Donald Trump's Big Claim - India Has Proposed Trade Deal With "No Tariffs"
Trade Minister Piyush Goyal's delegation is set to visit Washington.
Apple aims to produce iPhones in India amid potential tariff changes.
New Delhi:
A day before trade minister Piyush Goyal and a delegation of top negotiators are to arrive in Washington for talks on the proposed India-US trade deal, Donald Trump has let the cat out of the bag by making a huge claim - that India has offered a trade deal with "no tariffs".
Donald Trump, who is on a whirlwind 3-nation visit to the Middle East, made this claim during a meeting with top executives in Doha. New Delhi has not commented on it yet.
INDIA OFFERS ZERO TARIFFS?
Speaking about tariffs and trade, President Trump said, "It is very hard to sell in India, and they are offering us a deal where basically they are willing to literally charge us no tariffs." He also expressed his dissatisfaction with Apple's plans to invest and manufacture in India.
President Trump recalled how he had "confronted" Apple CEO Tim Cook when he found out about Apple shifting production from China to India. "I told him, Tim, we treated you very good, we put up with all the plants you built in China for years. We are not interested in you building in India. India can take care of themselves, they are doing very well, we want you to build here (in the US)," the US President said.
APPLE'S PLANS FOR INDIA
Apple, which had already aimed to manufacture most of its iPhones meant to be sold in the United States at factories across India by the end of 2026, has been speeding up those plans to navigate potentially higher tariffs imposed by Trump on China.
In March, hours before Donald Trump announced his "reciprocal tariffs" for friends and does alike, Apple's main India suppliers - Foxconn and Tata - shipped nearly $2 billion worth of iPhones to the US - an all-time high, to bypass those tariffs, which, at the time, President Trump had said, would come into effect within two days of the announcement.
MARKETS UPBEAT
Meanwhile, equity markets in India surged to a seven-month high almost immediately after reports about Trump's claim of India allegedly offering a trade deal with zero tariffs surfaced. As the delegation led by trade minister Piyush Goyal heads to Washington, New Delhi seeks to clinch the deal within the "Autumn" time frame announced by the government earlier this year.
Donald Trump's 90-day pause on punitive "reciprocal tariffs" also ticks along, but that has not deterred New Delhi. Minister Piyush Goyal had said last month that "We never negotiate at gunpoint. Favourable time constraints motivate us for quicker talks, but till the time we are not able to secure the interest of our country and our people, we do not hurry (into any deal)."
INDIA FIRST, ASSURES TRADE MINISTER
Adding to this, Mr Goyal had said, "All our trade talks are progressing well, in the spirit of India First, and to ensure our pathway to Viksit Bharat by 2047 in the Amrit Kaal."
According to news agency Reuters, India has reportedly offered to reduce duties to zero on 60 per cent of tariff lines in a first phase of the deal under negotiation with Washington, while offering preferential access to nearly 90 per cent of the merchandise India imports from the United States.
WHAT INDIA-US TRADE STATS REVEAL
The US is India's largest trading partner globally. Bilateral trade between the largest and the oldest democracies in the world currently totals $129 billion, 2024 data reveals. At a surplus of $45.7 billion, the balance is in India's favour.
With negotiations under way, both countries are aiming for a massive boost in bilateral trade - totaling $500 billion by 2030.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
22 minutes ago
- India Today
Internet attempts to solve the curious case of Soham Parekh with memes and jokes
One cursory glance at Twitter and you will realise that the microblogging platform is overflowing with memes and jokes about Soham Parekh, an Indian engineer who has been accused of moonlighting - secretly working at multiple startups without informing any of US-based startup founders alleged that Parekh, apparently based in India, was simultaneously employed at as many as four or five after Parekh's story went viral, social media users did what they do best - responded with humour by crowning him the CEO of multitasking and mystery. For instance, one user quipped, 'Soham Parekh didn't choose this life, the Gujarati in him did.' Film clips, viral videos, and meme templates followed, turning the curious case of Soham Parekh into a full-blown internet a look at the memes and jokes here: advertisement Soham Parekh and his team of coding mules going for the next interview Gabbar (@GabbbarSingh) July 3, 2025 VCs realizing 12 of their portfolio companies have founders named Soham Parekh Turner Novak (@TurnerNovak) July 2, 2025live footage of Soham Parekh Trung Phan (@TrungTPhan) July 2, 2025LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman also participated in the Soham Parekh meme-fest: Parekh began trending after Suhail Doshi, founder of Playground AI and former CEO of analytics firm Mixpanel, posted a public warning on X, saying: 'PSA: there's a guy named Soham Parekh (in India) who works at 3–4 startups at the same time. He's been preying on YC companies and more. Beware.'Furthermore, Doshi claimed that Parekh had briefly joined Playground AI last year but was fired within a week after his dual employment came to Doshi also shared what he claimed was Parekh's CV, which listed companies like Dynamo AI, Union AI, Synthesia, and Alan AI among his past employers. He alleged that most of the resum was likely '90% fake.'Soham Parekh, according to his CV, holds a bachelor's degree from the University of Mumbai and a master's from Georgia Institute of Technology. The authenticity of these claims, however, is currently under scrutiny.- Ends
