, where garment work has empowered women at scale. (REUTERS) The US imported almost $85 billion worth of garments in 2024, of which India accounted for about $10.5 billion. While the latest tariff announcement can be seen as a setback, India still has three aces up its sleeve to neutralise its impact and push firmly towards its $100 billion textile exports target. These aces are concluding the free trade agreement (FTA) with the EU, ensuring the supply of raw material at competitive prices, and an incentive and reforms package tailored for employment generation through apparel exports. The first ace India must play is to expedite the FTA with the EU. Currently, the EU is the largest garments importer with an import value close to $200 billion. India only captures $5 billion of this against Bangladesh's $25 billion. The primary reason is the 10% duty advantage enjoyed by Bangladesh due to its LDC status, which allows it to export to the EU duty-free. If India were to sign an FTA with the EU on the lines of the recently concluded UK FTA, this disparity will vanish — making Indian exporters highly competitive in the largest market in the world. The second ace India needs to deal is addressing the high cost of raw material for its textile and apparel industry. Cotton, the lifeblood of our textile industry, carries an import duty of around 10% imposed in 2021. Duties are even higher when it comes to synthetic-fibre-based products. For example, the basic customs duty on polyester fabric is 20%, which raises the cost of synthetic fabric in the market. While garment exporters are allowed to import fabrics duty-free under the advance authorisation scheme, it is currently extremely restrictive and rigid. A few simple but far-reaching reforms can enable Indian exporters to access fabric at globally competitive prices, on a par with their Bangladeshi counterparts. First, simplify the input-output norms and allow exporters to import fabrics on self-certification basis with post-export audit, on the lines of the EU. Second, allow exporters to import inputs against export orders or contracts without prior licence. Finally, allow exporters or third parties to pool inputs or maintain bonded warehouses for multi-party use and treat sales of fabric to exporters as deemed exports. In addition to these, rationalisation of import duties on both cotton and synthetic fibres, yarn, and fabrics would eliminate the substantial disability Indian garment exporters face on account of raw material. The third ace that India must play is a package of carefully crafted policy measures and reforms for the garment sector to enhance competitiveness to world-beating levels. Such measures would include a suitable incentive scheme for the garment sector — one that is easy to avail and is export- and job-centric. The scheme would essentially function as an employment-linked incentive (ELI) — rewarding companies not just for production volumes, but for the number of new jobs they create and sustain in the sector. For it to be truly effective, such a scheme should be skewed towards large manufacturing units that employ, say, 1,000+ workers, to drive economies of scale and higher productivity. The government must also extend the Rebate of State & Central Taxes and Levies (RoSCTL) — which refunds embedded taxes to exporters — beyond 2026 to keep Indian apparel prices competitive globally. In addition to incentives, the government must fast-track the completion and operationalisation of the new PM MITRA textile parks. These parks should become magnets for textile and garment manufacturers through world-class infrastructure, responsive governance, and easier regulation around land, labour, and environment. The goal must be to make India the supplier of choice in terms of cost and reliability. The apparel sector can lift millions out of poverty, as seen in Bangladesh, where garment work has empowered women at scale. India can replicate and surpass that model by consciously steering policy to favour labour-intensive growth. The encouraging news is that global brands are already showing interest. From Japan to West Asia, buyers are in talks to tap into India's expanding production capacity and favourable incentive structure. This confidence, combined with the right policy push, could help India achieve the government's ambitious target of $100 billion in textile and apparel exports by 2030, up from roughly $30-40 billion (including yarn and fabric) today. Achieving this would vault India into the upper ranks of global apparel exporters, close in on rivals and create an estimated 2.5 crore new jobs by 2030 — a transformation with profound social and economic benefits. Ashish Dhawan is founder-CEO and Piyush Doshi is operating partner, The Convergence Foundation. The views expressed are personal.
