Trump imposes heavy tariffs on THIS country with aim to weaken...; clear warning for India, China not to...
Trump Tariffs: US President Donald Trump has announced to impose a 50% tariff on all exports from Brazil, move which is being seen as clear warning to BRICS countries, especially India and China, not to challenge American economic and strategic interests, amid rumblings of de-dollarization within the regional grouping. Why Trump imposed heavy tariffs on Brazil?
Trump's decision to impose heavy tariffs on Brazil came following a heated exchange with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who called the US President an 'unwanted emperor'. In response, Trump alleged that Brazil was attacking freedom of speech in the United States, and influencing free and fair elections.
Experts view Trump's imposition of heavy tariffs on Brazil as a multi-dimensional move, loaded with business, geopolitical and even personal political motives, including weakening the BRICS grouping. The tariff are also meant to serve as a strong message to countries like India and China that they will suffer economic consequences if they make any moves against American interests. How Trump tariffs will impact Brazil?
Donald Trump's 50% tariffs on Brazil is expected to deal blow to the country's economy, by severely impacting Brazilian exporters, especially who import key agricultural products like coffee, orange juice, sugar, beef and ethanol, to the US. The impact of Trump tariffs is already being witnessed as Brazilian Real fell after the announcement, while the shares of major firms such as aircraft manufacturer Embraer, oil giant Petrobras, dipped significantly.
However, American consumers are also expected to bear the brunt of US' tariffs on Brazil as the prices of goods imported from the South American country are likely to rise. Brazil is the world's largest coffee producer, and around one-third of the coffee consumed in the US comes from Brazil. What's the 'message' for India and China?
Trump's tariffs on Brazil are being seen by many as a direct 'message' to India and China, warning them not to threaten US interests. China, the largest economic power in the BRICS, is already embroiled in a trade war with the US, while India, a key member of the regional grouping, has strong strategic ties with US' rival Russia.
Notably, India also has important trade relations with the US, which put New Delhi in a complex position, where it must figure out how to balance ties with BRICS countries while maintaining a health partnership with America. Trump has talked about imposing more tariffs on Indian imports, including 10% tariffs on the pharmaceutical sector, indicating that New Delhi may have to face economic consequences if it opposes any US policies.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
17 minutes ago
- Time of India
US Supreme Court approves nearly 1,400 layoffs from the Education Department under Trump's federal downsizing push
US Supreme Court approves nearly 1,400 layoffs in the Education Department. In a ruling that could permanently alter the landscape of American public education, the US Supreme Court has allowed the Trump administration to proceed with mass layoffs at the Department of Education, a key step in President Trump's broader plan to decentralise federal control and shift responsibility for education back to the states. The court's unsigned emergency order effectively lifts a lower court's block on the administration's move to terminate more than 1,300 federal employees. Critics say this will gut the department's core functions, including oversight of civil rights protections in schools, financial aid distribution, and special education services. The Education Department began 2025 with over 4,000 employees. Post-layoffs, the workforce is expected to shrink by nearly half, after including probationary dismissals and voluntary resignations. Particularly affected is the Office for Civil Rights, where seven out of twelve regional offices have already been shut down. Judiciary expands presidential power The Supreme Court's decision marks another major expansion of executive power, signalling judicial backing for Trump's efforts to reconfigure, or even dismantle, a department created by Congress nearly 50 years ago. The ruling did not include a vote breakdown, but liberal justices dissented strongly. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing on behalf of Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, warned that the court was enabling an unconstitutional overreach. She argued that only Congress has the power to eliminate a cabinet-level department, and that the administration's unilateral action would inflict "untold harm" on students, particularly those affected by discrimination, disability, or lack of educational access. From the executive order to legal showdown President Trump had signed an executive order in March directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin the process of shutting down the department. He cited low student test scores and bureaucratic inefficiency as justification for transferring federal education functions back to the states. Almost immediately, legal challenges erupted. School districts, education unions, and 21 Democratic-led states filed lawsuits in federal court, arguing that dismantling the department without congressional approval violated the Constitution and federal statutes. Judge Myong Joun