&w=3840&q=100)
India may soon allow US, foreign companies to bid for govt contracts
The government is likely to allow US firms to bid for contracts worth over $50 billion, mainly from federal entities, as it negotiates a trade deal with Washington, the sources said.
Total public procurement - including by federal, state and local governments and state-run firms - is worth an estimated $700 billion-$750 billion per year, according to government estimates. Most is reserved for domestic firms, with 25% set aside for small businesses, although sectors like railways and defence can buy from foreign suppliers when domestic options are unavailable.
Earlier this month, India and the UK agreed on a free trade pact that gives British firms access to federal government contracts in select sectors - covering goods, services and construction - on a reciprocal basis.
"In a policy shift, India has agreed to open its public procurement contracts gradually to trading partners including the US in a phased manner and reciprocal manner," said one of the officials, with the knowledge of the matter.
Only a portion of the government's procurement contracts - mainly linked to federal projects worth around $50-$60 billion - will be opened to foreign firms, while state and local government purchases will be excluded, the official said.
"Following the UK pact, India is ready to open a part of its public procurement market to the US as well," said a second official.
Both sources requested anonymity, as details of the ongoing talks have not been made public.
The commerce ministry did not respond to requests for comment on the US proposal or extending the plan to other nations.
India has long resisted joining the World Trade Organisation's Government Procurement Agreement, citing the need to protect small businesses.
In its March report on foreign trade barriers, the US Trade Representative said India's restrictive procurement policies pose challenges for US firms due to "changing rules and limited opportunities."
Indian Trade Minister Piyush Goyal visited Washington this week to advance trade talks, with both sides aiming to sign an interim agreement by early July, officials said.
New Delhi is pushing to clinch a trade deal with the US within the 90-day pause on tariff hikes announced by US President Donald Trump on April 9 for major trading partners, which includes a 26% tariff on imports from India.
The commerce ministry said in a text message that UK firms would only be allowed limited access to bid for contracts of non-sensitive federal entities, excluding state and local government procurement.
UK-based suppliers can bid for Indian tenders above 2 billion rupees ($23.26 million) while the UK will offer non-discriminatory access to Indian suppliers under its public procurement system, the ministry said.
The government has assured small industry that a quarter of the orders will be reserved for them, said Anil Bhardwaj, secretary general of the Federation of Indian Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (FISME), a leading industry body.
"Opening procurement to foreign firms on a reciprocal basis offers an opportunity for Indian businesses in overseas markets as well," he said.
($1 = 85.9810 Indian rupees)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Deccan Herald
24 minutes ago
- Deccan Herald
The rhetoric and real costs of trade wars
India misread the tariffs brought on by the United States and, at a broader level, the Trump administration. We were one of the first to approach the US on this matter, and we continued to believe that we would have a favourable deal till recently, given what we felt was a great rapport between Modi and Trump. Mainstream electronic media houses were complicit in driving this narrative. To understand why India got it wrong, it would be useful to connect two disparate data dots. Top that with India's misreading of Trump's desire to be seen as a look at the first irritant and its impact. India exports roughly $90 billion, paying approximately 2 per cent tariffs currently, and imports roughly $45 billion at 12 per cent tariffs. The trade deficit of $45 billion carries a tariff differential of $5 billion per year in India's favour after adjusting for exempted products. We should have seen this imbalance in America's trade deficit and tariffs long ago and proactively addressed this. Modi is now overhauling the tax rates in a bid to boost the economy. This is expected to cost $20 billion, four times the tariff differential India was enjoying. .The other irritant is oil imports. In 2021/22, India imported roughly 2.5 million barrels of oil every day. Under the tacit approval of the West, India's imports from Russia grew from 2 per cent then to 40 per cent today. India buys 45 per cent of the exported oil from Russia, a growth of 1900 per cent from pre-war levels. China buys the same percentage, a growth of 50 per cent from pre-war levels. So why did India need this extra oil suddenly? It was because we processed this extra oil and sold it for a profit overseas. Therefore, the rhetoric is misplaced, as we are profiting and fuelling the Russian war machine. Predicting the flow of events, we should have scaled down our offtake back to the 2022 levels and with that, justify our need to fuel the Indian economy and keep inflationary tendencies in check. We have now started to do this, drawing a balance between the US and predict that the impact of tariffs at 25 per cent is likely to be in the region of $11-12 billion per annum on tariffed goods and about 0.25 per cent on GDP. In the earliest days of cranking up our imports of oil, the difference was around $30 a barrel, leading to a gain of $16 billion. That has now come down to around $5 a barrel after accounting for logistics, etc. The benefit we get is estimated today to be only $3.5 billion, a delta of $8.5 billion from what we lose out on with the long commentators have suggested many responses, ranging from the knee-jerk to keeping the long-term in mind. The real issue is what we do now. There is no pattern in the madness. Why have the four treatments of the BRIC countries been different? Because there is a different playbook with each one. With Brazil, the US has a trade surplus. Why then, do they have tariffs of 50 per cent, which is higher than China and equal to India? Bolsonaro? With China, 150 per cent was brought down to 30 per cent; here, it is about the rare earths. For the quantities required, the ecosystem is expensive, and the returns don't work out for a commercial operation. The CCP subsidised this for leverage and their long-term plans to pursue electric mobility and clean energy. This leverage on supplies was used to resolve the $650 