US-India trade deal hangs in the balance as India may go slow

 


·         Modi may delay signing and implementation of any trade deal with the US, as it may affect both Vote & Note Bank; may not sign any BTA-I before Dec’25

·         India has to impose 10-15% tariffs on US goods to get 15-20% tariffs from the US, so that the total tax component remains at par after considering sales tax

·         India also has to provide free & fair access to its market for US agri, farm, and MSME products and a level playing ground for domestic producers to compete globally


As India navigates a delicate dance between Trump tariffs and domestic politics, Prime Minister Modi's decision to skip the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur has fueled speculation that a much-anticipated phase one Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) with the United States could be delayed until after the Bihar assembly elections (Mid-November’25). With U.S. President Trump set to attend the October 26-28 summit, Modi's virtual participation—citing Bihar election campaigns and scheduling conflicts—avoids a potential face-to-face meeting with Trump that might force premature concessions amid ongoing tariff tensions.

A Deal Driven by Tariffs and Oil: Progress amid Hurdles

Negotiations for the BTA, kick-started after Modi's February 2025 White House visit with Trump, aim to slash U.S. tariffs on Indian exports from a punitive 50% (25% base plus 25% Russian oil penalty) to reported 15%, providing relief to India's $66 billion merchandise export sector. In return, India has signaled cuts on tariffs for 55% of U.S. imports worth over $23 billion, including zeroing out select goods, while insisting on a review clause after one year for flexibility. Indian Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal, speaking on October 23, emphasized that talks are "progressing well" but no pact will compromise Indian farmers, fishermen, or MSMEs—key "red lines" remain in the negotiations.

Electoral Calculus: Bihar's Farmers and MSMEs Hold the Key

With Bihar polls looming—first phase on November 6, second on November 11, and results on November 14—the Modi administration is treading cautiously. Agriculture employs over 70% of Bihar's workforce, and MSMEs (1.5 million strong) dominate textiles, leather, and food processing. Opening markets to cheaper U.S. corn, soymeal, or auto parts could squeeze margins by 5-10%, alienating rural voters and urban job creators central to the NDA's (BJP-JD(U)) campaign. Opposition leader Tejashwi Yadav has branded the BTA a "sellout," amplifying fears on social media where users speculate delays to dodge backlash: "Modi won't announce before Bihar; after, no elections for months."

Modi's 12-rally blitz, starting October 24 in Samastipur, touts welfare like 10,000 aid to 21 lakh women and infrastructure investments, but any BTA optics of "weakness" against Trump's "bullying" could fracture NDA unityespecially with seat-sharing at 101 each for BJP and JD(U). Analysts see the summit snub as a sidestep: A Trump meet might spotlight unresolved issues, handing ammo to rivals in a state where backward castes and youth unemployment are flashpoints. External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar will lead the delegation, a "rare downgrade" from Modi's usual in-person role.

Corporate India echoes these concerns. Giants like Maruti Suzuki and Tata Motors fear 4-6% EBITDA erosion from cheaper U.S. EVs and parts, while agri-processors like Godrej Agrovet brace for 5-8% margin squeezes. Post-2024 electoral bonds scrapping, funding via trusts (1,075 crore in 2023-24, mostly to BJP) could amplify lobbying for phased implementations or exemptions, blending economic unease with political leverage.

Broader Reforms and Geopolitical Tightrope

India's protectionist past—high tariffs shielding inefficient farms and industries—necessitates structural overhauls in land, labor, law, energy costs (higher than U.S./EU/China), and GST simplification to level the playing field. Borrowing rates must drop to 4-5% for global competitiveness, lest cheaper U.S. mechanized agri products overwhelm fragmented Indian holdings. Implementation could lag 9-12 months post-signing to cushion domestic producers.

Geopolitically, Trump wields "triumph cards": tariffs, H-1B visas, and a proposed 25% cess on Indian services via the HIRE Act, countering India's 18% IGST on U.S. services. India plays the "China friendship" card for derisking, not decoupling, while diversifying trade. The U.S.-EU axis bolsters 25% of India's FX reserves ($149B net from exports/remittances), vital for oil imports from sanctioned suppliers like Russia (now in rupees/yuan). Wild rumors of a CIA plot against Modi at the SCO summit—thwarted by Putin—add thriller-sequel flair but underscore U.S. "interests over friends." As Trump quips, "The U.S. doesn't need India, but India needs the U.S."

