Auto, IT Stocks Skid Amid US Tariff Uncertainty; Maruti, Tech Mahindra Fall Up To 2%
Shares of auto & IT companies declined amid uncertainty over impending hike in US tariffs and absence of a India–US trade agreement
Auto, IT Stocks Slide: Shares of auto and IT companies declined on July 7 as uncertainty over the impending hike in US tariffs and the absence of a finalized India–US trade agreement rattled investor sentiment. The Nifty Auto and Nifty IT indices slipped into negative territory, trading at around 23,949 and 39,004, respectively, in the morning session.
The 90-day pause on US President Donald Trump's proposed tariff hike is set to expire on July 9, with the new elevated rates expected to come into effect on August 1. So far, India and the US have not announced any formal trade pact.
On July 5, President Trump said that the US would send formal letters to 10–12 countries outlining new reciprocal tariffs. Describing these as 'take it or leave it" offers, he said the letters would be dispatched by July 7 and the final rollout would conclude by July 9. 'The money is going to come to the United States from August 1," Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews.
Indian Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal said India would not rush into any agreement due to external deadlines. 'India does not enter into any trade agreement based on deadlines. We will sign a deal with the US only when it is fully finalised, properly concluded, and in the national interest," Goyal stated.
10% Tariff on BRICS Allies Announced
Adding to market anxiety, Trump also announced plans to impose an additional 10% tariff on countries aligning with what he termed the 'anti-American policies of BRICS"—just as Prime Minister Narendra Modi addressed the BRICS summit. In response, BRICS nations issued a joint statement expressing 'serious concerns" over rising unilateral tariffs and their adverse effects on the global economy.
India has already notified the World Trade Organization of its intent to impose retaliatory tariffs in response to Washington's 25% duty on automobiles and auto parts, which could impact $2.89 billion worth of Indian exports.
Export-driven sectors bore the brunt of these developments. Maruti Suzuki shares fell over 1% to Rs 12,510, while Bharat Forge dropped nearly 1%. Tata Motors also traded in the red.
In the IT pack, Tech Mahindra, Mphasis, and HCL Tech slipped up to 2%. Infosys, Wipro, TCS, and Persistent Systems saw marginal losses. Analysts noted that the weakening US dollar and concerns over delayed outsourcing decisions could weigh on IT firms, given their heavy dependence on the US market.
'With the tariff deadline nearing, all eyes are on the anticipated US–India trade deal. Market participants remain optimistic about a favorable resolution, which could serve as a key catalyst for the next leg of the market's upward trajectory," said Bajaj Broking.
Harshal Dasani, Business Head at INVasset PMS, stated, 'The mood across Dalal Street is far from celebratory. Both Nifty Auto and Nifty IT indices slipped into the red in early trade, signaling investor caution around sectors directly exposed to Donald Trump's latest tariff regime."
He further cautioned that with auto components facing a 25% duty under Section 232 and no exemptions in place, companies like Bharat Forge, Motherson, and Tata Motors are at risk of margin pressure and demand delays from US-based OEMs.
'For IT, the concerns are more indirect—ranging from delays in outsourcing decisions to potential visa restrictions. And while pharma may be insulated, for now, the threat of non-tariff barriers looms large under Trump's 'reciprocal tariff doctrine,'" Dasani concluded.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
11 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Don't see other risks, Sebi is upgrading surveillance': Chairman Tuhin Kanta Pandey
MUMBAI: Sebi chief Tuhin Kanta Pandey on Monday assured investors there were not many other risks in the market like the one seen recently in the event of market manipulation by US-based quant fund Jane Street. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The Sebi chief also said that the Jane Street issue was more of a surveillance issue and that the regulator is in the process of upgrading now. The chairman of of the markets regulator was speaking to the media after inaugurating a new investor empowerment facility on the apps run by the two depositories, CDSL and NSDL. Late on Thursday Sebi through an enforcement order had temporarily banned Jane Street and three of its affiliates from the Indian market for manipulation in stocks and futures & options (F&O) markets. The regulator had also asked the entities to together disgorge nearly Rs 4,850 crore, alleged to be Jane Street's illegal gains. Asked if there were other similar funds that have manipulated the market, Sebi chief said he didn't think there were "very many other risks." Pandey said that what happened in the Jane Street matter was a surveillance issue, and the regulator was upgrading its surveillance systems. A day earlier, the markets regulator had said that along with Sebi, the two leading bourses were also in the process of upgrading their surveillance systems so that cases like Jane Street did not occur. He had also assured investors that Sebi will not tolerate any attempt at market manipulation. The Sebi chief also said that the action it took against Jane Street was within the confines of the regulatory powers. Pandey also said that was not the regulatory powers but better surveillance and enforcement systems which would act as deterrents against market manipulators.
