Trump hits India with 25% tariff, extra ‘penalty' for Russian oil purchases
Trump announced the trade moves – which he said will come into effect on Friday – on his Truth Social account on Wednesday, saying they are necessary to reverse a long-running trade imbalance.
'While India is our friend, we have, over the years, done relatively little business with them because their Tariffs are far too high,' Trump wrote.
The president also blamed India for buying military equipment and oil from Russia, which he said has enabled the war in Ukraine. As a result, he intends to charge an additional 'penalty' starting on Friday as part of the launch of his administration's revised tariffs on multiple countries.
The aggressive trade policy further complicates ties between Trump and India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which were warm during the US president's first term but have since faced challenges over trade and immigration. Modi has also denied Trump's claims that he intervened to resolve a four-day conflict with Pakistan in May, saying India has not and will never 'accept mediation'.
Pakistan, by contrast, has seen its stock rise with the Trump administration before and after the conflict with India. In June, Trump hosted Pakistan's army chief, Asim Munir, for lunch at the White House – the first time a US president has hosted a military chief from Pakistan who isn't also the country's head of state.
The US announcement also follows a slew of negotiated trade frameworks with the European Union, Japan, the Philippines and Indonesia – all of which Trump said would open markets for US goods while enabling the US to raise tax rates on imports. Trump views tariff revenues as a way to help offset the budget deficit increases tied to his recent income tax cuts and generate more domestic factory jobs.
While Trump has effectively wielded tariffs as a cudgel to reset the terms of trade, the economic impact is uncertain, as most economists expect a slowdown in US growth and greater inflationary pressures as the costs of the taxes are passed along to domestic businesses and consumers.
The Census Bureau reported that the US ran a $45.8bn trade imbalance in goods with India last year, meaning it imported more than it exported.
With a population exceeding 1.4 billion people, India is the world's largest country and a possible geopolitical counterbalance to China. India and Russia have close relations, and New Delhi has not supported Western sanctions on Moscow over its war in Ukraine.
When Trump in February met with Modi, the US president said that India would start buying US oil and natural gas.
Trump discussed his policies on trade and tariffs with reporters accompanying him on Tuesday on the flight home following a five-day visit to Scotland. He declined to comment when asked about reports that India was bracing for a US tariff rate of at least 25 percent, saying, 'We're going to see.'
Trump also said the outlines of a trade agreement with India had not yet been finalised.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
5 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Russia's Medvedev issues warning as Moscow says not bound by missile treaty
Russia is no longer bound by a moratorium on the deployment of short- and medium-range nuclear missiles, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has said, with former President Dmitry Medvedev blaming NATO's 'anti-Russian policy' and warning that Moscow will take 'further steps' in response. Medvedev, who has engaged in a war of words on social media with United States President Donald Trump, made his latest broadside after the Foreign Ministry's announcement on Monday. 'The Russian Foreign Ministry's statement on the withdrawal of the moratorium on the deployment of medium- and short-range missiles is the result of NATO countries' anti-Russian policy,' Medvedev posted in English on the X social media platform. 'This is a new reality all our opponents will have to reckon with. Expect further steps,' he said. Medvedev, who serves as the deputy head of Russia's powerful Security Council and has made several hawkish comments on Russia's nuclear capabilities in recent years, did not elaborate on what 'further steps' may entail. Last week, Trump said that he had ordered two US nuclear submarines to be repositioned to 'the appropriate regions' in response to Medvedev's remarks about the risk of war between Washington and Moscow. The Russian Foreign Ministry's statement on the withdrawal of the moratorium on the deployment of medium- and short-range missiles is the result of NATO countries' anti-Russian is a new reality all our opponents will have to reckon with. Expect further steps. — Dmitry Medvedev (@MedvedevRussiaE) August 4, 2025 In its statement, Russia's Foreign Ministry said the developing situation in Europe and the Asia Pacific prompted its reassessment on the deployment of short- and medium-range missiles. 