Pragmatism over Haste

The BTA promises $500 billion bilateral trade by 2030, diversifying chains and aiding U.S. agri offloads, but Bihar's 7.5 crore voters—and NDA's projected majority—trump geopolitics for now. Expect a post-poll announcement on Trump's terms, with delayed rollout; As one source quipped, "Flexibility via review mechanisms ensures no side feels cornered." In Modi's playbook, safeguarding "vote bank" (farmers/MSMEs) and "note bank" (corporates) is paramount—trade deals be damned if they risk the throne. With no official responses from Goyal or USTR as of October 24, the balloons float, testing Dalal Street's mood while Main Street braces.

India's Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal in Berlin: Firm Stance on Trade Deals Amid Global Pressures

On October 24, 2025, during his address at the Berlin Global Dialogue in Germany, India's Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal reiterated New Delhi's commitment to strategic autonomy in trade negotiations, emphasizing that India will not accept preconditions from trading partners that dictate its foreign relations or sign any deal under duress. This comes amid heightened US sanctions on Russian oil giants Rosneft and Lukoil—announced just a day prior on October 23—which directly impact India's energy imports; and ongoing Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) talks with Washington targeting a first tranche by November 2025.

Key Statements from Goyal

v  No Conditions on Third-Country Ties: Goyal stated unequivocally that "India is not to accept conditions of any trading partner not having relations with other countries." This appears aimed at the US, where tariff relief has been linked to phasing out discounted Russian oil purchases (currently 34% of India's crude needs). The minister underscored India's right to maintain diversified partnerships, including with Russia, without external interference—a nod to strategic autonomy amid geopolitical tensions.

v  No Rushed Deals: In a direct rebuttal to perceived US deadlines, Goyal added, "India will not sign any trade deal in a hurry or with 'gun to our head'." He highlighted ongoing discussions with the US as "constructive" but insisted on thorough consultations to protect domestic interests, such as agriculture, MSMEs, and energy security. This aligns with India's "red lines" in talks, including safeguards against import surges in sensitive sectors like dairy and ethanol.

v  Ongoing Dialogue and Progress: "We are in dialogue with the United States on a trade deal. Our teams are engaged. Recently, Commerce Secretary Rajesh Agrawal visited the US and met his counterparts. We continue to engage with the US, and talks are progressing." He noted five rounds of talks completed since February 2025, with Goyal himself leading a delegation to New York last month.

v  Hope for Near-Term Resolution: "We hope to work towards a fair and equitable trade agreement in the near future." This aligns with the $500 billion bilateral trade target by 2030, despite tensions from Trump's tariffs.

v  No Rushed or Coerced Deals: In a stronger tone on October 24, Goyal clarified: "We'll not sign any deal in a hurry... We don't enter into deals with a gun to our head." He added that India "will not accept conditions from any trading partner of not having relations with other countries," a veiled reference to US pressure to curb Russian oil buys. "India has never decided who its friends will be based on any other considerations other than national interest."

v  Safeguards for Domestic Interests: Goyal reiterated protections for farmers, fishermen, and MSMEs, stating no agreement will compromise these "red lines." Talks are in a "cordial atmosphere," but free of deadlines.

Recent Developments: Secretary Agrawal's October 13 meeting with US Ambassador-designate Sergio Gor and September 16 talks with Assistant USTR Brendan Lynch signal momentum. However, the US's latest Russian sanctions (effective post-November 21) could disrupt 1-1.5 million barrels/day of Russian imports, pushing India toward US energy while inflating costs by $2-3 billion monthly.

Global Outreach: Goyal's Berlin trip also advanced India-EU FTA talks (14th round stalled October 10) and Indo-German ties, including meetings with Schaeffler and Mercedes-Benz CEOs.