India Today
23 minutes ago
- India Today
Melania and Einstein visa: Why some Americans want FLOTUS deported
Amid intensified immigration enforcement and the Trump administration's attempt to revoke the citizenship of naturalised Americans, a viral petition on MoveOn – a public policy advocacy group – has ignited a debate. The petition, which has gained significant traction online, seeks the deportation of the First Lady of the United States (FLOTUS), Melania Trump, her parents, and her son, Barron largely symbolic, the petition is a response to what critics call the hypocrisy of Trump's immigration stance — targeting immigrants while his own wife and in-laws benefited from the very system he seeks to from being a progressive public policy advocacy group, MoveOn is also a political action committee formed in 1998. The criticism is focussed on Melania Trump's use of the EB-1 visa, which is also nicknamed the "Einstein visa", typically reserved for individuals with extraordinary abilities in fields like science, arts, or business. Critics are saying that if Trump wants to investigate and deport naturalised citizens for possibly taking advantage of immigration rules, then he shouldn't ignore his own wife's was born in the former Yugoslavia (now Slovenia) and became a US citizen in 2006, according to official government biographies of the First Lady, Fox News reported. She is the first US First Lady who is a naturalised First Lady sponsored her parents, who were also from current-day Slovenia, for green cards and then citizenship after securing her own citizenship, The New York Times reported in the petition was originally created five months ago, it has recently gained renewed traction, according to a report in an Ireland-based newspaper, Irish had 100 signatures a few days ago, but had risen to over 6,000 by the time this report went for CALLS OUT TRUMP 'S IMMIGRATION POLICYThe petition questioned Melania Trump's immigration status and called out Trump's immigration policy."Since Trump wants to deport naturalised citizens, I believe it is only fair that Melania and her parents are on the first boat out. In addition, Melania's anchor baby, Barron, should be forced to leave as well because we know that his mother's mother was born in a different country," the petition petition further added, "That is part of the criteria that Trump is putting into place. Your mother's mother has to have been born in the United States and we know Melania's mother was born elsewhere. If it's good for one, it's good for all! There should be no exceptions! On the first boat or flight out."advertisementThe petition also claimed that such action would help avoid any appearance of bias."It is important that this is done to show that it is not a matter of favouritism. If this is truly about national security, then Melania needs to go," the petition also MAXINE WATERS HAD FIRST CALLED FOR MELANIA'S DEPORTATIONThe petition emerged shortly after Democratic California Representative Maxine Waters, at an anti-DOGE protest in Los Angeles on March 25, called for Trump to look into and possibly deport Melania Trump."When he (Trump) talks about birthright, and he's going to undo the fact that the Constitution allows those who are born here, even if the parents are undocumented, they have a right to stay in America. If he wants to start looking so closely to find those who were born here and their parents were undocumented, maybe he ought to first look at Melania," Fox News quoted Waters as saying."We don't know whether or not her parents were documented. And maybe we better just take a look," she was referencing President Trump's executive order, signed on his first day in office, which aimed to eliminate birthright executive order works to clarify the 14th Amendment and tighten the rules for birthright citizenship, which states, "All persons born or naturalised in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."CONGRESSWOMAN JASMINE CROCKETT ALSO QUESTIONED MELANIA 'S EINSTEIN VISACommonly dubbed the "Einstein visa", the EB-1A is a US immigration program that offers a path to permanent residency for individuals with extraordinary ability in fields such as science, the arts, education, business, or athletics. Reserved for those who have achieved national or international acclaim, the visa targets top-tier talent at the pinnacle of their Representative Jasmine Crockett raised concerns over how Melania Trump, a former model, secured a visa generally intended for individuals demonstrating "extraordinary ability" in their said when she last checked, the First Lady had none of those accolades under her belt."You're supposed to have some sort of significant achievement, like being awarded a Nobel Peace Prize or a Pulitzer; being an Olympic medallist; or having other sustained extraordinary abilities and success in sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics. Last time I checked, the First Lady had none of those accolades under her belt," US-based weekly magazine Newsweek quoted Crockett as saying.- Ends advertisement