'Since the situation is developing towards the actual deployment of US-made land-based medium- and short-range missiles in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region, the Russian Foreign Ministry notes that the conditions for maintaining a unilateral moratorium on the deployment of similar weapons have disappeared,' the ministry said. Russian President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said last year that Moscow may have to respond to what they described as provocations by the US and NATO by lifting restrictions on missile deployment. Lavrov told Russia's state news agency RIA Novosti in December that Moscow's unilateral moratorium on the deployment of such missiles was 'practically no longer viable and will have to be abandoned'. 'The United States arrogantly ignored warnings from Russia and China and, in practice, moved on to deploying weapons of this class in various regions of the world,' Lavrov told the news agency. The US withdrew from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty in 2019, under the first Trump administration, citing Russian non-compliance, but Moscow had said that it would not deploy such weapons provided that Washington did not do so. The INF treaty, signed in 1987 by Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and US President Ronald Reagan, had eliminated an entire class of weapons: ground-launched nuclear missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500km (311 to 3,418 miles). In its first public reaction to Trump's comments on the repositioning of US submarines, the Kremlin on Monday played down the remarks and said it was not looking to get into a public spat with the US president. 'In this case, it is obvious that American submarines are already on combat duty. This is an ongoing process, that's the first thing,' Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters. 'But in general, of course, we would not want to get involved in such a controversy and would not want to comment on it in any way,' he said. 'Of course, we believe that everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric,' he added. The episode comes at a delicate moment, with Trump threatening to impose new sanctions on Russia and buyers of its oil, including India and China, unless President Vladimir Putin agrees by Friday to a ceasefire in Moscow's war on Ukraine. Putin said last week that peace talks had made some positive progress but that Russia had the momentum in its war against Ukraine, signalling no shift in his position despite the looming deadline.
Qatar Tribune
9 hours ago
- Qatar Tribune
Swiss luxury watchmakers slip after Trump tariff blow
Agencies Shares in Swiss luxury watchmakers, including Richemont and Swatch, were volatile in early trade on Monday, underscoring the challenge the industry faces after U.S. President Donald Trump imposed a steep 39% tariff on Switzerland. The sector, which exported watches worth 26 billion Swiss francs ($32.79 billion) in 2024, is already under pressure from a stronger franc and falling global demand. Watch exports are on track to hit their lowest levels since the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. 'The impact of the U.S. tariffs, if they stay at 39%, could be devastating for numerous brands in Switzerland,' said Jean-Philippe Bertschy, an analyst at Vontobel. Shares in Richemont and Swatch were both down around 1% at 09:06 a.m. GMT, paring back losses after earlier falling as much as 3.4% and 5%, respectively. Bertschy linked the move to hopes of Switzerland still getting a better deal as the tariffs are effective as of August 7. Swatch Group CEO Nick Hayek, meanwhile, called on Swiss President Karin Keller-Sutter to meet Trump. A separate report by Reuters said Switzerland's government would hold an extraordinary cabinet meeting on Monday to discuss its response to tariffs, which threaten to inflict heavy damage to its luxury goods industry. The duties are scheduled to go into effect on Thursday, giving Switzerland a small window to strike a better deal. Switzerland was left stunned on Friday after Trump hit the country with one of the highest tariffs in his global trade reset, with industry associations warning that tens of thousands of jobs were at risk. President Keller-Sutter told Reuters on Friday that Switzerland had given U.S. goods virtually free access to its market, and Swiss companies had made very important direct investments in the U.S. 'The president (Trump) is really focused on the trade deficit, because he thinks that this is a loss for the United States, that every year with Swiss exports, the United States loses, well, 38.5 billion (francs),' she told Reuters. 'Tariffs can change at any moment due to the unpredictability of the Trump administration,' said Georges Mari, co-owner of Zurich-based investment firm Rossier, Mari & Associates, which holds shares in Swatch, adding that it is 'impossible to make a serious forecast.' Monday was the first day of trading following the U.S. tariff announcement, as markets were closed on Friday for the Swiss National Day holiday. Stocks and the Swiss franc both tumbled in response to heavy levies. An index of Swiss blue-chip stocks hit its lowest level since mid-April on Monday, as shares in banks, luxury retailers, and pharma companies dropped. The SMI index was last down 0.6% on the day, compared with a 0.6% rise in the regional STOXX 600 index. The Swiss franc was the worst-performing major currency against the dollar, which was last up 0.7% at 0.809 francs, not far off Friday's one-month highs.