Goyal's balanced tone—optimistic yet unyielding-India will not sign any deal at gunpoint

On Friday, October 24, 2025, following his address at the Berlin Global Dialogue, India’s Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal reaffirmed India’s cautious yet open approach to trade negotiations, particularly with the United States, European Union, and United Kingdom. Speaking to reporters after bilateral discussions with German counterparts, Goyal’s statements address mounting international pressure on India to reduce its reliance on discounted Russian crude oil imports amid recent US sanctions on Rosneft and Lukoil, while outlining a pragmatic timeline for potential agreements.

Key Statements from Goyal

·         No Rushed Trade Deals: Goyal reiterated, "India will not sign any trade deal in a hurry," emphasizing a deliberate pace to protect national interests. This stance aligns with his earlier remarks on October 24, rejecting deals signed "with a gun to our head," reflecting India’s resolve to avoid coercive terms.

·         Pressure to Scale Back Russian Crude: He acknowledged that the EU, UK, and U.S. are pressuring India to scale back imports of discounted Russian crude, a significant component of India’s energy supply (34-40% of crude needs, saving $3.8-5 billion annually). This pressure intensified with the US sanctions announced on October 23, targeting Russia’s oil giants and threatening secondary penalties on third-country buyers like India post-November 21 wind-down.

·         Ongoing US Dialogue and Timeline: "We are still in dialogue with the United States of America, and trade deals can be closed in the short term—6 months," Goyal stated, suggesting a window until April 2026 for the India-US Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) first tranche, originally targeted for November 2025.

Broader Implications for India's Trade Strategy

Goyal's Berlin remarks echo a consistent playbook seen in stalled EU FTA talks (14th round ended October 10 without a breakthrough on agriculture/CBAM) and the recently signed but unimplemented UK FTA (awaiting parliamentary ratification). They reinforce:

·         Electoral Caution: With Bihar elections looming (November 6-11), any perceived "surrender" on Russian ties or import openings could alienate rural voters and the sugar lobby (protesting potential US ethanol inflows).

·         Corporate Pushback: Indian firms in autos and agri-processing fear 5-10% margin erosion from cheaper US goods, amplifying calls for phased implementation.

·         Global Diversification: India eyes alternatives like the UAE and Africa for oil, while advancing FTAs with EFTA (implementation late 2025) and GCC (resumed talks).

In essence, Goyal's assertive messaging positions India as a principled negotiator—prioritizing sovereignty over speed—in a multipolar world where trade is increasingly a geopolitical tool.

India-US Bilateral Trade Agreement Nears Completion: Key Issues Converging, Focus Shifts to Legal Drafting

On October 24, 2025, a senior Indian government official confirmed that India and the United States are "very near" to finalizing the first tranche of their proposed Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA), with most contentious issues resolved and negotiations proceeding smoothly without new hurdles. The focus has now shifted to refining the agreement's language, as both sides aim to wrap up the initial phase during the fall of 2025, potentially announcing it at the ongoing ASEAN Summit (October 26-28). This update follows five rounds of talks since March, building on directives from Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Donald Trump in February 2025 to double bilateral trade to $500 billion by 2030 from the current $191 billion.

Progress and Converging Issues

v  Substantive Convergence: The official noted that "both sides are converging on most issues" and "there are not many differences left for resolution," signaling breakthroughs in core areas like tariff reductions and market access. Negotiators are now "sorting out the language of the agreement," indicating a transition from substantive haggling to technical finalization. Recent virtual discussions on October 23 further advanced this, with no major sticking points emerging.

v   Timeline and Optimism: While Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal emphasized no rushed deals—stating India "will not sign any trade deal in a hurry" and rejecting conditions on third-country ties like Russian oil—the official's remarks suggest a breakthrough is imminent. Goyal's recent Berlin comments (October 24) extended the potential timeline to 6 months (until April 2026), but sources indicate the November deadline remains feasible for the first phase.

v  Key Sectors in Focus: The deal targets slashing US tariffs on Indian exports (e.g., textiles, gems, shrimp) from ~50% (including 25% punitive levies tied to Russian oil) to 15-16%, offering relief to exporters hit by a 20% drop in September shipments. In return, India may expand quotas for US agricultural goods (non-GM corn, soymeal) and energy imports, while safeguarding "red lines" for farmers, fishermen, and MSMEs.

