Trump's 25% tariffs: Would India be better off without a rushed trade deal?
Trump has justified his move with a number of complaints: he has spoken of India's high tariffs, non-tariff barriers, India buying oil and defence hardware from Russia, and India's membership of BRICS, which he considers as anti-US coalition.
Exports to the US constitute 18% of India's overall exports. If the tariffs kick in, they are expected to lower India's GDP growth by 20-30 basis points.
Are these tariffs just a pressure tactic aimed to extract concessions from India on the trade deal? What are India's options? Would India be better off without a rushed trade deal?
Guest: Jayati Ghosh, Professor of Economics at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Host: G. Sampath
Produced and edited by Jude Francis Weston
Listen to more In Focus podcasts:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
24 minutes ago
- India Today
Who is Stephen Miran? Trump's new pick for Fed governor
US President Donald Trump has appointed Dr. Stephen Miran, the current Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, to a vacant seat on the Federal Reserve Board, calling the Harvard-trained economist's expertise 'unparalleled' and his service 'outstanding.'In a statement posted on Truth Social, Trump said: 'It is my great honor to announce that I have chosen Dr. Stephen Miran He has been with me from the beginning of my Second Term, and his expertise in the World of Economics is unparalleled — He will do an outstanding job.'advertisementMiran will serve on the Fed board through January 31, 2026, as the administration continues to look for a permanent nominee. Trump praised Miran's credentials, noting his Ph.D. in Economics from Harvard and longstanding service in his economic team.'Stephen has a Ph.D. in Economics from Harvard University, and served with distinction in my First Administration,' Trump said, adding, 'He has been with me from the beginning of my Second Term.'John Velis, member of BNY Mellon Markets' global strategy team said "A bit of surprise to nominate Miran – he wasn't mentioned as a likely candidate by markets, although he is likely to be a reliable dove, given his current political position (as Chair of CEA) and his public comments to added by stating that the appointment is temporary. "This is a recess appointment, so it does not need Senate confirmation. As far as I understand about recess appointments, they remain valid until the next session of the Senate is complete."This still doesn't remove the current chatter about Christoher Waller being named Fed Chair to replace Powell." He the Senate confirms Miran, his presence at the Federal Reserve would likely add support for lowering interest rates. At the Fed's July meeting, officials voted to keep borrowing costs unchanged for the fifth straight time, though the decision saw rare dissent from multiple governors, a first in over 30 the Senate acts quickly enough to seat Miran before the Fed's next policy meeting on September 16–17 remains Gardner, who serves as the chief Washington policy strategist at Stifel, told CNN. 'The confirmation process is going to take a couple of weeks, maybe as much as two months,'WHO IS STEPHEN MIRAN?Stephen Miran, a prominent figure in conservative economic policy, is poised to shape key financial strategies under Trump's second term as chair of the Council of Economic Advisors. Previously, he served in the Treasury Department under Secretary Steven Mnuchin, where he was instrumental in designing the Paycheck Protection Program during the 2020 COVID-19 background includes roles as senior strategist at Hudson Bay Capital Management and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. He has been a vocal critic of the Federal Reserve's pandemic-era stimulus policies and authored the controversial 'Mar-A-Lago Accord,' which advocates dollar devaluation to address the US current account staunch supporter of reciprocal tariffs and pro-crypto initiatives, Miran's views closely mirror Trump's economic platform. His potential impact on the Federal Reserve could influence not only interest rate policy but also broader financial regulation.- EndsWith inputs from Reuters
Economic Times
24 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Trump blasts jobs report as ‘Rigged' — Nobel economist Paul Krugman fires back with brutal dig
Synopsis Paul Krugman slams Trump after President Donald Trump called the July 2025 jobs report rigged and fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Trump claimed the weak job numbers were politically manipulated, sparking outrage from economists. Krugman fired back, saying, 'every accusation is a confession,' warning that dismissing data undermines democracy. Experts explained job data revisions are routine, not rigged. This political clash over economic facts is fueling deep concerns about transparency and trust. Paul Krugman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist, is calling out President Donald Trump after the release of the July 2025 jobs report, which showed much weaker job growth than expected. Trump didn't just criticize the numbers—he went a step further by firing the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) chief and calling the report 'rigged.' Paul Krugman slams Trump over 'rigged' jobs report claim as economists warn of deeper crisis- In a fiery response that's stirring headlines across the political and economic world, Paul Krugman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist, has lashed out at President Donald Trump for claiming that the latest U.S. jobs report is 'rigged.' The report, which showed far weaker-than-expected job growth in July 2025, has sparked a wave of controversy after Trump accused federal officials of manipulating economic data against him — a move Krugman and other economists are calling dangerous, dishonest, and deeply destabilizing. The controversy began with the July 2025 U.S. jobs report released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The report showed that only 73,000 jobs were added in July, falling far short of Wall Street expectations. More alarmingly, the government revised previous months' job gains down significantly—by a total of 258,000 jobs across May and June. This sharp downward revision has raised concerns that the American economy is slowing more rapidly than previously thought. It also sent shockwaves through financial markets, reignited fears of a possible recession, and put the Federal Reserve in a tricky position regarding potential interest rate cuts. President Donald Trump, who is seeking re-election this fall, did not hold back in his reaction. Within hours of the BLS release, Trump publicly called the numbers 'rigged,' 'a scam,' and fired the Bureau's Commissioner, Dr. Erika McEntarfer, who was originally appointed under President Biden. Trump accused McEntarfer and the agency of political manipulation, claiming the negative jobs report was deliberately skewed to damage his administration's record on the economy. He went as far as calling the data a 'deep state lie' intended to fuel voter distrust just before the election. This isn't the first time Trump has attacked federal institutions, but this move has sparked widespread criticism from economists, policymakers, and media outlets across the spectrum. Leading the intellectual pushback is Paul Krugman, a longtime Trump critic and respected economist. Writing in response to Trump's accusations, Krugman stated that 'every accusation is a confession,' suggesting that Trump often blames others for the very things he's guilty of doing. Krugman accused Trump of embracing a 'paranoid style of politics' that undermines trust in core democratic institutions like the BLS. He stressed that data revisions are normal, especially during periods of economic volatility, and that Trump's response only highlights his discomfort with reality. In Krugman's words, the danger isn't just in Trump's rhetoric — it's in what he's willing to dismantle to protect his image. 