Qatar Tribune
9 hours ago
- Qatar Tribune
Legal challenge to Trump's tariffs likely headed to Supreme Court
Agencies A federal appeals panel on Thursday appeared skeptical of US President Donald Trump's argument that a 1977 law historically used for sanctioning enemies or freezing their assets gave him the power to impose tariffs. Regardless of how the court rules, the litigation is almost certainly headed to the US Supreme Court. Here is what you need to know about the dispute, which Trump has called 'America's big case,' and how it is likely to play out in the months ahead. The litigation challenges the tariffs Trump imposed on a broad range of US trading partners in April, as well as tariffs imposed in February against China, Canada and Mexico. It centers around Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which gives the president the power to address 'unusual and extraordinary' threats during national emergencies. Trump has said that trade imbalances, declining manufacturing power and the cross-border flow of drugs justified the tariffs under IEEPA. A dozen Democratic-led states and five small US businesses challenging the tariffs argue that IEEPA does not cover tariffs and that the US Constitution grants Congress, not the president, authority over tariffs and other taxes. A loss for Trump would also undermine the latest round of sweeping tariffs on dozens of countries that he unveiled late Thursday. Trump has made tariffs a cornerstone of his economic plan, arguing they will promote domestic manufacturing and substitute for income taxes. The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments on Thursday in the case. The panel of 11 judges sharply questioned the government about Trump's use of IEEPA, but did not rule from the bench. The Federal Circuit has not said when it will issue a decision, but its briefing schedule suggests it intends to move quickly. Meanwhile, the tariffs remain in effect after the Federal Circuit paused a lower court's ruling declaring them illegal. A Federal Circuit ruling would almost certainly not end the litigation, as the losing party is expected to appeal to the Supreme Court. If the Federal Circuit rules against Trump, the court could put its own ruling on hold while the government appeals to the Supreme Court. This approach would maintain the status quo and allow the nine justices to consider the matter more thoroughly. The justices themselves could also issue an 'administrative stay' that would temporarily pause the Federal Circuit's decision while it considers a request from the Justice Department for more permanent relief. The Supreme Court is not obligated to review every case appealed to it, but it is widely expected to weigh in on Trump's tariffs because of the weighty constitutional questions at the heart of the case. If the Federal Circuit rules in the coming weeks, there is still time for the Supreme Court to add the case to its regular docket for the 2025-2026 term, which begins on October 6. The Supreme Court could rule before the end of the year, but that would require it to move quickly. There is no consensus among court-watchers about what the Supreme Court will do. Critics of Trump's tariffs are optimistic their side will win. They point to the Supreme Court's decision from 2023 that blocked President Joe Biden from forgiving student loan debt. In that ruling, the justices limited the authority of the executive branch to take action on issues of 'vast economic and political significance' except where Congress has explicitly authorized the action. The justices in other cases, however, have endorsed a broad view of presidential power, especially when it comes to foreign affairs. Can importers seek refunds for tariffs paid? If Trump loses at the Supreme Court, importers are likely to seek refunds of tariffs already paid. This would be a lengthy process given the large number of anticipated claims. Federal regulations dictate that such requests would be first heard by US Customs and Border Protection. If that agency denies a refund request, the importer can appeal to the Court of International Trade. There is precedent for tariff refund requests being granted. Since May, CBP has been processing refunds to importers who inadvertently overpaid duties because of tariff 'stacking' — where multiple overlapping tariffs are applied to the same imports. And in the 1990s, after the Court of International Trade struck down a tax on exporters that was being used to finance improvements to US harbors, the court set up a process for issuing refunds. That decision was upheld by both the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court. Would a courtroom defeat unravel Trump's trade deals? Trump has used the threat of emergency tariffs as leverage to secure concessions from trading partners. A loss at the Supreme Court would hamstring Trump in future negotiations. The White House, however, has other ways of imposing tariffs, like a 1962 law that allows the president to investigate imports that threaten national security. Trump has already used that law to put tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, and those levies are not at issue in the case before the Federal Circuit. Some legal experts say a loss for Trump at the Supreme Court would not impact bilateral trade agreements the US has already inked with other countries. Others say that the trade deals alone might not provide sufficient legal authority for taxes on imports and may need to be approved by Congress.
