Democrats and Republicans introduce bill on Indo-US nuclear cooperation
Four US Senators (Two Republicans and two Democrats) have introduced a bill to create a whole-of-government strategy for nuclear cooperation and nuclear export with India as an "ally or partner nation" to further the
bilateral civilian nuclear deal
.
"The Secretary of State, in consultation with the heads of other relevant federal departments and agencies, shall establish and maintain within the US-India Strategic Security Dialogue a joint consultative mechanism with the Government of the Republic of India that convenes on a recurring basis," as per the bill. Republicans Jim Risch and Mike Lee are sponsoring the bill along with Democrats Martin Heinrich and Chris Coons.
The purpose should be "to assess the implementation of the Agreement for Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of India concerning peaceful uses of nuclear energy, signed at Washington on October 10, 2008; to discuss opportunities for the Republic of India to align domestic nuclear liability rules with international norms... to develop a strategy for the United States and the Republic of India to pursue bilateral and multilateral diplomatic engagements related to analysing and implementing those opportunities."
Foreign nuclear power firms had evinced interest in setting up atomic power plants in India after it secured a waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group to engage in global nuclear trade. The NSG waiver came after the landmark India-US civil nuclear deal of 2008.
However, the
Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act
of 2010 proved to be an impediment for private sector participation. Foreign players termed certain provisions of the law unacceptable and contradicted the international Convention for Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CSC).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
35 minutes ago
- Economic Times
India and China are promising alternatives for investment, says Mirae Asset VC
Mirae Asset suggests India and China as promising investment alternatives amid concerns over US economic dominance and policy shifts. Mirae Asset suggests India and China as investment alternatives. This comes amid concerns about over-reliance on the US economy. Weakening global confidence and rising nationalism are factors. India's digital infrastructure and population growth are attractive. China's policy shifts are also creating opportunities. Foxconn plans a significant investment in its India unit. South Korean exports to the US have declined recently. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads India and China emerge as promising alternatives for investments, said Mirae Asset Securities Vice Chairman Heo Sun-ho while speaking at a global asset allocation forum in Seoul on Thursday, reports Korea the return of US President Donald Trump to the Oval Office, crack seems to emerge 'in the US-centered investment landscape'. Speaking at the summit hosted by Mirae Asset, Heo-Sin-ho said the over-dependence on the US as its primary growth engine needs to be re-examined."The recent depreciation of the US dollar reflects weakening global confidence, spurred by growing nationalism and ballooning fiscal deficits," Heo said, urging investors to pivot from a US-centric strategy and realign their portfolios with the shifting global innovation vice chairman mentioned that India is emerging as a vast consumer market, driven by robust digital infrastructure and a rapidly expanding to Heo Sun-ho, "Innovative technology that once fuelled US growth is no longer its exclusive domain."He also cited how Chinese AI Startup, DeepSeek positioning itself as a challenger to OpenAI, alongside Chinese automobile company BYD which in April overtook Tesla in the European electric vehicle market for the first to the director and head of Asia Pacific Research at Mirae Asset Hong Kong, policy shifts in China are also creating a more favourable environment for foreign investors. He also echoed the call for a diversified investment South Korean exports to US were down 8.1 per cent for the month of May, as compared to same month last year, weighed down by the US President Donald Trump's tariff, as it took a toll on automobile supplier Foxconn is set to invest USD 1.5 billion in its India unit, Reuters reported, citing a company filing. (ANI)
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Trump's trade tantrum, and stock market: The ABCD strategy of investing
For Indian retail investors, this is not a moment for fear but a moment for foresight, says Sandeep Walunj of Motilal Oswal Financial Services. premium Sandeep Walunj Mumbai Listen to This Article Trump's unpredictable and transactional approach to trade—especially with partners like India—could trigger short-term market volatility. But structural geopolitical trends, such as the potential US-India Free Trade Agreement (FTA), the India-EU FTA, the China+1 strategy, and evolving BRICS dynamics, are tilting the balance in India's favour. Even if Trump's return stirs disruption, Indian investors are better positioned today. Global resistance to US hegemony, rising inflation concerns in the US, and India's growing strategic autonomy act as counterweights. Navigating this terrain requires smart thinking across three horizons: short, medium, and long-term. SHORT TERM (0–6 months): Defensive, yet opportunistic