India Today
23 minutes ago
- India Today
The thick red line: Why India shouldn't agree with US on agri
July 9, Donald Trump's tariff deadline, is fast approaching. He's expecting a "very big deal". Indian officials camping in Washington, DC, have extended their stay, with External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar rushing to the US capital to meet his counterpart, Marco Rubio. Amid all this diplomatic hustle and heat, New Delhi's goal is clear — secure a favourable interim deal for India before Trump's threatened high tariffs, up to 26%, on Indian exports, kick in. But there's an impasse in the talks. India has a "big red line", on which it will find difficult to negotiate. Team Trump is reportedly seeking concessions from India in the agriculture and dairy sectors. There are big reasons why India shouldn't agree to the US demands on agri and Delhi has dug in its heels, and is determined to safeguard India's domestic agricultural sector, and the dairy domain. Millions of Indians, about 40% of the population, are employed in the sector, even though it's not as heavily subsidised as farming in the US, whose government is driving a hard bargain to ensure American agricultural products don't face steep import tariffs in the US tries to project it as an attempt at creating a level playing field, the situation is heavily tilted in its favour. A mere quid pro quo tariff regime will not address the mismatch created by the US by providing massive subsidies to its farmers vis-a-vis farmers in India. While farmers in the US get over $61,000 in subsidies annually, their counterparts in India get just $282 a India rightly called the agriculture and dairy sectors a "big red line", it, in all likelihood and fairness, shouldn't give in to Trump's demands because doing so could jeopardise the livelihoods of nearly half the country's workforce dependent on agriculture, say the data and could expose the Indian market to heavily subsidised US farm dumping, undermine food security standards, some tied to religious and cultural practices, fear experts and reportedly the Indian government and a think tank."As far as the import of genetically modified (GM) soybean, maize and dairy products from the US is concerned, the government does not seem to be ready for it at all," agricultural expert Om Prakash tells India Today there are risks of cross-pollination from GM crops that could harm India's native seed varieties. There's also the matter of dietary sensitivities and consumer trust, especially in dairy, where feeding cattle animal remains clashes with Indian cultural and religious values."India is protective of its farmers, which is why they have relatively high tariffs compared to anywhere in the world," agricultural trade expert Sharon Bomer Lauritsen told Politoco."They're going to protect their farmers," added the former negotiator of the US Trade ROLE IN EMPLOYMENT: INDIA-US CONTRASTadvertisementFirst, let's look at the numbers. They will highlight how agriculture produces, employment, and their demand and supply vastly differ between India and the US, and why trade negotiations must acknowledge these realities with of 2020, around 196.64 million people were employed in agriculture in India, compared to just 2.11 million in the US. Agriculture accounts for 41% of total employment in India, while in the US, it is merely 1%. At 14.6%, agriculture is one of the biggest components of India's GDP, while it contributes 0.92% to the American it comes to average farm size, the difference is average farm holding in the US is about 180 hectares, while in India, it is just 1.08 in the US also receive significantly more government support, with an average of $61,286 per farmer (2016), compared to $282 per farmer in India (2018–19), according to World Trade Organisation (WTO) data, accessed from Kisan Tak, India Today Digital's sister portal on agriculture, farmer welfare and expert Om Prakash says that India has been constrained by the WTO's discriminatory policies since the Agreement on Agriculture (AOA) came into effect on January 1, 1995. He argues, "India's farm subsidy is significantly lower, even more so when adjusted per farmer, yet the WTO continues to pressure India to reduce it even further".advertisementKisanTak's Prakash ties them directly to the WTO's flawed subsidy accounting WTO's subsidy accounting method is flawed because it doesn't look at how many farmers India has. It just counts the total money given to them. On the other hand, the US, with fewer farmers, gives more money, and each farmer gets a much bigger sum. But in India, where millions of farmers get little help, it looks like India is giving more than it should, even when it's IF INDIA LOWERS TARIFFS ON US FARM AND DAIRY GOODS?To ring-fence its farmers and the agriculture sector, India is forced to charge much higher import tariffs on agricultural products compared to the average, India puts a 39% tax on farm goods coming from other countries. But for the items that are imported the most, the tax goes up to 65%. This shows how strongly India protects its farmers by making imported farm goods more expensive. In contrast, the US keeps its agricultural import taxes lower, with a simple average of just 5% and a trade-weighted rate of 4%, according to data from the New Delhi-based think-tank Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) has warned that reducing import tariffs on subsidised US