India Today
21 minutes ago
- India Today
Ex-chief justices back simultaneous polls, flag poll body's broad powers in bill
Former Chief Justices of India have supported the constitutionality of the 'one nation, one election' concept but raised concerns about the provisions of the proposed bill, particularly the wide powers granted to the Election Commission of India (ECI). Their views were conveyed to a parliamentary committee examining the bill on simultaneous a written opinion submitted to the Joint Committee of Parliament, former Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud dismissed the opposition's contention that synchronising Lok Sabha and state assembly elections violates the Constitution's basic argument that staggered elections are a part of the Constitution's basic structure (or form part of the principles of federalism or democracy) does not hold. Staggered timing of elections cannot be considered as a feature of the original Constitution, let alone an immutable feature,' he said. Chandrachud, however, expressed reservations over the 'sweeping powers' the bill seeks to grant the Election Commission. He warned that such 'unbounded authority' could allow the poll body to extend or curtail the tenure of a state assembly beyond the constitutionally mandated five years under the pretext of aligning elections with the Lok Sabha. 'The Constitution must define, delineate and structure the circumstances under which the ECI may invoke this power,' he Chief Justices Ranjan Gogoi and J S Kehar are scheduled to appear before the committee on July 11 for discussions with members over the bill's provisions. Gogoi had earlier appeared before the committee in March and shared concerns about excessive powers being given to the Chief Justice U U Lalit had appeared in February and advised that simultaneous polls be introduced in a phased manner. He warned that cutting short the terms of state assemblies with significant tenure left for synchronisation could invite legal their concerns, all three former Chief Justices agreed that the idea of simultaneous elections does not breach the Constitution. Chandrachud said, 'Simultaneous elections will not infringe upon the voters' right to elect their representatives and that the bill ensures that electors remain continuously represented by their duly elected MPs or MLAs.' He further criticised arguments against the bill as being based on the belief that 'the Indian electorate is naive and can be easily manipulated.'Chandrachud also cautioned that simultaneous elections could marginalise regional and smaller parties due to the influence of better-funded national parties. 'To ensure a level playing field among political parties, the rules governing electoral campaigning, particularly those relating to campaign finance, must be strengthened,' he pointed out that while individual candidates face spending limits under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, there are no caps on party the bill's proposal that houses elected through midterm polls will only serve the remainder of the original five-year term, Chandrachud flagged concerns about the effectiveness of such short-term governments. He said their ability to implement meaningful projects would be constrained, as the Model Code of Conduct would apply six months before the next members of the parliamentary panel have echoed this concern, questioning the capacity of short-tenure governments to deliver on policy and governance.- EndsMust Watch IN THIS STORY#One Nation One Election
Mint
21 minutes ago
- Mint
Lawyers Say New Evidence Challenges Trump on El Salvador Prisons
Lawyers for Venezuelans sent to a prison in El Salvador claim new evidence 'contradicts' the US government's claims that Salvadoran officials, not the Trump administration, have legal authority over the men. Attorneys on Monday filed a copy of statements that El Salvador submitted to a United Nations human rights office in April, stating that 'the jurisdiction and legal responsibility' for detainees 'lie exclusively' with the United States under agreements between the two countries. The US government, however, has repeatedly insisted that it had no control over the Venezuelan prisoners once they were turned over to El Salvador. That position was backed by a federal judge in Washington, who ruled in June that the detainees were no longer in the 'constructive custody' of the US. 'The documents filed with the court today show that the administration has not been honest with the court or the American people,' Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward, one of the groups representing the Venezuelans, said in a statement. The case is one of the highest-profile challenges to the Trump Administration's crackdown on immigration. The Venezuelan men, who the US claims are gang members, were sent to El Salvador's notorious Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, a facility denounced by human rights groups. A spokesperson for the State Department declined to comment, nor did public information officers for the office of El Salvador's president and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. US District Judge James Boasberg relied on a May declaration from a senior State Department official stating that 'the detention and ultimate disposition of those detained in CECOT and other Salvadoran detention facilities are matters within the legal authority of El Salvador.' Lawyers for the Venezuelans argue the new evidence from the UN undermines that statement. The April documents were part of a probe into claims that El Salvador was responsible for the disappearance of people sent to its prisons from the United States. El Salvador denied wrongdoing. It wasn't immediately clear how the latest filing will affect the case. The Venezuelans' lawyers suggested they could ask the judge's permission to gather more information from the government. The case is before a federal appeals court on the government's challenge to another part of Boasberg's June order requiring that the Venezuelans in El Salvador be given an opportunity to contest their removal. The case is J.G.G. v. Trump, 25-cv-766. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
