Modi Seeks to Dodge Trump's Trade Wrath in White House Summit
Why American Mobility Ground to a Halt
Saudi Arabia's Neom Signs $5 Billion Deal for AI Data Center
SpaceX Bid to Turn Texas Starbase Into City Is Set for Vote in May
Cutting Arena Subsidies Can Help Cover Tax Cuts, Think Tank Says
When Prime Minister Narendra Modi last met President Donald Trump five years ago, the US leader stood before a crowd of 100,000 cheering Indians in Modi's home state of Gujarat and declared: 'America will always be faithful and loyal friends to the Indian people.'
Modi is likely to find the US president in a decidedly less celebratory mood when the two leaders meet in Washington Thursday.
The head of the world's most populous nation faces a minefield in negotiations with Trump, who has signaled that India remains a potential tariff target despite a deepening partnership between the two countries.
Modi has rolled out a series of concessions to Trump in an effort to mollify the US leader and preserve his nation's access to its largest trading partner. In the last few weeks, India has slashed tariffs on items from motorcycles to luxury cars, agreed to take planeloads of undocumented migrants and pushed to ramp up purchases of US energy.
'Prime Minister Modi knows that Trump's priorities are deportations of illegal Indians and India's high tariffs, so Modi has prepared for this, and he is seeking to preempt Trump's anger over these issues,' said Lisa Curtis, a former Trump aide who directs the Indo-Pacific Security Program at the Center for a New American Security.
Read: Modi Returns to US With Lost Clout as Stock, Economic Boom Fades
That may not be enough. Trump has repeatedly threatened tariffs on India in return for its high levies on US goods and he's vowed to soon enact 'reciprocity' on all nations when it comes to import duties — a move that would hit India harder than most major trade partners.
Underscoring that view, top Trump economic aide Kevin Hassett told CNBC this week that India's tariffs on US imports were 'enormously high' and said Modi 'has got a lot to talk about with the president.'
And White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday she expected the tariffs to be announced before Modi visited the White House.
'It's very simple logic as to why the President wants to impose reciprocal tariffs,' Leavitt said. 'It's the golden rule, which we all learned when we were growing up in school, treat others the way you want to be treated.'
Modi arrived in Washington on Wednesday and met with Trump's newly confirmed Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, with the two discussing bilateral intelligence cooperation, according to a readout from India's External Affairs Ministry. Modi is set to meet with Trump in the Oval Office on Thursday afternoon.
India's stock market slumped ahead of Modi's meeting with Trump, with the MSCI India Index on Wednesday touching its lowest level since early June, taking its losses for the week to as much as 4.6%.
Some in Modi's administration are concerned that his early overtures may not yield much from the new president, and say it's not clear what, if anything, Trump is seeking from New Delhi, people familiar with the matter said. They also worry that India has few backers among immigration and foreign policy hardliners in Trump's government, in particular on the issue of H-1B visas for skilled workers, they said.
Read: Why Trump's Inner Circle Is So Divided on H-1B Visas: QuickTake
The unease underscores the stakes for India going into Thursday's meeting. Modi is among the earliest batch of foreign leaders to meet with Trump since he returned to office, and their summit follows a series of personal phone calls and lower-level meetings between their governments.
'President Trump and Prime Minister Modi are focused on deepening the US-India strategic partnership across defense, energy, technology and fair trade,' said Brian Hughes, a US National Security Council spokesman, in a statement, adding that the leaders share 'warm ties.'
India's Ministry of External Affairs didn't immediately respond to an email seeking further information.
Another issue hanging over the gathering that might not be formally discussed is the US allegations of bribery leveled during the Biden administration against Indian billionaire Gautam Adani, a close associate of Modi. Adani has denied the charges, and it now rests with Trump's Justice Department to determine how aggressively to pursue the case.
Read: Adani Builds US Influence Machine While Trump Reins in DOJ Cases
For all their differences, there's little doubt that India has become an increasingly important partner for the US, especially when it comes to pushing back on China. American companies including Apple Inc. and Starbucks Corp. have turned to India as an engine of growth or as an alternative to having supply chains moored to China. India is also an active partner with the US, Australia and Japan in the 'Quad,' an informal bloc with shared economic and security interests that often draws Beijing's criticism.
At the same time, India is a leader of the so-called Global South, particularly through the BRICS grouping with Brazil, Russia and South Africa that is frequently at odds with US priorities. And India continues to be a major buyer of Russian oil and weaponry.
