Latest news with #USITC
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
4 days ago
- Business
- First Post
Irony just died, many times, in Trump's 25% tariff penalty on India
Trump slaps India with tariffs over Russian oil ties, even as the US and China trade freely with Moscow read more The announcement of a 25 per cent on Indian exports by US President Donald Trump, aimed at penalising India for purchasing oil from Russia, has drawn global attention—not merely for its economic implications, but for its profound inconsistency. The irony is multilayered: while India is being singled out for maintaining an energy relationship with Russia, the United States itself remains a significant importer of Russian goods. According to US government data, in 2024, American trade with Russia amounted to $5.2 billion. This included critical imports such as $1.3 billion worth of fertilisers, $878 million of precious metals (notably palladium), and $624 million of uranium (USITC, 2025). STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Even as Washington accuses New Delhi of indirectly funding 'Putin's war machine,' it quietly maintains its own economic ties to Moscow—ostensibly under the radar of public and political scrutiny. America buys Russian uranium, then scolds India India's Ministry of External Affairs was quick to flag what it called a 'revealing' double standard. The ministry pointed out that US imports of Russian palladium and uranium have not ceased, and that fertiliser imports are, in fact, rising. Between January and May 2025, US imports of Russian uranium were up 28 per cent year-on-year, and fertiliser imports surged 21 per cent in the same period, The Indian Express reported. India's criticism carries a sharp edge: unlike the US, it argues, India turned to Russian oil only after traditional Western suppliers diverted their supplies to Europe, at Washington's own urging. India, the MEA noted, did not indulge in Russian trade as an indulgence but out of 'vital national compulsion.' In contrast, America's imports from Russia serve specific industry needs but continue without the same punitive scrutiny. China buys more oil — and buys time If India is being penalised for its energy trade with Russia, China's treatment is even more telling. Despite importing nearly half (47 per cent) of all Russian oil exports—compared to India's 38 per cent—China received a 90-day pause in US tariffs. The reason appears less about diplomacy and more about leverage. China, with its dominance over the global supply of rare earth elements and essential electronics components, holds sway over American industry. This leverage was evident during US-China trade talks in Stockholm, where Beijing framed its energy strategy as an expression of sovereignty. In response, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent conceded that while the US didn't want to 'impede on [China's] sovereignty,' Beijing might still 'like to pay a 100% tariff', Reuters reported. The Chinese strategy of strategic ambiguity and long-term positioning is hard to ignore. As Scott Kennedy of the Center for Strategic and International Studies observed, Beijing is simply waiting out the storm while doubling down on energy security and its relationship with Moscow. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD From China first to India first… in penalties The irony deepens when considering that Trump's trade war initially focussed on China. The US ran its largest goods trade deficit—$295 billion in 2024—with Beijing. That imbalance made China the presumed primary target of the tariff campaign. Now, while Chinese goods are being slapped with a 30 per cent tariff, India, a country with whom the US runs a much smaller deficit, is facing a punitive 25 per cent penalty simply for energy purchases. Trump's rationale—that India is profitting from reselling Russian oil—was stated with characteristic bluntness: 'They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine,' he said. However, such rhetoric appears at odds with on-the-ground realities. India uses the bulk of imported Russian oil for domestic consumption. The 'reselling for big profits' argument, while provocative, lacks substantiation. Tariff logic: Russia threatens US, so India must pay? The official justification for the new sanctions is rooted in national security. Trump's executive order states that 'the actions and policies of Russia continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the US.' By extension, India, through its oil purchases, is allegedly sustaining that threat. But the logic seems flawed. If the real aim is to end the war in Ukraine by drying up Russian revenues, then China's much larger purchases of Russian oil—along with the EU's ongoing trade—would warrant stricter action. Instead, US has exempted its own uranium buyers and offered China a delay. Trump had once boasted he could end the war in 24 hours if elected; yet six months into his third campaign cycle, Vladimir Putin remains unmoved, and Ukraine still bleeds. Defiance from the Global South Both India and China have responded not with capitulation, but resistance. Prime Minister Narendra Modi's public framing of the issue ties directly into his government's Atmanirbhar Bharat (Self-Reliant India) narrative. Officials in the Ministry of External Affairs have likewise drawn a sharp line, stating that India's bilateral ties 'should not be seen from the prism of a third country.' In other words, Washington's sanctions won't dictate New Delhi's strategic calculations. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD China's stance mirrors India's, albeit with different rhetoric. It portrays energy decisions as sovereign choices, and positions itself as a leader of the Global South. Beijing's message isn't just directed at the White House—it's aimed at a world increasingly frustrated with US-centric norms. Brics: A quiet realignment India and China's parallel resistance fits into a broader shift. Brics, which now includes Egypt, Iran, Ethiopia and the UAE, is increasingly presenting itself as an alternative to the Western-led global order. At the July 2025 Brics summit in Rio de Janeiro, members called out unilateral trade measures and emphasised sovereign financial cooperation. Trump's recent comment that Brics is 'basically a group of countries that are anti-US' shows how far this sentiment has travelled into American politics. Washington's fear that Brics will undermine the dollar's dominance and bypass Swift reflects the economic realignment underway. Parallel but uncoordinated pushback Despite the complex and often tense relations between India and China, the Trump administration's aggressive tactics are inadvertently aligning their responses. Both countries are rejecting US pressure not in coordination, but in parallel. For India, it's about economic autonomy and for China, it's about geopolitical calculus. Yet both share a common interest in resisting what they view as economic coercion masked as moral high ground. Whether through 25 per cent tariffs or Senate bills proposing 500 per cent duties on countries buying Russian oil, the US risks isolating itself from two of the world's largest economies. Oil: The last lever? Ultimately, Washington's hope that tariffs will force India to abandon Russian oil may be misplaced. India now sources 35 per cent of its crude from Russia, and much of it cannot be easily replaced. Many fear that any hasty pullback could disrupt refining and supply chains. At the same time, the global oil market remains delicately balanced. Russia could still retaliate by cutting CPC pipeline flows, which would hit Western oil giants and potentially spike global prices beyond $80 per barrel. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Given this backdrop, punishing India—while ignoring similar or larger trade by others—risks weakening Washington's credibility and alienating a vital partner in the Indo-Pacific. Final Irony: Targeting allies while fuelling the fire In the end, Trump's 25 per cent tariff on India seems less like strategic statecraft and more like symbolic punishment. It offers an illusion of action while failing to curb Russian oil revenues, ignoring American-Russian trade, and driving India and China further toward economic alignment. In trying to isolate Russia, Washington may be isolating itself. And in a world of sharp geopolitical edges, irony is the first casualty.
Indian Express
6 days ago
- Business
- Indian Express
US imports from Russia jumped 23% in Jan-May—fueled by uranium, palladium
Even as Washington pressures New Delhi over Russian oil imports, American imports from Russia are quietly rising – growing 23 per cent year-on-year to $2.1 billion between January and May this year. The surge was led by sharp increases in imports of palladium (37 per cent), uranium (28 per cent), and fertilisers (21 per cent). In 2024, two years after the Ukraine war began, US merchandise imports from Russia fell to $3 billion in customs value – 90 per cent lower than in 2021, the year before the conflict. Still, key Russian goods continued to flow into the US in 2024, including fertilisers ($1.1 billion), palladium ($878 million), uranium ($624 million), and aircraft engine parts ($75 million), according to US International Trade Commission (USITC) data. Trade between Washington and Moscow has come under the spotlight after India's Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) called the 'targeting of India' over Russian oil imports by the US and the EU 'unjustified and unreasonable' in a statement on Monday. 'Where the United States is concerned, it continues to import from Russia uranium hexafluoride for its nuclear industry, palladium for its EV industry, fertilisers as well as chemicals,' the MEA said. The statement came hours after US President Donald Trump threatened to 'substantially' raise tariffs on Indian exports for 'buying massive amounts of Russian oil', in addition to the 25 per cent 'Liberation Day' tariff set to kick in from August 7. Fertilisers, palladium now lead US imports from Russia In 2021, the US imported goods worth around $30 billion from Russia. This halved to $14 billion in 2022, following the war in Ukraine that began in February that year. Imports then fell to $4.6 billion in 2023, before settling at $3 billion in 2024. The main import in 2021 was crude oil, valued at over $17 billion, but that has since become negligible. By 2024, imports of fish and crustaceans, nickel, and lead had ceased entirely. Around 90 per cent of US imports from Russia