Challenges and Broader Context

Despite the optimism, US pressure persists for India to scale back Russian crude imports (34% of needs, saving $3.8-5 billion annually), exacerbated by October 23 sanctions on Rosneft and Lukoil that could disrupt 1-1.5 million barrels/day post-November 21. Goyal acknowledged this push from the EU, UK, and US but reiterated India's autonomy: "We are still in dialogue with the United States... and trade deals can be closed in the short term—6 months." This aligns with recent delegations: Commerce Secretary Rajesh Agrawal's Washington visit (October 13-18) and Goyal's New York trip last month.

This development positions the BTA as a pivotal step in US-India ties, potentially offsetting US-China tensions while aiding India's diversification.

U.S. Official noted India’s Measured & Slow Pace in Trade Negotiations

October 25, 2025, a senior U.S. official commented on the ongoing India-US Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) negotiations, noting that progress is being shaped by "the pace of India's ambition on deals, which is not always speedy." This statement, made during a late-night briefing in Washington following the latest round of talks, reflects a nuanced recognition of India's cautious approach amid pressure from recent U.S. sanctions on Russian oil giants Rosneft and Lukoil, announced on October 23. The remark comes as both nations edge toward finalizing the first tranche of the BTA, potentially by the fall of 2025, with an announcement possibly at the ongoing ASEAN Summit (October 26-28).

Context and Implications

v  India’s Deliberate Strategy: The U.S. official’s comment aligns with Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal’s recent assertions in Berlin (October 24), where he emphasized, "India will not sign any trade deal in a hurry" and rejected conditions tied to third-country relations, such as scaling back discounted Russian crude imports (34-40% of India’s needs). Goyal’s extension of a potential timeline to six months (until April 2026) contrasts with earlier optimism for a November 2025 close, reflecting India’s focus on safeguarding "red lines" for farmers, MSMEs, and energy security.

v  U.S. Sanctions Pressure: The sanctions, freezing assets of Rosneft and Lukoil and threatening secondary penalties post-November 21, aim to disrupt Russia’s oil exports, directly impacting India’s $3.8-5 billion annual savings. The U.S. official’s remark suggests patience with India’s balancing act, though it hints at frustration with delays amid a 3%+ oil price surge.

v  Negotiation Progress: A senior Indian official on October 24 confirmed that talks are "very near" completion, with most issues converged and negotiators refining language. The U.S. stance indicates willingness to accommodate India’s pace, focusing on a deal that cuts tariffs on Indian exports from 50% to 15-16% in exchange for expanded U.S. agri/energy access.

Broader Dynamics

v  Geopolitical Balance: The U.S. comment reflects a diplomatic tone, avoiding direct criticism as PM Modi attends the ASEAN Summit virtually, where a Modi-Trump sideline could seal the deal. India’s autonomy on Russian ties remains a sticking point, with Goyal noting ongoing dialogue and a six-month window.

v  Market Sentiment: Nifty’s 300+ point rally earlier this week on deal hopes may waver if delays persist, with X posts from traders like @CapitalGains85 flagging "pace concerns" impacting investor confidence.

v  Global Context: Similar patience is evident in EU and UK FTA talks, where India’s deliberate approach delays resolutions amid domestic election cycles (e.g., Bihar, November 6-11).

The U.S. official’s remark underscores a pragmatic partnership, with India’s measured ambition shaping a deal that balances trade gains ($500 billion by 2030) against sovereignty.

US-Russia Sanctions and BTA Leverage: The timing is telling

The fresh US sanctions freeze assets of Rosneft and Lukoil—key suppliers to Indian refiners like Indian Oil Corp. and Reliance—potentially halting 1-1.5 million barrels per day of imports after a November 21 wind-down. This escalates pressure on India to accelerate diversification toward US crude (already 10% of needs), a core BTA demand. Goyal's comments signal resistance, potentially delaying the agreement's first phase despite optimism for $500 billion bilateral trade by 2030.