'When leaders start dismissing facts as lies and firing neutral officials, democracy suffers,' he warned. Stripping away the noise, here's a clearer picture of what the latest labor market data actually shows: July 2025 : 73,000 jobs added (vs. 180,000 expected) : 73,000 jobs added (vs. 180,000 expected) May & June revisions : Total jobs cut by 258,000 : Total jobs cut by 258,000 Unemployment rate : Slight uptick to 4.1% : Slight uptick to 4.1% Wage growth: Still steady at 3.7% year-over-year This data reflects a slowing but stable economy, not a collapse—and certainly not a government-led data conspiracy. Most independent economists agree that the labor market is adjusting as expected after years of aggressive post-pandemic growth and inflation-fighting monetary policy. Several independent economists have stepped forward to clarify what's really happening with the job numbers. According to Jeffrey Roach, Chief Economist at LPL Financial, 'downward revisions are common when the economy begins to slow down. Employers typically report data late or revise their numbers as trends shift.' Jamie Cox of Harris Financial Group added that the weak jobs data and revisions could nudge the Federal Reserve to consider rate cuts to keep the economy from tipping into recession. While the headlines were shocking, most experts agree that the changes reflect real-time corrections — not conspiracy. In fact, experts pointed out that job market reports often undergo revisions for accuracy, and this cycle is no different from previous economic slowdowns. Despite the political drama, economists say there is real concern beneath the headlines. A consistent theme across recent data points to a gradual slowdown in job growth, falling from the robust pace seen earlier in the year. While 73,000 new jobs in July may still reflect expansion, it's far from the 200,000+ averages seen in the first quarter. Coupled with the large downward revisions to prior months, experts believe the economy may be entering a cooling phase, likely influenced by: High interest rates by the Federal Reserve Slower consumer spending Reduced business hiring amid political uncertainty These shifts don't signal a recession yet, but they do suggest that America's post-COVID boom is tapering it's not unusual for presidents to spin economic data in their favor, Trump's decision to fire the head of the BLS has drawn sharp criticism from economists, political analysts, and even former government officials. Many see it as a direct threat to the independence of federal institutions responsible for delivering unbiased, factual information to the public. Critics argue that politicizing trusted data not only damages credibility but also sets a dangerous precedent, where economic reports could be shaped by political agendas rather than truth. This move has raised serious concerns about transparency, accountability, and the future of data integrity in American governance. Q: Why did Paul Krugman criticize Donald Trump over the jobs report? A: He said Trump's 'rigged' claim was dishonest and dangerous to democracy. Q: What did Donald Trump do after the July 2025 jobs report? A: He fired the BLS chief and claimed the data was fake.
India.com
24 minutes ago
- India.com
China's Envoy Hits Out At Trump's Tariffs On India, Says ‘Give The Bully An Inch…'
New Delhi: Chinese Ambassador to India Xu Feihong has criticised U.S. President Donald Trump's escalating tariff policies, including the recent imposition of 50% duties on Indian exports. His reaction came through a post on X, where he referenced an old proverb in pointed context. 'Give the bully an inch, he will take a mile,' Xu wrote, attaching a quote from recent discussions between China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Celso Amorim, chief advisor to Brazil's President Lula da Silva. The quote read, 'Using tariffs as a weapon to suppress other countries violates the UN Charter, undermines WTO rules and is both unpopular and unsustainable.' Give the bully an inch, he will take a mile. — Xu Feihong (@China_Amb_India) August 7, 2025 India had initially been in line to finalise a trade agreement with Trump's administration. Negotiators from both sides held five rounds of discussions. However, the process stalled due to disagreements. India was unwilling to open up its large farm and dairy markets. Talks also broke down over New Delhi's decision to continue importing oil from Russia. The Chinese ambassador's criticism comes at a moment when the U.S. president is considering further economic penalties. Trump warned that countries buying Russian oil may face additional tariffs. He made this remark during a recent press conference at the White House. 'It may happen, I don't know, I can't tell you yet. We did it with India and we are doing it probably with a couple of others. One of them could be China,' Trump said in response to a question about new trade restrictions. At present, India, China and Turkey remain the top three buyers of Russian crude. Trump has said new 'secondary tariffs' may be applied if the war in Ukraine does not end by Friday. Earlier this year, tensions rose between Washington and Beijing over trade measures. The United States had increased tariffs on several Chinese goods, reaching as high as 145 per cent. In response, China raised its tariffs but stopped at 125 per cent. Officials in Beijing explained that any further increase would lack economic sense. 'Even if the U.S. further raises tariffs to even higher levels, it would be economically meaningless and would ultimately become a laughingstock in the history of global economics,' a Chinese trade spokesperson had said at the time. Despite the current standoff, Trump has announced intentions to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping later this year. According to the White House, the meeting aims to build the foundation for a new trade agreement between the world's two largest economies.
