Free Trade or Colonial Bias? After India-UK FTA, Homegrown Liquor Makers Accuse British Market Of Discriminating Against Indian Brands
At the center of the anger is the Confederation of Indian Alcoholic Beverage Companies (CIABC), a body that speaks for India's local liquor manufacturers. According to its Director General Anant S Iyer, what India removed in tariff walls, the United Kingdom has maintained in 'non-tariff barriers', rules that may not show up in price charts but block access all the same.
'The United Kingdom and even the European Union (EU) do not allow fair imports of most Indian-Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) products into their markets due to non-tariff barriers related to maturation and ingredients. We only wish that the Indian government had stood firm on the issue of non-tariff barriers,' he said.
The bone of contention is the UK's strict definition of what can be sold as whisky. The British standard mandates that whisky must be matured for a minimum of three years. This rule is applied to both domestic and imported spirits. But Iyer says what works in cold European cellars does not work in the Indian climate.
'In India, the maturation is much faster due to the tropical climate. If we keep it for three years, we lose almost one-third of the spirit to evaporation. That is a financial loss. It also changes the flavour profile. It is a punishment for making whisky in a warmer land,' he explained.
Because of the three-year rule, Indian whiskies that mature faster due to heat are disqualified from calling themselves 'whisky' under British law. Instead, they must be labelled as 'Indian spirits', a description that, Iyer says, cuts them off from mainstream whisky shelves and consumer attention in the United Kingdom and Europe.
'We want to be allowed to call it Indian Whisky or Indian Rum or Indian Brandy. Let consumers decide. Let the market decide. Right now, we are kept out simply because we do not age our spirits in cold basements,' he added.
The CIABC has now urged the Indian government to actively pursue the matter with the United Kingdom. They argue that without reciprocal access for Indian products, the billion-dollar export vision for the Indian liquor industry will remain out of reach.
'The government has set an ambitious target of achieving $1 billion in exports from the Indian alcobev (alcoholic beverage) industry by 2030. However, without ensuring proper market access, it will be difficult to meet this target. Though Indian whiskies, rum, gins, wines, etc. have been winning accolades globally, the lack of removal of non-tariff barriers and absence of reciprocal market access will make this export target hard to achieve,' Iyer said.
There is also growing concern about what is flowing into India. While British spirits are now allowed in at lower duties, Indian manufacturers fear that Scotch whisky and other bottled-in-origin (BIO) liquors may soon dominate Indian shelves by being routed through third countries at cut prices, hurting the premium Indian market before it even matures.
To counter this, the CIABC has recommended that the Indian government fix a Minimum Import Price (MIP) on such foreign products. 'The government has incorporated MIP in the India-UK FTA on rum, brandy and other liquor products. The only exception on this count being Scotch Whisky/other whiskies/Gin originating from the United Kingdom,' Iyer added.
He urged the government to monitor billing data and use technology to trace each bottle from port to shelf. 'We hope the government will ensure that Scotch whisky and other BIO spirits are not dumped in India at low import prices or routed through any other country at cheaper rates. This will hurt the growth of premium and luxury Indian brands,' he said.
