Trump threatens India with 25% tariff — plus ‘penalty' for buying Russian energy
While describing India as a 'friend,' the president raged against the country's high tariffs on the US, including their 'obnoxious' non-monetary trade barriers.
'Also, they have always bought a vast majority of their military equipment from Russia, and are Russia's largest buyer of ENERGY, along with China, at a time when everyone wants Russia to STOP THE KILLING IN UKRAINE — ALL THINGS NOT GOOD! INDIA WILL THEREFORE BE PAYING A TARIFF OF 25%, PLUS A PENALTY FOR THE ABOVE, STARTING ON AUGUST FIRST,' Trump wrote on Truth Social.
3 President Donald Trump listens during a news conference with India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the East Room of the White House, Feb. 13, 2025, in Washington.
AP
India is the first country to be hit with a direct penalty for engaging with Russia in Trump's tariff war.
The new punishment comes as Trump has threatened Russia with additional tariffs and potential secondary sanctions in 10 days from Tuesday in response to Russian President Vladimir Putin not putting an end to the war in Ukraine.
The president is negotiating with countries ahead of his Aug. 1 tariff deadline, when he will impose higher rates on the nations that have yet to strike a deal with the US.
The 25% rate for India is just slightly less than the original 26% tariff Trump levied in April on 'Liberation Day.' He then dropped rates to 10% while the US negotiated for long-term deals, and has since come to terms with a number of trading partners, including the EU, the UK, Japan and Indonesia.
India applied an average rate of 5.2% on US goods in 2022 and imported a wide range of products, including oils and machinery.
The US, meanwhile, tariffed India at an average rate of 2.4% in previous years.
3 India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi (R) greets Russian President Vladimir Putin before a meeting at Hyderabad House in New Delhi on December 6, 2021.
AFP via Getty Images
3 An oil refinery operated by Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd., in Mumbai, India, on Friday, April 4, 2025.
Bloomberg via Getty Images
The high rate on India may also be a ploy to get Apple to produce its iPhones in the US, as CEO Tim Cook has eyed manufacturing up to 25% of the phones there with the aim of moving away from China.
Trump said in March he told Cook to produce the phones in the US instead, expressing frustration over the tech company's potential move to India.
'I said to Tim, I said, 'Tim look, we treated you really good, we put up with all the plants that you build in China for years, now you got build us. We're not interested in you building in India, India can take care of themselves … we want you to build here,'' Trump said at the time.
The high rates for India still come as a surprise given Trump's close relationship with Indian Prime Minister Narenda Modi in his first term and Vice President JD Vance's moves to strike a deal back in April.
Vance said April 21 that he and Modi had come to a 'road map' on trade, and that a firm agreement would be coming soon.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Intercept
a few seconds ago
- The Intercept
What to Do — And Not to Do — About a Judge Like Emil Bove
Emil Bove, the nominee to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, is sworn in before his confirmation hearing in the Senate on June 25, 2025, in Washington. Photo: Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images President Donald Trump's second term has so far been a constant barrage of unconstitutional actions and illegal orders. So it was thus no surprise when the Senate on Monday confirmed Trump's former personal lawyer and Justice Department lackey, Emil Bove, to a lifetime appointment on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That 50 Republican senators would install this fascist bootlicker to one of the most powerful judicial positions in the land for life is, as MSNBC legal analyst Andrew Weissmann put it, 'a nail in the coffin' for a system of checks and balances on authoritarian presidential overreach. There's a risk, however, after a grave blow like this to legal, political, and constitutional norms, that liberal epitaphs to the American constitutional order will mourn the wrong thing. Bove's appointment confirms something worse than the Republican embrace of lawlessness. He represents the Republicans' use and abuse of our fraught constitutional order for the purposes of enacting profound, life-denying, and long-lasting injustices to uphold a white nationalist regime. Liberal epitaphs to the American constitutional order risk mourning the wrong thing. Calling on the restoration of preexisting norms of law and constitutionality to reverse course will be, at best, insufficient. After all, liberal reliance on a system of order above justice helped deliver us Trump and his jurist enablers in the first place. This is not to understate how appalling it is that Bove has been appointed a federal judge. 'It is one thing to put lab-designed Federalist Society members on courts across the country — and, to be clear, several of Trump's nominees from his first administration went far beyond that,' wrote legal journalist Chris Geidner when Trump nominated Bove, 'but it is another thing altogether to name a lawless loyalist to a federal appeals court.' Geidner called Bove's confirmation a 'line that cannot be crossed.' It has now been crossed. Bove is perhaps best known as the Justice Department official who dismissed corruption charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams — a decision that led more than 10 Justice Department attorneys to resign in protest. He fired federal prosecutors who had worked on January 6 cases. According to three Justice Department whistleblower accounts, Bove also told federal attorneys that they 'would need to consider telling the courts 'fuck you'' and ignore orders blocking the administration from sending immigrants to El Salvador's gulag. Over 900 former Justice Department attorneys, identifying with both parties, wrote letters opposing Bove's judgeship. Yet Republican