Theoretically, India saved $3.8 billion in FY25 via Russian discounts, and abrupt cuts could inflate oil prices by 3%+ globally, adding $2-3 billion to India's monthly import bill and risking 0.2-0.5% GDP drag. But in reality, Indian private and public (government-owned) refiners earned a windfall profit by purchasing heavily discounted Russian crude oil and reselling it mainly to the EU after refining. The then Biden admin and also the EU designed the so-called Russian oil sanction in a way that Russia could sell its 'Ukraine war blood tainted black heavy crude oil' to Indian and Chinese refiners, who can then sell the refined products (mainly gasoline) to the EU after refining (whitewash). As the EU needs imported oil, it has no other option but to buy the same tainted Russian oil after being whitewashed by Indian and Chinese refiners. Now under Trump, the same US policy suddenly changed as Trump now wants to sell US oil to the EU, although the US has no additional production capacity for that.

No benefit for the Indian public from cheaper Russian oil

The energy sector looms large: India, reliant on discounted Russian crude for 34% of its imports (saving $3.8 billion in FY25), faces Trump's precondition to phase out these purchases by December 2025 in exchange for boosted U.S. crude, gas, and ethanol imports. Commerce Secretary Rajesh Agrawal noted on October 15 that India is open to ramping up U.S. energy buys if prices suit domestic refiners, but anonymous sources highlight stalled clarity on biofuels and dairy tariffs. Trump, in a recent TV appearance, claimed India is "gradually abandoning" Russian oil, aligning with fresh U.S. sanctions on Rosneft and Lukoil that could disrupt supplies to Indian refiners like Reliance Industries (RIL).

Agriculture concessions are equally thorny. The U.S. seeks expanded quotas for non-GM maize (from 0.5 million tonnes annually) and soymeal to offload surpluses battered by China's import cuts—from $5.2 billion in 2022 to $331 million in 2024—while India grapples with poultry, dairy, and ethanol demands. Yet, bodies like the Soybean Processors Association warn of 10-15% local price crashes, hurting farmers already below minimum support prices (MSP). The sugar lobby, via the Indian Sugar & Bio-Energy Manufacturers Association (ISMA), is mobilizing against ethanol imports, fearing a 10-15% hit to mill revenues and echoes of the 2020-21 farm protests.

India made a policy blunder in approaching Trump 2.0 proactively from day one for a trade deal.

India may have made a policy blunder by proactively approaching the Trump admin from day one (January 2025) for a trade deal, engaging in marathon public meetings. Trump takes this as a sign of weakness and intensifies his bullying tactics steadily. This happened with China during Trump 1.0, when President Xi approached Trump proactively for an early trade deal, and the result was known to all of us. India should have now followed the current Chinese stance for a tit-for-tat treatment with Trump on trade, despite having no leverage like China (like rare earth materials). Trump is now less hawkish on China and more hawkish on India in his 2nd term.

The Trump admin may have made a realistic assessment that, together with China, the US has almost 45% of the global economy and is dependent on each other for prosperity and development. Unlike Trump 1.0, the US under Trump 2.0 is now seeing China as a big competitor, not seeking decoupling, but derisking from strategic dependence. China, on the other hand, is also steadily expanding itself in the last 10-20 years, not only in trade with other countries to reduce US/EU dependence, but also diversifying itself from any US dependence, including high-tech and aerospace. China is also trying to diversify itself from the US on various strategic issues, ranging from high-end techs/software to airplanes/jet engines.


Is there a tectonic shift in Trump’s policy towards India?

Although as a sovereign country, India does not need to explain every time megalomaniac Trump throws an insulting comment, the reality is that India needs the US and the USD, not the opposite. The US is now India’s biggest source of USD ~$95B to $100B if we combine both export surplus and net inward remittances. The US, under Trump 2.0, no longer needs India against China. Trump 2.0 now abandons the China decoupling policy, unlike during Trump 1.0, and is now focusing more on de-risking, treating China as the main superpower competitor rather than adversary.

China is now overtaking the US not only in terms of real wealth, development, prosperity, but also in hi-techs, AI, chips, quantum computing, 6G, and advanced military hardware & software. China's indigenous GPRS and operating system have reduced its dependence on the US. The US now sees China as an equal, if not bigger competitor in both economic and military, i.e., as the true 2nd superpower in the world in all aspects; not as a mere military superpower like the old USSR (now Russia). Thus, Trump 2.0 is now negotiating with a stronger China with a different approach (3D chess game) than India, which has no leverage (cards) like China, except the narrative of the biggest democracy and a strategic partner of the US against adversary China.