agricultural products, particularly grains, could harm Indian farmers and destabilise food prices in India. Lowering tariffs could allow cheap, subsidised US grains to flood the Indian market, especially when global prices are would potentially undercut local farmers and disrupt the domestic food supply in staples like frozen shrimp, basmati rice, and spices still lead India's export basket, there's been a notable surge in shipments of processed cereals and other value-added food products. On the import side, India continues to source premium items from the US, with almonds, pistachios, and walnuts making up a significant AAYOG BACKED GM IMPORTS, CONGRESS PROTESTEDA March NITI Aayog discussion paper titled Promoting India-US Agricultural Trade Under the New US Trade Regime highlighted stark productivity gaps between the two noted that "India's average soybean yield has stagnated around "one tonne per hectare", whereas in the US, it is "3.4 tonnes per hectare". Similarly, "maize yields in India are just 3.5 tonnes per hectare," compared to "11.1 tonnes per hectare in the US".advertisementThese differences, the now-withdrawn paper says, show there is "a clear scope for improvement" in India's agricultural paper, whose withdrawal attracted Congress MP Jairam Ramesh's attack on the Centre, argued that beyond strategic trade management, "India must undertake medium-term structural reforms to improve the global competitiveness of its farm sector". These reforms should focus on "bridging the productivity gap with developed nations by embracing appropriate technologies", while also "nudging states to undertake long-pending reforms".It further called for "liberalising private sector participation", enhancing logistics, and developing "competitive value chains" to strengthen India's agricultural exports. The Centre's move to do the same suffered backlash during the farm protests of is the world's biggest buyer of edible oil, and the US has a lot of soyabean oil to export, which comes from genetically modified crops. The NITI Aayog paper said India could allow some imports of this oil to reduce the trade imbalance with the US, without hurting local farmers."Except for cotton, no other GM crop is allowed to be cultivated in India. In such a scenario, the question of importing GM soybean and maize from the US for consumption simply does not arise. In essence, the US-India trade deal poses a trial by fire for the Indian government, to safeguard the interests of farmers, agriculture, and the faith of the country's vegetarian population," Om Prakash tells India Today NITI Aayog paper also said India should try to get better access to the US market for top exports like shrimp, fish, spices, rice, tea, coffee, and rubber. India earns about $5.75 billion every year from farm exports to the US, and this could grow if India negotiates for lower duties or special trade leader Jairam Ramesh, on June 30, pointed out that the NITI Aayog working paper had been withdrawn from the think-tank's website. India Today Digital also could not access it. Ramesh alleged that the paper recommended duty-free import of GM maize and soyabean from the US. He added, "For the Modi sarkar, the interests of Midwestern American farmers and large Multinational Corporation traders are bigger than that of the maize farmers of Bihar and soyabean farmers of MP, Maharashtra, and Rajasthan".Lowering tariffs could also disrupt India's food security."In today's geopolitically unstable world, food security must remain sovereign," GTRI Founder Ajay Srivastava was quoted as saying by news agency Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, in a June interview with the Financial Express, said that New Delhi will not compromise on areas that affect vulnerable domestic said that agricultural and dairy sectors remain "very big red lines" in the HOLDS FIRM ON BAN OVER ANIMAL-FED COW MILK PRODUCTSThen there are dietary, cultural and religious sensitivities that complicate the issue of dairy imports from the US, especially when it comes to genetically modified products or items derived from animals not raised according to the norms of several Indian communities. These concerns are deeply rooted and can't be dismissed as mere trade hurdles, as they touch upon dietary restrictions, traditional practices, and firmly maintains its ban on importing dairy products from cows fed animal-derived feed, according to the USRT's National Trade Estimate (NTE) Report, according to news agency ANI."Imagine eating butter made from the milk of a cow that was fed meat and blood from another cow. India may never allow that," GTRI's Srivastava wouldn't like to compromise with milk and dairy products as they are used in religious rituals are several reasons why the big red line exists when it comes to food imports. Cultural beliefs, employment, the agricultural markets, and concerns over the long-term impact are some of them. GM crops' impact on health and the environment is another concern. These are not just policy preferences but emotional and political red zones trade is deeply sensitive in India too. These developments follow the massive farmer protests in 2020-21 and again in 2024. The policy shift revamping agricultural trade triggered protests and resistance, enough for the Centre to a way forward may be there. Sure, it'll take time, persuasion, trust-building, and change, which could be in favour of one of the two parties. But why not both?- EndsTune InMust Watch