senators refused to hear whistleblower testimony and dismissed the widespread concerns about Bove as Democratic meddling. As usual, they did what the president asked. Bove's new, permanent position assures more serious harms to come. Given how few cases are heard by the Supreme Court, the 3rd Circuit is most often the final voice in the law for cases from Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Bove has made unwaveringly clear that, for him, the law is the president's will. This position is now standard in the Republican Party and all too consistently affirmed by a Supreme Court majority committed to unitary executive theory to vest authoritarian powers in Trump's hands. Earlier this month, Geidner posted on social media that 'should Bove be confirmed — which he should not be — he should immediately be the subject of an impeachment inquiry should Dems retake Congress.' Based on his actions at the Department of Justice, there are ample grounds to call for impeachment. Democrats should vow to do this immediately. Senate Democrats carry significant blame for Bove's judgeship, too. Senate Democrats, after all, carry significant blame for Bove's judgeship, too. His seat should have been filled by Biden nominee, Adeel Mangi, who would have been the first Muslim judge on a federal appeals court. Instead of shutting down vile, Islamophobic Republican attacks against Mangi, Senate Democrats allowed the smears to gain ground and eventually stood down on the nomination. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Tuesday said, 'To confirm Mr. Bove is a sacrilegious act against our democracy.' He did not mention that, when he was Senate majority leader, he permitted a relentless Islamophobic campaign to tank Mangi, a qualified nominee, which left the judge's seat open for Trump's taking. The Democratic establishment may lament Bove's confirmation as 'a dark, dark day,' but we have no reason to think that this party leadership will bring us toward the light. Geidner's suggestion — to pursue impeachment — would be the very least that Democrats can do. What they should already be doing is using every tool in their power to hinder Trump's deportation machine. Given the Democrats' own vile embrace of harsh border rule, I am not holding my breath. The judges who have continued to push back directly against Trump's illegal actions, meanwhile, remain a crucial constraint on some of the administration's worst attacks on our rights. These judges are under unprecedented attack. On the same day Bove was confirmed, Trump's Justice Department filed a baseless misconduct complaint against U.S. District Judge James Boasberg. In March, Boasberg issued an order to block deportation flights to El Salvador under Trump's invocation of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act — the very sort of order that Bove reportedly told attorneys to say 'fuck you' to. In an obscene retaliatory escalation, the Justice Department's complaint claims that Boasberg's alleged comments — that the administration could trigger a 'constitutional crisis' by disregarding court orders — 'have undermined the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.' The complaint says that the administration has 'always complied with all court orders.' The idea that it constitutes judicial misconduct to suggest otherwise, despite clear evidence of the executive's disregard for certain unfavorable court orders, is the sort of authoritarian logic that obviates concerns about a constitutional crisis in the worst way: There can be no crisis if fascist rule silences all constitutional pushback. Then the problem is not a constitutional order in crisis, but a fascist order without opposition. This is not yet the state of affairs. The courts — certain courts, at least — are not yet a dead end. It should be increasingly clear, however, that they will not deliver us from fascism either. As legal scholar Aziz Rana wrote earlier this year, the left should 'strongly back litigation efforts and condemn Trump's defiance of the courts,' but not because the courts are a terrain of liberatory struggle. Rana is clear that 'the reason to oppose Trump's violation of court orders is not out of a general faith in judges or constitutional norms,' but because they are a tool, however limited, for protecting people and holding the administration to account. The affront at the heart of Bove's confirmation is not that he does not respect the law — although that should no doubt be disqualifying for a judge. If that's where we object, however, we risk lionizing a criminal legal system that also gives rise to racist policing and mass incarceration. Bove's violence lies primarily in his commitment to a form of injustice that ensures impunity for the corrupt and powerful, while the poorest and most vulnerable are treated as wholly disposable. The infamous advice Bove allegedly gave to ignore court orders over deportations was a 'fuck you' to the Constitution and the rule of law, yes, but above all it was a 'fuck you' to the over 200 men who were rounded up, kidnapped, shaved, beaten, and tortured in a foreign gulag without any recourse. It was a 'fuck you' to human beings. It should go without saying that the constitutional order in and of itself has never in practice guaranteed equality and justice for all. The constitutionalization of slavery's abolition and many basic civil rights protections took extraordinary social struggle and political work. The successful dismantling of the constitutional right to an abortion took decades of political organizing, too. Nothing in the Constitution guarantees progress. 'The great social movements of the past, from abolition to civil rights, labour to women's suffrage, famously called for the defiance of unjust court judgments that sustained slavery, segregation and disenfranchisement, or criminalized union organizing,' Rana noted. 'Considering the current right-wing control over the courts, the left may find itself in a similar place in the coming years, calling for civil disobedience of judicial authority.' With judges like Bove in place, such action will likely be all the more necessary.