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
US remittance tax to revive hawala, hand cartels a financial lifeline
Hidden on page 1,054 of President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' is a threat to impose a 3.5 per cent tax on all remittance transfers made by non-citizens to accounts outside the country. This is a dangerous, backward-looking provision, and will make Americans less safe without raising much revenue. It is easy to understand why a measure like this would appeal to the current administration. It makes migrants' lives harder, and that's enough for it to be worth passing into law. And it certainly will create difficulties for millions of legal and illegal immigrants in the US, as well as for their families outside. Mexico's president, Claudia Sheinbaum, has been a vocal opponent, saying — correctly — that this is unjustifiable double taxation. Her country, the largest destination for such transfers, has a lot to lose. But other countries are also worried. India is the third-largest destination for remittances from the US, receiving about $18 billion in 2024; the Philippines and China aren't far behind, at $14 billion each. According to Capital Economics, US-based remittances support 3 per cent of the Philippines' GDP. The impact on migration-dependent areas of the world will be severe. For some countries in Central America, national income might fall by almost 1 per cent if this proposal is implemented. Meanwhile, some estimates suggest that even a higher 5 per cent rate would only increase the US' takings by 0.1 per cent. For the remittance tax's backers, that's beside the point. Vice President JD Vance, when he was still a senator, introduced a similar bill. At that time, he said that 'this legislation is a common-sense solution to disincentivise illegal immigration and reduce the cartels' financial power.' That argument is exactly backward. What common sense actually tells you is that if less money is available in some of the poorest parts of Central America, it increases the incentives for people there to try and move to the US to join their family members already there. As for the impact on criminal networks — well, history suggests that they'll welcome this. The world has spent decades trying to make legal transfers cheap and efficient. An additional levy might increase the cost of transferring even small sums four fold. This would reverse all our efforts to force this trade above ground. If legal transfers are made too expensive, illegal and informal networks take their place. Some people have happily assumed that Bitcoin will fill the gap. But, more likely, there will be a renaissance in simpler, older mechanisms for international transfers. In South and West Asia, we call these methods 'hawala.' But other parts of the world derived equivalents independently. In China, for example, such mechanisms are called 'fei-ch'ien.' From a customer's point of view, they're simple to use. All you need to do is find a well-networked trader and give them the cash to be transferred. That person then calls somebody in their clan or village back home, who gives the same amount of cash to the chosen recipient. The two members of the hawala network settle accounts between each other once or twice a year, through smuggling or perhaps through false invoices and shell companies. Naturally, such informal mechanisms to transfer value can be used not just to evade the remittance excise, but taxes in general. Worse, they are frequently used as conduits for terrorism and drug financing — which is why governments have spent decades trying to stamp them out. This was hard because, if enough people use these systems, they can be more efficient and cheaper than formal finance. The exchange rates that hawala traders offer are often more attractive, and their fees take less of a bite out of small transactions than many banks do. In spite of the best efforts of regulators and cops, hawala networks only really shrank when other routes became more competitive. Informal currency traders need a large volume of transactions to be efficient and offer the best rates to their customers, so when their custom shrank, they became less attractive. It's this self-reinforcing loop that the remittance tax threatens to break. Suddenly, hawala networks — and their equivalents in South and Central America — will become appealing again. And when this method returns to its former prominence, it will become easier to pay those who smuggle opiates or people. And, of course, criminal syndicates of various types will once again step in to run these systems, and profit accordingly. The vice president is, not for the first time, wrong: His administration's remittance tax doesn't attack the cartels, it empowers them.