Read: India Is Building a Sanctions-Proof Supply Chain for Russian Oil
Despite all that, ties with India have generally received bipartisan support in Washington and the US president has been seen positively in India. Trump's 2020 visit — billed 'Namaste, Trump' — received blanket coverage in the Indian media, and was preceded a year earlier by a trip Modi took to Houston dubbed 'Howdy, Modi.'
But Trump has long used trade balances as a lens for rendering judgment on other nations, and that tendency isn't likely to change. The $41 billion US trade deficit with India in 2023 put it 10th overall, just behind South Korea. On the campaign trail, Trump said India was a 'very big abuser' of its trade ties with the US.
Modi is going into this week's meeting prepared to discuss further reducing India's import duties, as well as purchasing more energy and defense equipment from the US, Bloomberg News has reported.
Harsh Shringla, a former Indian ambassador to the US and former Indian foreign secretary, signaled that's the approach most likely to resonate with Trump.
'The way out of this is to provide the United States a window that would enable it to get a better access to the Indian market, and vice versa,' he said.
--With assistance from Justin Sink, Akayla Gardner, Shruti Srivastava, Hadriana Lowenkron and Josh Wingrove.
(Adds details of Modi's arrival in Washington in paragraph 10 and link to X post)
Elon Musk's DOGE Is a Force Americans Can't Afford to Ignore
The Game Changer: How Ely Callaway Remade Golf
How Oura's Smart Ring Bridged the Gap From Tech Bros to Normies
Why Fast Food Could Be MAHA's Next Target
Trump's Tariffs Make Currency Trading Cool Again After Years of Decline
©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court allows Trump's cuts to National Institutes of Health grants over DEI policies
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed Trump administration cuts to National Institutes of Health grants as part of the federal government's campaign against diversity, equity and inclusion policies. But in a mixed decision the court left in place a different part of the lower court judge's ruling that threw out the administration's guidance document that introduced the policy, raising questions about whether it can be applied moving forward. The justices, on a 5-4 vote, granted in part an emergency request filed by the administration seeking to put a Massachusetts-based federal judge's ruling on hold. The court did not fully explain its reasoning, but the majority indicated that groups seeking to challenge the funding cuts have to file separate lawsuits in a different federal venue — the Court of Federal Claims. Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett appeared to be the deciding vote in crafting the mixed decision. Four justices, all conservatives, said they would have granted the Trump administration's application in full, while four others — conservative Chief Justice John Roberts and the court's three liberals — would have denied it in full. "As today's order states, the District Court likely lacked jurisdiction to hear challenges to the grant terminations, which belong in the Court of Federal Claims," Barrett wrote in a concurring opinion. But, she added, "the Government is not entitled to a stay of the judgments insofar as they vacate the guidance documents." The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a collection of agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services that receives billions of dollars from Congress to fund medical research at universities, hospitals and other institutions. When President Donald Trump took office in January, he vowed to end so-called diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, policies, saying that rather than fostering equality as intended, they are a form of discrimination, primarily against white people. He has also taken aim at policies recognizing transgender rights, including access to gender transition care. The NIH then conducted a review of grants and determined that more than 1,700 of them were not consistent with Trump's directives and terminated them, including studies into HIV prevention and gender identity among teens. The moves were challenged by 16 states led by Massachusetts and the American Public Health Association, among others. After a trial, U.S. District Judge William Young in Massachusetts ruled that the government had failed to follow correct legal processes in implementing the policy, in violation of a law called the Administrative Procedure Act. In rushing to implement Trump's agenda, NIH "simply moved too fast and broke things, including the law," Young wrote. He also said that DEI was "an undefined enemy," noting that government lawyers had not been able to explain exactly what it meant. Young found that there was "pervasive racial discrimination" and "extensive discrimination" against gay, lesbian and transgender people in how grants were selected for termination. He also found "an unmistakable pattern of discrimination against women's health issues." Young declined to put his ruling on hold, as did the Boston-based 1st U.S Circuit Court of Appeals, which also kept the grants intact. In asking the Supreme Court to intervene on behalf of the Trump administration, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that the case is similar to another that arose in Massachusetts in which a judge blocked Trump administration plans to terminate teacher training grants on anti-DEI grounds. The Supreme Court in April blocked that ruling on a 5-4 vote. "This application presents a particularly clear case for this court to intervene and stop errant district courts from continuing to disregard this court's rulings," Sauer wrote. Lawyers for the states pushed back on Sauer's narrative, saying it "bears little resemblance to reality, with Young's ruling a "run-of-the mill" example of a court intervening when the government violates the law. There is no need for Supreme Court intervention because there is no emergency, they added. "The only unlawful decisions here are the federal government's. And the only urgency is that manufactured by NIH in its haste to implement its unprecedented and unreasoned policies," the lawyers wrote. The Trump administration has regularly turned to the Supreme Court when its broad use of executive power is challenged in court and has prevailed in the majority of cases. Trump and his allies have also harshly criticized judges who have ruled against him. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Here's where all the legal cases against Trump stand since his return to the White House
Before he battled his way back to the White House, President Donald Trump was in court battling a slew of civil lawsuits and criminal charges that threatened to upend his finances and take away his freedom. Those cases have mostly abated since his return to office, albeit with some loose ends. On Thursday, Donald Trump declared 'total victory' after an appeals court threw out a massive financial penalty in New York Attorney General Letitia James' lawsuit alleging that he exaggerated his wealth and the value of marquee assets like Trump Tower and Mar-a-Lago. Other punishments affecting Trump's business still apply, but they can be paused pending further appeals. Since Trump's reelection in November, four separate criminal cases — including his hush money conviction and allegations of election interference and illegally hoarding classified documents — have either been dropped, resolved or put aside. On the civil side, several high-profile lawsuits against Trump have been quietly working their way through the appeals process. Here's a look at some of Trump's criminal and civil cases and where they stand now: New York Hush Money Case Trump became the first former U.S. president convicted of felonies when a New York jury found him guilty in May 2024 of falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment to a porn actor who said the two had sex. Though Trump could have faced jail time, Manhattan Judge Juan M. Merchan in January sentenced him instead to what's known as an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction on the books but sparing him any punishment. Trump is appealing the conviction. Trump was set to take office just days later, and Merchan said he had to respect Trump's upcoming legal protections as president, even wishing him 'Godspeed as you assume your second term in office.' Georgia Election Interference Case In August 2023, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis charged Trump and 18 others with participating in a scheme to illegally try to overturn his narrow loss to Democrat Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election in Georgia. Willis cited Trump's January 2021 phone call to Georgia's secretary of state, an effort to replace Georgia's Democratic presidential electors with ones who would vote for Trump, harassment of a Fulton County election worker and the unauthorized copying of data and software from elections equipment. But the case stalled over revelations Willis had been in a relationship with the man she appointed to prosecute it. A state appeals court in December removed Willis from the case. She has appealed that decision to the Georgia Supreme Court, but even if the high court takes the case and decides in her favor, it's unlikely she can pursue criminal charges against Trump while he's in office. Federal Election Case Special counsel Jack Smith charged Trump in August 2023 with conspiring to overturn the results of his election loss to President Joe Biden in the run-up to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. Prosecutors allege Trump and his allies knowingly pushed election fraud lies to push state officials to overturn Biden's win and pressured Vice President Mike Pence to disrupt the ceremonial counting of electoral votes. But Smith moved to drop the case after Trump won reelection in November. Longstanding Justice Department policy says sitting presidents cannot face criminal prosecution. Classified Documents Case In a separate prosecution, Smith charged Trump in June 2023 with illegally retaining classified documents he took from the White House to Mar-a-Lago after he left office in January 2021, and then obstructing government demands to give them back. Prosecutors filed additional charges the following month, accusing Trump of showing a Pentagon 'plan of attack' to visitors at his golf club in New Jersey. Smith also moved to drop that case after Trump's election victory. Sexual Assaults Lawsuits In May 2023, a federal jury found that Trump sexually abused writer E. Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and later defamed her. The jury awarded Carroll $5 million. In January 2024, a second jury awarded Carroll an additional $83.3 million in damages for comments Trump had made about her while he was president, finding that they were defamatory. Trump is appealing that decision. He also appealed the first jury decision, but a federal appeals court in December upheld it and then declined in June to reconsider. Trump still can try to get the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. New York Civil Fraud Lawsuit On Thursday, a five-judge panel of New York's mid-level Appellate Division overturned Trump's whopping monetary penalty in James' lawsuit while narrowly endorsing a lower court's finding that he engaged in fraud by padding his wealth on financial statements provided to lenders and insurers. The judges ruled that the penalty — which soared to $515 million with interest tacked on each day — violated the U.S. Constitution's ban on excessive fines. At the same time, they left in place other punishments, including a bans on Trump and his two eldest sons from serving in corporate leadership for a few years. The decision will almost certainly be appealed to the state's highest court, the Court of Appeals, and the upheld punishments can be paused until that court rules.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