For now, India's liquor makers are pouring their hopes into diplomatic channels. Their demands include recognition, fairness and a level playing field. 'We do not want favours. We just want the right to sell our products under the names they deserve,' Iyer concluded.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
19 minutes ago
- Mint
Demand for American degrees is sinking
SOME OF AMERICA'S most valuable companies were built by people who came to America as students. Elon Musk was born in South Africa and lived in Canada before studying physics at the University of Pennsylvania. Patrick and John Collison moved from Ireland to attend MIT and Harvard, respectively, before founding Stripe, a digital payments company. All told, more than half of America's billion-dollar start-ups were founded by at least one immigrant; a quarter have a founder who arrived as a student. That pipeline of talent is now under heavy pressure. On May 22nd the Trump administration abruptly stripped Harvard University of its ability to enroll foreign students. A judge blocked the move the following day. But the administration only tightened its squeeze: on May 27th it suspended all new visa interviews for foreign students hoping to study in America. Officials say the pause is temporary. The damage might not be. Attracting global talent has long been one of American academia's greatest strengths. The country draws more international students than any other; over the past two decades the share of foreign students has nearly doubled, reaching almost 6% in 2023 (see chart 1). Most pursue degrees in fields such as science, engineering and maths. Nearly a third come from India; a quarter from China. America's top private universities attract the lion's share of foreign talent (see chart 2). International students make up 14% of the intake at the country's 158 most selective research institutions—more than double the national average. At the dozen 'Ivy-plus" universities—including the Ivy League and peers such as Stanford and MIT—the share reaches 28%. Columbia and Harvard, two institutions that President Donald Trump has recently targeted in his broader assault on elite universities, rely heavily on international enrolment, at 40% and 28% respectively. Public universities, although less exposed in terms of headcount, face other risks. They tend to depend more on foreign tuition, which is often several times higher than the rates charged to local students, and lack the endowments that cushion private institutions. Prospective students are already looking elsewhere. Studyportals, an online directory for degree programmes around the world, says clicks on American courses are now at their lowest level since the covid-19 pandemic (see chart 3). Weekly page views halved between January 5th and the end of April. First-quarter traffic to American undergraduate and master's degrees was down by more than 20% year on year; traffic to PhD courses fell by a third. The biggest drop was from India, where interest fell by 40%. The data suggest that British universities would be the most likely beneficiaries. The financial stakes are high. In the 2023-24 academic year foreign students added $43.8bn to America's economy, according to the National Association of International Educators, a non-profit—mostly in Democratic-leaning areas (see map). They also supported jobs at universities and in other sectors, such as food services and health care. But the heaviest cost to America will be in talent. Around three-quarters of international PhD students say they intend to stay in America after graduating. Blocking the next generation of students may punish the Ivies. Over time, though, it is America's edge in science, business and innovation that will suffer.
Mint
19 minutes ago
- Mint
Tiger Global-backed Progcap expands beyond lending, pilots tech platform for MSMEs
Progcap, a fintech company focused on small businesses, is setting up a new vertical that will digitise their supply chains and offer them on-the-spot credit. It is building a full-stack software-as-a-service (SaaS) platform for brands, distributors and retailers, expanding from pure-play lending into embedded finance as a second revenue source, co-founders Pallavi Shrivastava and Himanshu Chandra told Mint. 'Large corporates have access to platforms like Salesforce but the actual sales process on the ground was still very analog. If you can place the order on the spot and initiate the payment process immediately, it leads to better conversion. Smaller brands and distributors lacked access to such tech," said Chandra. Progcap's new vertical will digitise this supply chain end-to-end and is already live with over 40 companies. Progcap plans to scale up embedded credit on this platform. Embedded credit means getting a loan right where you're buying or selling something, without going to a bank. 'We want to be the operating system for these brand-distributor-retailer ecosystems," said Shrivastava. This comes as Indian businesses such as Zepto's Atom, Big Basket's BB Matrix and InsuranceDekho's Heph launch their SaaS verticals to diversify revenue streams. Currently, Progcap's SaaS vertical offers credit only through Progfin, its non-banking finance company. The company aims to onboard over 200 brands and will open the SaaS platform to other banks and financial institutions by year-end, the founders said. Revenue contribution from the SaaS and embedded credit vertical is expected to be 10-15% over the next two to three years as lending will continue to be the main business. 