India expressed strong opposition to America’s proposed 12.5% tariff
India has expressed strong objection to the 12.5 percent additional duty (tariff) proposed by America. India says that any trade related dispute between the two countries should not be resolved through unilateral decisions but through bilateral negotiations. Under this, India has appealed to the US Trade Representative (USTR) to reconsider the proposed duty.
Questions raised on ‘Section 301’ investigation
India has also raised questions on the investigation conducted under ‘Section 301’ of USTR. In this investigation, it has been said that action will be taken against some countries regarding the import of products made through forced labour. India says that there are many factual and legal flaws in this investigation and the report is not based on sufficient evidence.
India presented its side in the public hearing
Brij Mohan Mishra, Joint Secretary in the Commerce Department, presented India’s side in the public hearing held on July 8. He said that India is fully committed to eliminating bonded labour. This is not only the constitutional responsibility of the country, but also under international rules, India takes this issue seriously.
He said that before imposing comprehensive tariffs on a country, there should be solid and credible evidence, but the USTR report does not meet this criterion.
It is wrong to keep 46 countries together
India also said that USTR in its report has placed 46 countries including India in the same category, whereas the circumstances of every country are different. India says that the report did not explain why there was a need to impose additional duties on the entire country.
Furthermore, the investigation has drawn conclusions based on some selected cases and general business trends. India claims that country-specific or industry-specific evidence has not been presented.
The claim of loss to American industry is also not proved
India also said that USTR has not been able to prove that the alleged lack of import restrictions in India has caused any unfair competitive disadvantage to the US industry. In such a situation, there is no strong basis for imposing additional fees.
Brij Mohan Mishra said that India is ready for continuous dialogue and consultation with America on this issue, so that a solution can be found keeping in mind the interests of both the countries.
APEDA, FICCI and CII also protested
During the hearing, Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA) also presented India’s side. APEDA representative Shreyansh Gupta said that import of rice in India is very limited and is done only to meet the needs of certain specific varieties. He said that the export of such rice is also strictly monitored.
At the same time, industry organizations FICCI and CII also opposed the proposed US duty. He says that due to this, not only Indian exporters but also American companies and consumers there will have to pay higher prices.
It is noteworthy that USTR had started investigation under Section 301 in March this year. The opinions and objections of all parties will be considered before taking the final decision.