billion of trade at stake between the US and China. .India made public its hypocritical treatment at the hands of the US, as it bought palladium, uranium, etc. from Russia. However, the reality is that US imports from Russia were at best $3 billion, down some 45 per cent from the previous year. India's imports from Russia stood at $70 billion, almost twice what it imports from the must now not get caught in the whirlpool of its rhetoric. And it certainly must not seek to appease China and Russia in a hurry and on the rebound. One can expect that this is short-term. There are many moving parts – Russia and Ukraine could arrive at a truce as early as next month. India has already started to demonstrate it is willing to reduce its import of Russian oil while not displeasing Russia. The midterms in the US could go against Trump, and the US courts could reverse Trump's executive decisions. Importantly, Trump does not define the long-standing US relationship with India. Trump himself may not have a long-term view on this the US, it seems clear. The average tariff on its imports has seen inflows of $28 billion, three times post these levies were collected in June. This aggregates to $350 billion. Add to this DOGE cuts and some others, and we have $500 billion being saved or added to the US treasury. This pays half its annual interest cost of $1 trillion, which, if left alone, is not sustainable. This is good for no one, as it is the world's biggest market by the short term, one sees no harm in subtly managing the relationships and dynamics at play and being practical. In the long term, anyway, as economist John Maynard Keynes said, we are all dead..(The writer is the former managing director of a Tata Company and now runs a Bengaluru-headquartered corporate finance practice)
Hindustan Times
24 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Did Trump 'defend' slavery? Post targeting the Smithsonian sparks backlash
A social media post by US President Donald Trump sparked backlash for allegedly defending slavery, considered one of the darkest chapters in the US's history. On Monday, Trump criticized the Smithsonian Institution for highlighting "how bad Slavery was." President Donald Trump.(REUTERS) Many on social media were quick to interpret the 79-year-old's post as a defense of slavery, which was abolished on December 18, 1865, under the 13th Amendment. Calling the Smithsonian "out of control," Trump said: 'The Museums throughout Washington, but all over the Country are, essentially, the last remaining segment of 'WOKE'.' 'The Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was, and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been — Nothing about Success, nothing about Brightness, nothing about the Future,' he added. This story is being updated.
New Indian Express
29 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
US destroyers head toward waters off Venezuela as Trump aims to pressure drug cartels
WASHINGTON: The United States is deploying three Aegis guided-missile destroyers to the waters off Venezuela as part of President Donald Trump's effort to combat threats from Latin American drug cartels, according to a US official briefed on the planning. The USS Gravely, the USS Jason Dunham and the USS Sampson are expected to arrive soon, said the official, who was not authorized to comment and spoke Tuesday on the condition of anonymity. A Defense Department official confirmed that the military assets have been assigned to the region in support of counter narcotics efforts. The official, who was not authorized to comment about military planning, said the vessels would be deployed 'over the course of several months.' The deployment of US destroyers and personnel comes as Trump has pushed for using the US military to thwart cartels he blames for the flow of fentanyl and other illicit drugs into American communities and for perpetuating violence in some US cities. Trump has also pressed Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum to cooperate more on security than her predecessor, specifically being more aggressive in pursuit of Mexico's cartels. But she has drawn a clear line when it comes to Mexico's sovereignty, rejecting suggestions by Trump and others of intervention by the US military. Trump in February designated Venezuela's Tren de Aragua, MS-13 in El Salvador and six groups based in Mexico as foreign terrorist organizations. His Republican administration has also stepped up immigration enforcement against alleged gang members. The designation is normally reserved for groups like al-Qaida or the Islamic State group that use violence for political ends — not for money-focused crime rings such as the Latin American cartels. But the Trump administration argues the international connections and operations of the groups — including drug trafficking, migrant smuggling and violent pushes to extend their territory — warrant the designation. Earlier this month, the Trump government announced it was doubling to $50 million a reward for the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, accusing him of being one of the world's largest narco-traffickers and working with cartels to flood the US with fentanyl-laced cocaine. The press office of Venezuela's government did not respond to a request for comment from the AP on the deployment of the destroyers. But without mentioning the ships, Foreign Minister Yvan Gil in a statement Tuesday characterized the US government's drug-trafficking accusations against Venezuela. 'Washington's accusing Venezuela of drug trafficking reveals its lack of credibility and the failure of its policies in the region,' Gil said. 'While Washington threatens, Venezuela steadily advances in peace and sovereignty, demonstrating that true effectiveness against crime is achieved by respecting the independence of its peoples. Every aggressive statement confirms the inability of imperialism to subdue a free and sovereign people.' Maduro on Monday said the US had increased its threats against Venezuela and announced the planned deployment of more than 4.5 million militia members around the country. The militias were created by then-President Hugo Chávez to incorporate volunteers who could assist the armed forces in the defense of external and domestic attacks. 'The empire has gone mad and has renewed its threats to Venezuela's peace and tranquility,' Maduro said at an event in Caracas, without mentioning any specific action. Maduro was indicted in a New York federal court in 2020, during the first Trump presidency, along with several close allies on federal charges of narco-terrorism and conspiracy to import cocaine. Back then, the US offered a $15 million reward for his arrest.