'It is significantly reducing our customer acquisition cost. If the transaction is initiated on our platform, there's a high likelihood that we'll also be chosen to finance it," said Chandra. He added that it is helping reduce feet-on-the-street sales teams. 'Sales teams of our partner brands essentially became our onboarding channels, and we didn't need to send field teams," said Chandra. Automating processes This comes as companies actively think of further automating their processes and reducing costs to become leaner and turn profitable. Progcap's revenue from operations almost doubled to ₹139 crore in FY24 from ₹71 crore in FY23, while it managed to narrow its loss to ₹46 crore from ₹49 crore. The company is yet to file its FY25 financials. Founded in 2017 by Srivastava and Chandra, the financial service company, last valued at over $600 million, gets 95% of its revenue from lending to micro and small businesses. Within the SaaS platform, direct monetisation will come from subscription-based fees charged to brands and distributors. In addition, the new vertical opens up international expansion possibilities for Progcap. 'Lending is heavily regulated and requires deep market understanding. SaaS, however, is globally scalable," said Chandra. 'Some large brands are already asking us if we can deploy this in Bangladesh or Indonesia. So, once we prove the product in India, we will consider expanding it internationally." Though still at an early revenue stage, the SaaS platform is expected to be spun off as a separate entity company in two to three years as Progcomm, said Shrivastava. Co-founder Chandra leads this vertical fulltime, she added. Funding in the works Progcap is also preparing to raise a fresh round of equity capital to fund growth. The new round will include a secondary component to provide partial exits to early investors, the founders said. 'We haven't hit the market yet," said Shrivastava. 'But we're looking at capital to expand geographically, grow the team, scale the lending book, and double down on SaaS plus embedded credit. A portion may go into secured lending pilots as well." The company has been diversifying revenue outside of unsecured lending, an area that's come under greater scrutiny of the banking regulator. So far, Progcap has raised about $110 million across four funding rounds from marquee investors such as Tiger Global, Sequoia Capital India and Google. 'The valuation will depend on timing and market conditions. We're not chasing vanity milestones," Shrivastava said. Progcap aims to grow its assets under management to ₹3,000 crore by the end of FY26, riding on strong demand for formalised credit in India's underserved micro, small and medium enterprise sector.
Indian Express
21 minutes ago
- Indian Express
With Aug 1 deadline looming, India's faces a trade predicament: to accommodate Trump's hardball tactics while maintaining tariff advantage
With less than a couple of days left for the August 1 deadline that the Donald Trump administration set itself to thrash out deals with its trading partners, the American President said he is planning tariffs for 'the rest of the world' at 'somewhere in the 15 to 20 per cent range'. That would mean a significant increase on the 10 per cent 'baseline' tariff that currently applies to most trading partners. India's talks with the US for an interim deal are in a limbo of sorts, given the lack of a significant breakthrough so far. As things stand, three things are clear: the US is pushing for zero duty access to the Indian markets, like the deals it has got with Vietnam and Indonesia. That would, however, be a tough demand for India to accommodate. Secondly, from its perspective, New Delhi is pushing for a headline tariff number of around 15 per cent for its goods going into the US, like what was offered by the Americans to the EU and Japan, with the comparative tariff advantage starting to diminish if the tariff starts to go over figure and inch up closer towards the 20 per cent mark, or even higher. Also, going by the deals signed by the US so far, the tariff scenario for each country seems to be dependent on multiple external factors as well. This includes investment commitments and promises on directional shifts in trade in goods that America is keen to peddle. The Trump administration is learnt to be pushing for India to commit to specific purchases and investments, of the sort that it got the EU and Japan to sign up for. The commitment for purchases should not be a big issue for India, given that Trump is ostensibly focused on extracting a big figure that runs into billions of dollars, without even bothering to specify the time-frame for achieving these targets. The full texts of the deals for both Japan and the EU are not out, and are unlikely to be out anytime soon. India has comminated its openness to purchasing three big-ticket items from America: defence equipment, natural gas imports and nuclear reactors. Cobbling together a big number might not be a difficult task. Agri and dairy, two