US Court Strikes Down Trump Tariffs, Indian Exporters Cheer $8B Relief

The US Supreme Court has struck down reciprocal tariffs imposed during the Trump administration, bringing relief to Indian exporters. However, approximately $8.3 billion worth of Indian exports in sectors like steel and aluminium remain subject to Section 232 national security duties. The court's 6-3 decision marks a significant check on presidential trade authority. Former President Trump has indicated he has alternative plans, potentially using other trade statutes to impose restrictions.

Key Points: US Supreme Court Overturns Trump Tariffs on Indian Exports

  • US Supreme Court voids 18% reciprocal tariffs
  • $8.3B Indian exports still under Section 232 duties
  • Court's 6-3 decision curbs executive power
  • Trump indicates he has a "backup plan"
  • Alternative trade statutes like Section 301 remain
2 min read

Exporters jubilant at US tariff verdict; $8 billion of exports may still face duties

Indian exporters gain relief as US Supreme Court strikes down reciprocal tariffs, though $8.3B in exports may still face national security duties.

"a major repudiation of a core piece of Trump's economic programme - Politico"

New Delhi, Feb 20

With the US Supreme Court striking down reciprocal tariffs imposed by the Donald Trump administration on Friday, Indian exporters were jubilant at the news. However, around $8-9 billion worth of trade is still likely to face higher duties under national security provisions.

The US Supreme Court ruling effectively eliminates the 18 per cent reciprocal tariff agreed earlier under the India-US trade framework.

According to analysts, Section 232 duties remain in force, covering sectors deemed critical to US national security such as steel, aluminium, automobiles, timber, copper and certain machinery products.

According to data, India exported about $8.3 billion worth of goods in Section 232 categories to the US in 2024.

This accounts for around 10.4 per cent of India's more than $80 billion exports to the US.

However, the US administration indicated it could explore alternative routes to impose trade restrictions.

Among the options available to the US administration is to rely on long-standing trade statutes that give the President authority to impose tariffs after formal investigations.

After the US Supreme Court ruling, President Trump said that he has a "backup plan" for the punitive duties.

As per reports, these include Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows the US to impose duties in response to unfair trade practices by foreign countries, and Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, which permits tariffs on national security grounds.

Meanwhile, the US court ruling marks a rare instance of the conservative-led court reining in Trump's use of executive power.

According to Politico, the court in a 6-3 decision struck down the tariffs, calling it "a major repudiation of a core piece of Trump's economic programme".

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
Finally some relief! My uncle's small engineering unit exports auto parts. The 18% tariff was killing his business. Hope the remaining Section 232 issues get resolved soon. The "backup plan" threat is worrying though.
R
Rohit P
We should use this as a wake-up call. Why are 10% of our exports to the US in "national security" categories? We need to diversify our export basket and reduce dependency on such volatile markets. Atmanirbhar Bharat should mean stronger global trade positions too.
S
Sarah B
Interesting to see the US Supreme Court step in. It shows even their systems have checks. But the article mentions they can use other sections like 301. Our trade negotiators must be prepared for all scenarios. It's a delicate dance.
V
Vikram M
Steel and aluminium sectors will still suffer. These are major employment generators. The government's PLI schemes need to focus on making these industries more competitive globally, so tariffs hurt less. Jai Hind!
K
Karthik V
While I welcome the court verdict, I have to respectfully say our trade policy often seems reactive. We need a more proactive, long-term strategy with the US and other partners, rather than celebrating short-term wins while bigger issues loom.
A
Ananya R

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50