in 2024 comprised fertilisers (including urea and potassium chloride), palladium, and uranium. Compared to 2021, fertiliser imports in 2024 were down 8 per cent, palladium 45 per cent, and uranium just 3 per cent. Palladium is a precious metal widely used in catalytic converters in internal combustion engines (ICE) and hybrid vehicles to reduce emissions, but it has limited use in fully electric vehicles (EVs). Uranium imports rise despite curbs At $806 million, US fertiliser imports from Russia between January and May 2025 were up 21 per cent y-o-y and 60 per cent higher than the $503 million imported in the same period of 2021. Similarly, uranium imports rose 28 per cent y-o-y to $596 million and surged 147 per cent compared to $241 million in January-May 2021, before the war began. Weeks after the war began, Washington banned imports of Russian crude oil, liquefied natural gas, and coal, and restricted US investments in most Russian energy firms. In 2024, it also barred imports of Russian enriched uranium – a key revenue source for Moscow. However, some US companies can apply for waivers until 2028, which partly explains the recent surge in imports. MEA defends oil imports, calls EU-Russia trade 'revealing' In its statement, the MEA said India began importing oil from Russia 'because traditional supplies were diverted to Europe after the outbreak of the conflict'. 'The United States at that time actively encouraged such imports by India for strengthening global energy markets' stability,' the ministry said. It asserted that India's Russian oil imports are a 'necessity compelled by global market situation'. 'However, it is revealing that the very nations criticising India are themselves indulging in trade with Russia. Unlike our case, such trade is not even a vital national compulsion,' the statement said. With Russia, the EU's bilateral trade in 2024 stood at 67.5 billion euros in goods and 17.2 billion euros in services, it added. 'This is significantly more than India's total trade with Russia that year or subsequently. European imports of LNG in 2024, in fact, reached a record 16.5 mn tonnes, surpassing the last record of 15.21 mn tonnes in 2022. Europe-Russia trade includes not just energy, but also fertilisers, mining products, chemicals, iron and steel and machinery and transport equipment,' the statement said.
Fibre2Fashion
17-07-2025
- Business
- Fibre2Fashion
High tariffs cut value of US RMG imports from China in May by 52% YoY
High tariffs reduced the value of US apparel imports from China in May this year by 52 per cent year on year (YoY), data from the US International Trade Commission (USITC) reveal. China's market share in US apparel imports in May also dropped to 9.9 per cent, a new low in decades; it was 19.9 per cent in May 2024. High tariffs cut US apparel imports value from China in May by 52 per cent YoY, USITC data show. China's market share in US apparel imports in May also dropped to 9.9 per cent, a new low in decades. Due to reciprocal tariffs, the average tariff rate for US apparel imports grew to 23.8 per cent in May, up several points from the already record-setting 20.8 per cent seen in April, a US academic said. The May trade insights, compiled by University of Delaware professor of fashion and apparel studies Sheng Lu using USITC data, revealed that tariff rates on fashion products (especially steep duties on China-originating goods) ballooned beyond levels seen in the modern era. As a result of the Trump administration's reciprocal tariff regime, the average tariff rate for US apparel imports grew to 23.8 per cent in May this year, up several points from the already record-setting 20.8 per cent seen in April, and substantially higher than the 13.9 per cent average rate in May 2024, and even the 14.7 per cent rate of January 2025, before the president's second term began, he wrote on his website. While the overall value of US apparel imports decreased by 7 per cent YoY, import duties grew by almost 60 per cent during the same duration. 'In May, I think most of the [average apparel tariff] increase was because of China. And for the rest of the world, they were charged a 10 per cent universal tariff rate. Some products, especially those from Asia, were able to enter [the country] in May before the new tariff rate hit,' Lu said. Across the board, all countries paid more duties on apparel in May than they did in previous months due to the universal baseline tariff. Vietnam's average apparel import duty rate reached 25.9 per cent, up from 20.5 per cent in April, while Bangladesh saw a similar percentage jump from 17.8 per cent to 21.1 per cent month on month (MoM). India's average clothing tariff rate climbed from 15.8 per cent to 20.1 per cent, while Cambodia's increased from 19.7 per cent to 24.6 per cent. Mexico, however, saw its average import duties paid on apparel products decrease from 2.2 per cent in April to 1.4 per cent in May — nearly the same rate it paid a year ago. But the country's apparel import values jumped considerably YoY, by 12.2 per cent. Mexico's apparel imports are covered by the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), giving them duty-free access. However, the country still only accounted for 4.6 per cent of US apparel sourcing in May this year. 'The signal is very clear—the Trump administration not only wants to decouple from China, but it wants Asian countries to decouple their supply chains from China,' Lu noted. But the US administration's target of encouraging Asian nations to abandon China as a partner 'does not appear to be realistic, at least in the near to medium term,' with so much dependence on the country for inputs, he added. Fibre2Fashion News Desk (DS)
