The tariff hikes apply to all countries; India did not receive an initial exception like some trading partners, nor negotiate an alternative quota arrangement.Localisation Trade BarriersThe United States continues to press India on its “forced” localisation practices., nuts, apples, steel, and motorcycles), but has deferred applying the tariffs until November 2, 2018, in hopes of a bilateral resolution. For India, a key Countersunk wood screw issue is US temporary visa policies, which affect Indian nationals working in the United States., some precious stones, steel, and consumer electronics) from all countries to curb imports in order to support its depreciating rupee.InvestmentIndia has made FDI reforms, such as raising foreign equity caps for insurance and defence, but barriers remain in multi-brand retail and others.
India supplied 2. India is eager for more technology-sharing and coproduction; recent reports indicate US and Indian interest in producing F-16 combat aircraft there.g. GSP accounted for 12 per cent ($5.6 billion) of US goods imports from India in 2017. On June 1, 2018, the United States began applying 25 per cent steel and 10 per cent aluminum tariffs under Section 232 of the Tariff Expansion Act of 1962. The US, meanwhile, urges more reforms in India’s defence offsets policy and higher FDI caps in its defense sector.4 billion of US goods (e. The review concerns India’s compliance with the GSP “market access” criterion and also relates to US medical and dairy industry market access petitions.ServicesThe United States and India are competitive in certain services industries. This follows a pattern of tariff hikes by India in recent years (such as on cell phones and solar panels), as well as longstanding US concerns over India’s tariff regime.The Trump Administration, which views bilateral trade balances as an indicator of the health of a trading relationship, has taken issue with the US trade deficit with India ($27 billion deficit in goods and services trade in 2017), and has criticised India for a range of “unfair” trading practices.
Each side also sees the other’s agricultural support programmes as market-distorting; India’s view of its programmes from a food security lens complicates matters.Intellectual Property (IP)The two sides differ on how to balance IP protection to incentivise innovation and support other policy goals, such as access to medicines. The consequences of trade deficits are contested. India favours taking a broader view of their trade ties beyond the trade balance.TariffsBilateral tensions have become heightened over US and Indian tariff policies.AgricultureSanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) barriers in India limit US agricultural exports. 115-44). Barriers to US firms’ market access include India’s limits on foreign ownership and local presence requirements. India also continues to seek a “totalization agreement” to coordinate social security protection for workers who split their careers between the two countries.
留言列表