The US and China now have almost 45% of global GDP; both are dependent on each other for prosperity and growth. China is also the biggest export market for the US, and thus, Trump 2.0 is now no longer seeking China decoupling, but only strategic derisking. For Trump, China, its market and supply chain are far bigger and important than 'tiny' India, and thus Trump 2.0 is now less hawkish on China and harsher on India. Trump now often praises China for opening up the economy for US goods & services, unlike 'Tariff King' India, which is very reluctant or rigid to change its century-old protectionist policies for domestic industries (including MSMEs) and also the agri/farm/dairy sector (vote bank & note bank politics).

Trump may not sign any BTA with India, unless it opens the economy almost fully like Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Vietnam, and other ASEAN countries with 0% tariff and no stringent (obnoxious) regulations. As a 'vibrant democracy', India or any main political party may not be ready yet to sacrifice both the note bank and vote bank for US interests. Trump may not like India's go-slow, time-consuming negotiation tactics and may also favor Pakistan more than India because of its high potential rare earth materials reserve for ~$6T, something which India does not have at present.

Trump’s tariff tantrum has sent shockwaves through U.S.-India relations. This move, part of Trump’s broader reciprocal tariff policy, marks a significant departure from over 15 years of U.S. efforts to court India as a strategic counterweight to China’s ‘growing aggression’. Trump’s tariffs and work visa policies are not just about trade deficits; they’re a calculated move to pressure India into reducing ties with Russia and aligning more closely with U.S. interests. India’s 35–40% reliance on Russian oil (up from 3% in 2021) and its status as a major buyer of Russian military equipment have become flashpoints.

Trump also blinked on India after Modi attended the SCO, and China imposed export restrictions for REMs.

Modi’s strategy to deepen India-China relations is a calculated response to Trump’s tariff war and geopolitical pressures, rooted in India’s pursuit of strategic autonomy and economic resilience. By engaging China on trade, border de-escalation, and multilateral cooperation, Modi aims to offset U.S. tariffs, diversify partnerships, and bolster his domestic image. This pivot serves as leverage against the U.S. by diversifying India’s options and pressuring Trump to reconsider his approach to preserve India’s role as a strategic partner. However, India must navigate historical mistrust with China, manage Quad commitments, and address domestic skepticism to sustain this balancing act.

Modi's China card is definitely working, at least partially, but Trump 2.0 now no longer seeks China decoupling. The Trump administration is now seeking strategic China derisking and cooperation, especially in rare earth materials and pharmaceuticals (APIs). The Trump administration does not like India's delaying tactics in trade talks; India has to be decisive in opening its economy for the US with a lower tariff and GST.

Trump’s ‘Triumph Card’ over India

Trump may also use a tariff threat on the Indian IT outsourcing service to ensure a favorable trade deal. The Indian IT service industry is vital for the Indian middle class and discretionary consumer spending. Any tariff on it will be far more serious for the economy than additional secondary tariffs of 25% for Russian oil. Thus, India has to allow the US for a favorable trade deal, ensuring free & fair access of US goods into the country with minimal tariffs.

Trump's reciprocal tariff & sales tax policy

The Trump admin is also considering India's high GST as another tariff barrier, and thus, at ~17.5% weighted average India tariffs and 15% IGST, US goods now face 32.5% total tax in India. Against this, Indian goods are facing 25% normal Federal tariffs and 7.5% average sales tax in various US states, totaling the same 32.5%. This is Trump's reciprocal tariffs policy and applies to almost every country/trading bloc, including the EU.

Under the base case scenario, Trump may reduce tariffs on Indian goods from 25% to 20%; in that scenario, Indian goods will face a total 27.50% tax in the US. And India will have to ensure the same total tax on US goods. Indian IGST on US goods should be around 12.5% on a weighted average basis, from the previous 15% and thus India has to impose a maximum 15% average tariffs on all US goods (from the present 17.5%), totaling the same 27.5% tax. India may also have to withdraw its concept of a higher tax on luxury/sin goods.