As India bans real-money games, Dream Sports, MPL start pulling the plug
Top Indian startups in the real-money gaming space have begun shutting down operations after New Delhi effectively banned the sector through new legislation that's now on the verge of becoming law. On Thursday, the upper house of the Indian parliament passed the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Bill, 2025 — proposing to completely ban real-money gaming while aiming to promote casual online games and e-sports. The vote came just a day after the bill cleared the lower house, leaving only presidential assent before it becomes law — a formality expected to happen soon. Shortly after the bill passed in the parliament, Indian unicorns Dream Sports and Mobile Premier League (MPL) — along with other startups like Gameskraft, Probo, and Zupee — began shutting down their real-money gaming operations. Some of these companies informed employees of their decision following the bill's passage in the lower house on Wednesday, while others began notifying users directly through their apps. Dream Sports, which counts investors including Tiger Global, Multiples, Alpha Wave Global, and TCV, has shut down its recently launched quick-play fantasy gaming app, Dream Picks. Its other apps involving real-money transactions, including the widely-popular Dream11 and Dream Play, were still operational at the time of filing. However, TechCrunch has learned that the Mumbai-based startup plans to shut down its real-money gaming business entirely once the legislation comes into effect. At its town hall meeting on Wednesday, the startup informed its employees about the implications of the law, a person familiar with the matter told TechCrunch, requesting anonymity as the meeting was internal. Indian site Entrackr reported some details about the meeting earlier. Dream Sports was planning to expand outside India, two people privy to the information informed TechCrunch, on condition of sharing it anonymously, as the plan was not public. The startup also had some partnership talks for its Indian real-money business earlier this week that were about to be finalized, an investor source told TechCrunch. A Dream Sports spokesperson declined to comment. Similar to Dream Sports, MPL, backed by investors including Peak XV, Times Internet, MSA Novo, and Crown Capital, has suspended all real-money games and is no longer taking deposits. 'Deposit cash (minus GST) will be available for withdrawal from 22 Aug. 2025,' a notification on the MPL app reads. Zupee, backed by investors including WestCap Group, Tomales Bay Capital, Nepean Capital, AJ Capital, and Z47 (formerly Matrix Partners India), has also shut down real-money games with immediate effect. 'In line with the new Online Gaming Bill 2025, we are discontinuing paid games, but our hugely popular free titles like Ludo Supreme, Ludo Turbo, Snakes & Ladders, and Trump Card Mania will continue to be available for all users for free,' a Zupee spokesperson said in a statement. Probo, another Peak XV-backed startup, which also counts Elevation Capital and The Fundamentum Partnership among its key investors, stopped its real-money gaming operations after the parliament greenlit the legislation. 'As unfortunate as it is, we respect the government of India's latest Online Gaming bill. In light of this development, Probo has decided to discontinue its real-money gaming (RMG) operations with immediate effect until further notice,' the Gurugram-based startup said. Bootstrapped startup Gameskraft has also stopped accepting money on its rummy apps as a result of the legislation. Similarly, Times Internet-owned fantasy cricket game Cricbuzz11 has discontinued its operations. 'Deposits (net of GST) will be refunded to bank account within 30 days,' the app says on a notice to users. In addition to the shutdown of real-money gaming operations, many employees at these startups have begun searching for new jobs, with hundreds posting about their job hunt on social media. 'We no longer have a secure job, as these companies are expected to cut some roles in the coming days to sustain their business and satisfy investors,' one employee, who requested anonymity for fear of jeopardizing future opportunities, told TechCrunch. Even though these startups could challenge the law in the Indian Supreme Court once it comes into effect, most have chosen not to pursue that route. 'This assessment is accurate — they will have a tough fight in the Supreme Court,' a public policy expert working with some of these real-money gaming startups told TechCrunch, requesting anonymity for fear of losing clients. Real-money gaming startups in India have a combined enterprise valuation of ₹2 trillion (approximately $23 billion), generate cumulative revenues of ₹310 billion (around $3.6 billion), and contribute ₹200 billion (roughly $2.29 billion) annually in direct and indirect taxes, per estimates cited by industry bodies in their letters to the Indian Prime Minister and Home Minister earlier this week. They also project a 28% compound annual growth rate that would double the industry's size by 2028. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