of the US District Court in Massachusetts had sided with the plaintiffs in May, ordering the administration to halt layoffs and reinstate fired workers. His ruling was later upheld by the First Circuit Court of Appeals. But the Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court, which has now reversed course, allowing the layoffs to resume while the underlying legal battle continues. Reactions split along political lines Trump and his allies celebrated the ruling as a victory for local control and executive leadership. The White House reiterated that the president has full constitutional authority to reorganise federal agencies, and said the cuts were necessary to streamline operations and reduce federal overreach. Education Secretary McMahon stated that the department will proceed with a reduction in force to promote efficiency and accountability, while continuing to carry out statutory duties with a scaled-back staff. Democratic lawmakers and education advocates condemned the decision. Senator Chuck Schumer said the move amounts to sabotage of public education, adding that it's American kids paying the price. Sheria Smith, president of the union representing Education Department workers, warned that the firings would disrupt critical programs and services that millions of families rely on. What comes next While the court's decision allows the layoffs to proceed immediately, the underlying lawsuits are far from over. Courts are still examining whether the Trump administration's move to essentially dismantle the department violates congressional authority and statutory mandates. Meanwhile, the impact is already rippling through the education system. Several states have reported delays in federal funding for after-school programs, summer learning, and civil rights compliance. With fewer federal employees in place to monitor and enforce these mandates, education equity advocates fear that marginalised students will suffer the most. The future of the Education Department, and the federal role in American schooling, now hangs in a precarious legal and political balance. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
18 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Israeli strikes kill 31 in Gaza as UN agencies warn of fuel crisis
Israeli strikes across the Gaza Strip overnight killed at least 31 people, according to local hospitals, as UN agencies warned that critical fuel shortages put hospitals and other critical infrastructure at risk. The latest attacks came after US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held two days of talks last week that ended with no sign of a breakthrough in negotiations over a ceasefire and hostage release. Twelve people were killed by strikes in southern Gaza, including three who were waiting at an aid distribution point on Monday, according to Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, which received the bodies. Shifa Hospital in Gaza City also received 12 bodies, including three children and two women, after a series of strikes in the north, according to the hospital's director, Dr. Mohammed Abu Selmia. Al-Awda Hospital reported seven killed and 11 wounded in strikes in central Gaza. The Israeli military says it only targets militants and tries to avoid harming civilians. It blames civilian deaths on Hamas because the militants operate in densely populated areas. Separately, three Israeli soldiers were killed in northern Gaza, according to the military. A military official, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with regulations, said on Monday that they died in an explosion in their tank, apparently after it was hit by an anti-tank missile, though the incident was still being examined. UN agencies, including those providing food and health care, reiterated a warning made at the weekend that without adequate fuel, they "will likely be forced to stop their operations entirely". In a joint statement, they said that hospitals are already going dark and ambulances can no longer move. Without fuel, transport, water production, sanitation and telecommunications will shut down and bakeries and community kitchens cannot operate, they said. The agencies confirmed that some 1,50,000 litres of fuel entered Gaza last week the first delivery in 130 days. But they said it is "a small fraction of what is needed each day to keep daily life and critical aid operations running". "The United Nations agencies and humanitarian partners cannot overstate the urgency of this moment: fuel must be allowed into Gaza in sufficient quantities and consistently to sustain life-saving operations," they said. The agencies signing the statement were the UN humanitarian office OCHA, food agency WFP, health organisation WHO, children's agency UNICEF, the agency helping Palestinian refugees UNRWA, population agency UNFPA, development agency UNDP, and UNOPS which oversees procurement and provides management services. Israel's military said a June 19 strike killed Muhammad Nasr Ali Quneita, a senior Hamas militant who it said had taken part in the October 7, 2023, attack and held hostage Emily Damari, a dual Israeli-British citizen, in his home at the start of the war. There was no comment from Hamas and no independent confirmation. Thousands of Hamas-led militants stormed into Israel that day, killing some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and abducting 251 people, most of whom have since been released