Another issue will be India's 18% GST on most of the services, including those from the US. Thus, the Trump admin may also want to impose similar tariffs/taxes on Indian services to promote American employment in line with Trump's election campaign promise and overall extreme right MAGA sentiment. Thus, the coexistence of MAGA (Make America Great Again) and MIGA (Make India Great Again) may be very difficult, even if Trump and Modi prefer reconciliation rather than protracted escalations.


Also, India has to ensure its producers, especially MSMEs and farm sectors, are globally competitive rather than protected through obnoxious tariffs and other regulations. India has to modernize its agricultural sector to compete with the US or any other advanced economies. But the fact is that Indian producers are not yet ready to compete with the US or any other AE at this moment. Thus, Modi may face widespread protests from both the Vote bank and the note bank (corporate India). And as a mature politician, Modi may not risk his political future by going for a trade deal with the US with huge concessions. At the same time, Modi also has to manage Trump’s potential action to impose service tax/tariffs on Indian outsourcing to ensure political support from India’s middle class.

Conclusions

Under the best-case scenario, India may get 20-15% US tariffs against the present 25% under BTA-I (assuming 25% Russian oil tariffs are temporary); in that scenario, India has to impose 15-10% tariffs on US goods to match the total tax component after consideration of GST & state sales taxes. India has to open its economy for US agri & farm products substantially, if not fully, along with the MSME sector.  This is politically sensitive for both Trump and Modi as it involves domestic political compulsions involving vote banks for both. Trump is now under huge pressure from the US farmers lobby for his Tariff policies and subsequent boycott & diversification by China and other importers. Trump now has to pay almost $30 billion in subsidies to US farmers for his bellicose policies. Thus, Trump is now pressuring India to open its economy for US agri & farm products.

On the other side, Modi is also under pressure not only for domestic politics, but also for economics. Indian exports to the US have been substantially down since September’25, and almost half a million jobs are at stake in various states. Although India is now trying to diversify its exports to various other countries and trading blocs, it will take a longer time. India should have actively started the export diversification process long ago in 2015, rather than waiting for Trump 2.0 in 2025.

Overall, India is now trying to engage with the US in marathon trade talks without any binding BTA, and buying time. India may be trying to buy time for any definitive BTA and subsequent implementation of the same. Even if India signs any BTA with the US by December'25, the actual implementation of the same may be on hold till at least November'26 or even December'27 to test Trump's political future in the US midterm election and also to prepare domestic producers for the inevitable competition from US & global imports, both in terms of quality & affordability.

Although cheaper imports are good for the overall Indian economy for a lower cost of living, it may not be good for the Indian producers, least for the initial years; governments has to provide substantial monetary & fiscal stimulus along with proper process reform to provide a level playing ground for the Indian producers, so that they can compete with their US & global counterparts. Thus, PM Modi has to navigate carefully for the sake of both the vote & note bank. India has to de-risk itself from US hegemony & unilateralism by ensuring proper inclusive development in the country, so that people do not try to leave the country for the US, Europe, and other foreign destinations at the first available opportunity. Modi's 'Viswaguru' image now at stake: If India indeed develops so much, then why are people leaving the country rather than staying back?

Bottom line

Trump’s bellicose policies on tariffs and immigration/work visas are hurting Modi's 'Viswaguru' (Global Teacher) image, and thus he is now avoiding Trump ahead of the Bihar election; otherwise, Modi may be seen as a 'weak leader'. And India may also be waiting for the US Supreme Court (SC) verdict on November 3, 2025, on Trump tariffs; going by Trump's recent comments, the SC may uphold the lower court verdict that most of Trump's tariffs are illegal and the US Treasury has to refund the same.

India may also be waiting for the outcome of US-China trade talks and the Trump-Xi meeting at the ASEAN summit in Malaysia to be concluded by November 1. If there is a definitive US-China trade deal, Trump may not give India any additional concessions and vice versa; i.e., China's gain may be India's pain, and China's pain may be India's gain as far as the trade deal with the US under Trump is considered.


Popular posts from this blog

Gold wobbled on Trump tariff confusion on Swiss Gold (39%)

Trump’s work visa and tariff policies may cause US stagflation