San Francisco Chronicle
a few seconds ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Lithuania Prime Minister Gintautas Paluckas steps down after investigations and protests
FILE -Lithuania's Social Democratic party member Gintautas Paluckas, nominated as the next Prime Minister, speaks during a Lithuania's parliament session in Vilnius, Lithuania, Nov. 21, 2024. Mindaugas Kulbis/AP FILE -Lithuania's Social Democratic party member Gintautas Paluckas, nominated as the next Prime Minister, speaks during a Lithuania's parliament session in Vilnius, Lithuania, Nov. 21, 2024. Mindaugas Kulbis/AP FILE -Newly elected Lithuania's Prime Minister Gintautas Paluckas, speaks to the media at the Parliament in Vilnius, Lithuania, Nov. 21, 2024. Mindaugas Kulbis/AP VILNIUS, Lithuania (AP) — Lithuania Prime Minister Gintautas Paluckas stepped down on Thursday following investigations into his business dealings that prompted protests in the Baltic country 's capital calling for his resignation. Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda announced Paluckas' resignation to the media on Thursday morning. A spokesperson for Paluckas did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Paluckas, a newly established leader of the center-left Social Democrats, ascended to the role late last year after a three-party coalition formed following parliamentary elections in October. His entire cabinet is now expected also to resign, potentially leaving the country without an effective government weeks before Russia holds joint military exercises with neighboring Belarus. Advertisement Article continues below this ad Lithuanian foreign policy is unlikely to change as a result of the government shakeup. Nausėda, who was elected separately, is the country's face on the world stage and has been one of the most stalwart supporters of Ukraine in its fight against invading Russian forces. Paluckas has recently been dogged by media investigations into his business and financial dealings. Several media outlets published investigations in July regarding Paluckas' past and present ventures and alleged mishandlings, including ones more than a decade ago. The Baltic country 's anti-corruption and law enforcement agencies subsequently launched their own probes. In a devastating blow to his reputation, the media also revealed that Paluckas never paid a significant part of a 16,500 euro fine ($19,039) in connection with a 2012 criminal case dubbed the 'rat poison scandal.' Paluckas was convicted of mishandling the bidding process for Vilnius' rat extermination services while serving as the capital city's municipality administration director. Judges for the country's top court in 2012 ruled that he abused his official position by illegally granting privileges to the company that offered the highest price in the bid. He was also sentenced to two years behind bars, but the sentence was suspended for one year and he ultimately was never imprisoned. Advertisement Article continues below this ad The Social Democratic party leader denied any wrongdoing regarding his business affairs, labeling the criticism as part of a 'coordinated attack' by political opponents. He resigned before the opposition could formally launch impeachment proceedings. New coalition talks are expected to start shortly to form a new cabinet.
San Francisco Chronicle
a few seconds ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Lebanese president calls for Hezbollah to disarm as US pressure rises
BEIRUT (AP) — Lebanese President Joseph Aoun reiterated calls for the militant group Hezbollah to give up its weapons, a day after the group's chief doubled down on its refusal to disarm. Aoun's comments Thursday during a speech marking Army Day in Lebanon came as pressure increases from Washington to disarm Hezbollah. The U.S. presented Lebanon with 'draft ideas to which we have made fundamental amendments that will be presented to the Cabinet early next week," Aoun said. Under the Lebanese proposal, there would be an 'immediate cessation of Israeli hostilities' in Lebanon, including airstrikes and targeted killing, a full withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon and the release of Lebanese prisoners held in Israel, Aoun said. Lebanon, for its part, would implement the 'withdrawal of the weapons of all armed forces, including Hezbollah, and their surrender to the Lebanese Army,' he said. The comments came after a speech Wednesday by Hezbollah leader Naim Kassem that called the group's weapons 'part of Lebanon's strength' and said 'anyone who demands the delivery of weapons is demanding the delivery of weapons to Israel.' Hezbollah officials have said they will not discuss giving up the group's remaining arsenal until Israel withdraws from all of Lebanon and stops its strikes. Aoun said Lebanon's proposal also calls for international donors to contribute $1 billion annually for 10 years to beef up the Lebanese army's capabilities and for an international donor conference to raise funds in the fall for reconstruction of Lebanese areas damaged and destroyed during last year's war between Israel and Hezbollah. The war nominally ended with a U.S.-brokered ceasefire in November calling for Hezbollah and Israeli forces to withdraw from the area south of the Litani River in Lebanon, which would be patrolled by a beefed-up Lebanese army, along with U.N. peacekeepers. The agreement left vague how Hezbollah's weapons and military facilities north of the Litani River should be treated, saying Lebanese authorities should dismantle unauthorized facilities starting with the area south of the river. Hezbollah maintains the deal only covers the area south of the Litani, while Israel and the U.S. say it mandates disarmament of the group throughout Lebanon.