in ceasefire agreements or other deals. The militants are still holding 50 hostages, less than half of them believed to be alive. Israel's retaliatory offensive has killed over 58,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza's Health Ministry, which has said women and children make up more than half of the dead. It does not distinguish between civilians and militants in its tally. The ministry is part of the Hamas-run government and is led by medical professionals. The United Nations and other experts consider its figures to be the most reliable count of war casualties. Israel's air and ground war has destroyed vast areas of Gaza and driven some 90 per cent of the population from their homes. Aid groups say they have struggled to bring in food and other assistance because of Israeli military restrictions and the breakdown of law and order, and experts have warned of famine. Israel's Knesset meanwhile voted to expel a prominent Arab lawmaker, but the measure failed to pass the threshold of 90 votes in the 120-member assembly. Seventy-three members voted in favour. The attempt to remove Ayman Odeh from parliament was related to a social media post in January in which he welcomed the release of both Israeli hostages and Palestinian prisoners in a Gaza ceasefire. The prisoners released in the agreement included scores of militants convicted of deadly attacks against Israelis, and rival lawmakers accused Odeh of supporting terror, allegations he denied. Many Palestinians view those imprisoned by Israel as freedom fighters jailed for resisting Israel's decades-long occupation of lands the Palestinians seek for a future state. Israel's Arab minority, which makes up some 20 per cent of the population, has citizenship, including the right to vote, but faces widespread discrimination. Its members have close family ties to Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza, and largely support their cause, leading many Jewish Israelis to view them with suspicion or contempt.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
18 minutes ago
- Business Standard
US won't publish major climate change report on Nasa website as promised
The Trump administration has taken another step to make it harder to find major, legally mandated scientific assessments of how climate change is endangering the nation and its people. Earlier this month, the official government websites that hosted the authoritative, peer-reviewed national climate assessments went dark. Such sites tell state and local governments and the public what to expect in their backyards from a warming world and how best to adapt to it. At the time, the White House said NASA would house the reports to comply with a 1990 law that requires the reports, which the space agency said it planned to do. But on Monday, NASA announced that it aborted those plans. "The USGCRP (the government agency that oversees and used to host the report) met its statutory requirements by presenting its reports to Congress. NASA has no legal obligations to host data," NASA Press Secretary Bethany Stevens said in an email. That means no data from the assessment or the government science office that coordinated the work will be on NASA, she said. On July 3, NASA put out a statement that said: "All preexisting reports will be hosted on the NASA website, ensuring continuity of reporting. "This document was written for the American people, paid for by the taxpayers, and it contains vital information we need to keep ourselves safe in a changing climate, as the disasters that continue to mount demonstrate so tragically and clearly," said Texas Tech climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe. She is chief scientist at The Nature Conservancy and co-author of several past national climate assessments. Copies of past reports are still squirrelled away in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's library and the latest report and its interactive atlas can be seen here. Former Obama White House science adviser and climate scientist John Holdren accused the administration of outright lying and long intended to censor or bury the reports. "The new stance is classic Trump administration misdirection," Holdren said. "In this instance, the administration offers a modest consolation to quell initial outrage over the closure of the site and the disappearance of the National Climate Assessments. Then, two weeks later, they snatch away the consolation with no apology." "They simply don't want the public to see the meticulously assembled and scientifically validated information about what climate change is already doing to our farms, forests, and fisheries, as well as to storms, floods, wildfires, and coast property and about how all those damages will grow in the absence of concerted remedial action," Holdren said in an email. That's why it's important that state and local governments and every day people see these reports, Holdren said. He said they are written in a way that is "useful to people who need to understand what climate change is doing and will do to THEM, their loved ones, their property and their environment". "Trump doesn't want people to know," Holdren wrote. The most recent report, issued in 2023, found that climate change is affecting people's security, health and livelihoods in every corner of the country in different ways, with minority communities, particularly Native Americans, often disproportionately at risk.
