africa.chinadaily.com.cn
US Tariffs on Indian Steel and Aluminum Double to 50 Percent
The US administration doubled tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from India to 50 percent on May 30, 2025, negatively impacting businesses in both countries and potentially prompting retaliatory measures from India, while violating free trade norms.
- How will the US tariff increase affect the competitiveness of businesses in India and the US?
- The US tariff increase directly harms Indian exporters to the US, impacting \$4.56 billion in exports and potentially affecting competitiveness. Simultaneously, US businesses face increased costs and reduced global competitiveness due to higher input prices. This protectionist move violates free trade norms, creating a lose-lose scenario.
- What are the immediate economic consequences of the US doubling tariffs on steel and aluminum from India?
- On May 30th, the US doubled tariffs on steel and aluminum imported from India to 50 percent, impacting Indian and US businesses. India exported \$4.56 billion in these products to the US in 2024-25, and now faces decreased competitiveness and profitability. In response, India is pursuing free trade agreements with other countries and considering retaliatory tariffs.
- What are the potential long-term implications of this protectionist trade policy on global trade patterns and US-India relations?
- The US tariff increase could significantly shift global trade patterns, as India diversifies its exports and may impose retaliatory tariffs. This escalation reflects poorly on US leadership and could strain US-India relations further, impacting future trade negotiations and broader economic cooperation. The increased costs for US businesses may lead to price hikes for consumers.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing emphasizes the negative consequences for India. While this is a significant impact, the headline and introduction could be broadened to reflect the global implications more equally. The article focuses heavily on quotes from Indian experts, which is understandable given the focus on India's response, but including more American perspectives would create a more balanced narrative.
Language Bias
The language used is generally neutral. Terms like "apprehensive" and "assertiveness" could be considered somewhat loaded, but they are used sparingly and within the context of direct quotes. The overall tone remains factual and objective.
Bias by Omission
The analysis lacks perspectives from US businesses directly impacted by the tariff increase. While the negative impacts on Indian businesses are thoroughly detailed, a balanced perspective would include quotes and data from US manufacturers and consumers.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplified 'lose-lose' scenario, but does acknowledge complexities within the trade negotiations and potential retaliatory measures. A more nuanced discussion of possible wins for either side, even small ones, would improve the analysis.
Sustainable Development Goals
The increased tariffs negatively impact Indian manufacturers and exporters, affecting their competitiveness and profitability in the US market. This leads to job losses and reduced economic growth in India. US businesses also face increased costs, reduced global competitiveness, and potential job losses.