Yahoo
14-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
US Apparel Imports From China Fell to a 22-Year Low in May Amid Trade War Escalation
Clothing imports from China fell to a 22-year low in May and were down by more than half (52 percent) from the same period in 2024 amid escalating tariff tensions between Washington and Beijing that have since resulted in a patched-up trade truce. For the first time in decades, China's share of apparel imports into the U.S. market dropped below 10 percent. May saw the sourcing superpower account for just 9.9 percent of clothing imports—a precarious plummet from the year-ago period, when China represented 19.9 percent of all apparel brought into the American market. More from Sourcing Journal Trump Announces 30% Duties on EU, Mexico Trump Hits Canada With 35% Tariffs Too Much Space, Too Little Demand: China-US Freight Rates Keep Crashing The May trade insights, compiled by University of Delaware professor of fashion and apparel studies Dr. Sheng Lu using U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) data, revealed that tariff rates on fashion products (especially steep duties on China-originating goods) ballooned beyond levels seen in the modern era. As a result of the Trump administration's reciprocal tariff regime, the average tariff rate for U.S. apparel imports grew to 23.8 percent in May, up several points from the already record-setting 20.8 percent seen in April (and substantially higher than the 13.9-percent average rate in May 2024, and even the 14.7-percent rate of January 2025, before the president's second term began). China predictably faced the brunt of that burden for several weeks after a tit-for-tat spate of escalating tariff threats between President Donald Trump and Chinese trade officials. On April 9, the president set a 145-percent duty rate on China-originating products—an unprecedented measure that was reversed on May 12 when U.S. cabinet officials traveled to Geneva to meet with their Chinese counterparts and broker a truce that brought down the duty rate on both sides significantly. The duty hike had the effect of driving down apparel imports from China significantly, but those that did enter the U.S. market during May faced tariff rates averaging at an unprecedented 69.1 percent, up from 55 percent the month prior, 37 percent in March and 22.1 percent in January. Lu calculated the applied tariff rate on apparel by dividing the duty rate by the value of imports. All told, while the overall value of apparel imports decreased 7 percent year over year, import duties grew by almost 60 percent during the same time frame. 'In May, I think the most of the [average apparel tariff] increase was because of China. And for the rest of the world, they were charged a 10-percent universal tariff rate. Some products, especially those from Asia, were able to enter [the country] in May before the new tariff rate hit,' Lu said. Across the board, all countries paid more duties on apparel in May than they did in previous months due to the universal baseline tariff. Vietnam's average apparel import duty rate reached 25.9 percent, up from 20.5 percent in April, while Bangladesh saw a similar percentage jump from 17.8 percent to 21.1 percent month over month. India's average clothing tariff rate climbed from 15.8 percent to 20.1 percent, while Cambodia's increased from 19.7 percent to 24.6 percent. There were winners to be found in May, however, and their growing import values correlated with manageable tariff rates. Mexico, for example, saw its average import duties paid on apparel products decrease from a negligible 2.2 percent in April to 1.4 percent in May—nearly the same rate it paid one year ago. But Mexico's apparel import values jumped considerably year over year, by 12.2 percent. The country's apparel imports are covered by the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), giving them duty-free access. However, the country still only accounted for 4.6 percent of U.S. apparel sourcing in May. The biggest players are still the Asian nations, many of which have received letters this week from the Trump administration regarding their new, double-digit tariff rates. They also faced threats against transshipment, or rerouting products from other countries with the goal of evading tariffs. Lu, like other experts, believes the reference may allude to the administration's intent to revisit of content requirements and Rules of Origin, as true transshipment of finished goods is already illegal. In his view, 'The signal is very clear—the Trump administration not only wants to decouple from China, but it wants Asian countries to decouple their supply chains from China.' But the Trump administration's long-held goal of encouraging Asian nations to abandon China as a partner 'does not appear to be realistic, at least in the near to