contentious issues, are likely off the table for now, which is positive for New Delhi. Also, with the UK deals, India has shown a willingness to be flexible on segments such as opening up public procurement. That gives some headroom for Indian negotiators for the final push. Indications are that a sixth round of talks between the two negotiating teams is expected to take discussions forward mid next month. What could be instructive is the limited takeaway from the Japan deal: how the Japanese negotiators managed to upstage their American counterparts by getting an immensely favourable deal on automobiles, even as they dangled the agri market access concessions and Tokyo's investment pledges as distraction the entire time. While India's trade deal with the US is likely to be less focused on sectors and more focused on the headline number unlike its UK deal, New Delhi is likely to push for market access in labour-intensive sectors, while trying to ensure a significant tariff differential compared to its Asian peers. Now, if the final headline tariff offered to India by Washington DC is between 10 per cent and 15 per cent, the tariff points offered to the UK and Japan, New Delhi should have reasons to be satisfied. The advantage starts to taper off once the tariff goes over 15 per cent and inches up closer to 20 per cent, as was offered by the US to Vietnam. A transshipment clause, of the kind slapped on Vietnam, could be a problem for India, given that a lot of Indian exports have inputs and intermediate goods in sectors such as pharma, engineering goods and electronics coming in from outside, including China. Also, clarity on the final American duty offer on China is a number that negotiators will be looking at, given the implicit assumption in New Delhi that the Trump administration will maintain a tariff differential. For Indian negotiators, other tariffs, over and above the baseline tariffs and the sectoral ones on steel and aluminum, is an added complication. Sectoral tariffs such as the 50 per cent on steel, aluminum and copper are already impacting India's exports to the US, and Trump's threat of steep tariffs on BRICS countries over them buying Russian oil is a looming concern. Will that be neutralised in the agreement is a question. Another question for New Delhi is: in the absence of any kind of interim deal, should it brace for an eventuality where there may not just be 26 per cent reciprocal tariffs, plus a 10 per cent additional BRICS tariff as well? That's perhaps the absolute worst case scenario, till an agreement is achieved. A tariff in the 15-20 per cent range would mean India still compares reasonably well with Indonesia (19 per cent), Vietnam (20-40 per cent) and has an advantage against China (30-34 per cent) and Bangladesh (35 per cent), without the additional BRICS tariff being factored in. Meanwhile, as the uncertainty continues, India's exporters are struggling to navigate the way forward because the buyers are not clear as to what the final tariff is going to be, and are consequently holding back on placing orders. The higher tariffs that the US has imposed on China means a number of Chinese manufacturers are now rerouting shipments to Europe at throwaway prices, which is impacting India's exports to the EU as well. India, like other countries, had frontloaded a lot of shipments ahead of the reciprocal tariff deadline for the ongoing Spring-Summer season, but a big question mark looms over the Fall-Winter season spanning October-March. Once the official level discussions wrap up by mid next month, there is a sense that a final call on the deal could come down to a conversation between the two leaders, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Trump. This is especially so since the American President is the trade negotiator-in-chief in this entire tariff rationalisation exercise. A firm commitment from India to purchasing American defence equipment, natural gas and nuclear reactors, alongside some kind of guidance on India cutting its purchases of fossil fuels from Russia could be part of the final offer from New Delhi. Trump needs to be convinced of a deal that he can hard sell as a victory to his base. The best case scenario for India would be to get a deal of some sort now, and then build on that in the future negotiations that could run into 2026. For Trump, another growing consideration could be the fact that higher tariffs are making it nearly certain that American households will pay higher prices for the everyday goods that are made overseas and imported into the US. Inflation is a looming reality. A Yale estimate from July 23 found that the tariffs will result in as much as $2,700 in 'lost annual income' per household, though the taxes collected would potentially help narrow the long-running federal deficit. The tariffs that have kicked in so far are bringing in some money into the US Treasury, with tariff revenue pegged at $27.2 billion in June and $22.8 billion in May, according to the Treasury Department's monthly statements, a sharp increase from earlier years. Anil Sasi is National Business Editor with the Indian Express and writes on business and finance issues. He has worked with The Hindu Business Line and Business Standard and is an alumnus of Delhi University. ... Read More