medium term,' with so much dependence on the country for inputs, he said. For example, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) data from 2020 (the latest year for which insights are available) showed that about 55.4 percent of the value of Vietnam's textile and apparel gross exports contained content added from other countries—including 26.6 percent contributed by China. UNComtrade data was even more stark, showing that China accounted for 63.8 percent of the $16.6 billion in textile imports to Vietnam in 2023, a 'notable increase' from 37.4 percent in 2010. Like other developing countries with limited capabilities to manufacture certain fabrics and components, Vietnam still relies on imported raw materials. Meanwhile, the country represented the biggest apparel supplier to the U.S. in May, accounting for 21.7 percent of clothing imports. Limiting or discouraging access to the imported raw materials needed to produce apparel products could easily threaten Vietnam's stability as a sourcing base, Lu believes. The same is true for many of America's current top suppliers, which in May included Bangladesh (which accounted for 9.7 percent of U.S. apparel import market share), Dominican Republic-Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR) countries (10.4 percent), India (8.2 percent), Indonesia (5.1 percent), Cambodia (5.2 percent) and U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) members (5.5 percent). As companies brace themselves for the impact of the incoming duties, they're caught between a rock and hard place. 'Even though the situation between China and the U.S. has stabilized, and there's a deal out there, companies still see sourcing from China as having huge risks,' Lu said. 'They want to source from more countries, but they remain mainly looking at Asian countries, because they need these sourcing designations to be ready to provide products immediately.' There are 'not too many options' in terms of mature sourcing markets with the capabilities and capacity to take on production at scale, aside from 'second-tier emerging sourcing destinations in Asia' that are tight with China and about to be hit with steep duties themselves. Lu believes that despite those conditions, companies will continue to move into sourcing locales like Vietnam and Bangladesh, with the hope that more beneficial trade terms might be reached. 'They are developing countries, they don't pose any national security threat toward the U.S., and they're not the focal point of Trump's trade policy,' Lu said. 'So there's a hope that some kind of deal can be reached before the August deadline.' Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Observer
10-07-2025
- Business
- Observer
Tariffs drive US clothing imports from China to 22-year low in May
LONDON/NEW YORK: The value of apparel imports from China to the US fell in May to its lowest monthly level in 22 years, according to latest trade data, highlighting the impact of steep US tariffs. China has for years been the biggest exporter of clothes to the US, but its share of the US apparel market has fallen as trade relations between the world's two biggest economies soured. US President Donald Trump ratcheted tariffs up to as much as 145% in April, driving more US retailers to reduce purchases from Chinese factories in favor of Vietnam, Bangladesh, India, and elsewhere. "The sharp decline in US apparel imports from China in May 2025 was anything but natural," said Sheng Lu, professor of fashion and apparel studies at the University of Delaware. The US imported $556 million worth of clothing from China in May, down from $796 million in April, and the fourth straight month of declines, according to US International Trade Commission (USITC) data. The last time monthly imports were lower than that was May 2003. Earlier in the year, anticipating Trump's tariffs, US retailers stocked up: the value of apparel imports from China in January was $1.69 billion, up 15% from the $1.47 billion a year earlier. Despite a recent trade deal between the US and China, most leading US fashion companies still plan to reduce their China exposure further, if not totally move out of the country, Lu said. The same pattern is visible in demand from US retailers for factory inspections. Auditing firm QIMA said its data, based on thousands of inspections and audits worldwide, shows US sourcing from China fell by nearly a quarter in the second quarter from a year earlier, while demand in Southeast Asia grew 29%. Another early winner was Mexico, according to the USITC data. In May the US imported $259 million worth of apparel from its southern neighbor, up 12% from a year ago. QIMA said in its note that the shift out of China is not new and Southeast Asia's share of US sourcing has been steadily growing since mid 2023. "While the US administration's tariff policies took several sharp turns during Q2 2025, the procurement patterns of US-based brands and retailers have stayed largely within the bounds of long-standing trends established before this year's escalation," QIMA said. The coming months may put US supply chains to a new test, QIMA said, as the temporary pause on tariffs for most non-China countries will soon expire, coinciding with the kick-off of holiday season procurement.— Reuters
