India-US tariff framework: The significance of the India-US joint statement lies less in tariff arithmetic than in the options it preserves. Market access is widened but not guaranteed. Energy ties are deepened but not locked in. Strategic alignment is encouraged but not formalised. The ambiguity is deliberate. It reflects an older truth of economic diplomacy: flexibility is a design choice, not a defect.
Though framed as a tariff reset, the deal is an interim framework tying trade to energy, technology, and economic security. What began as a dispute over duties now lowers barriers in selected lines, retains leverage for both sides, and builds a structure meant for continuing negotiation rather than closure.
READ | India-US trade framework: The coercion behind concessions
At its core, the agreement reduces US tariffs to 18% on a range of Indian exports, replacing duties that had earlier crossed 50% under reciprocal and punitive measures. For Indian exporters in textiles and apparel, leather and footwear, plastics and rubber, organic chemicals, home decor, artisanal goods, and select machinery—sectors with high US exposure—this brings a measure of predictability and moves tariff treatment closer to that of competing suppliers. Of the nearly $88 billion in Indian goods exported annually to the United States, the deal immediately opens up roughly $30 billion worth of trade, with further upside under a partner-alignment framework. The immediate gain is not only lower duties, but a steadier operating environment.
PTAAP framework: the prize is near-zero tariffs
A key pillar is the US Potential Tariff Adjustments for Aligned Partners (PTAAP) framework. It identifies categories that may qualify for MFN tariff treatment—with zero “reciprocal” tariffs—if a partner enters a reciprocal trade and security arrangement with the United States. The categories include aircraft and components, generic pharmaceuticals and active ingredients, gems and diamonds, select natural resources, and agricultural products that are not sufficiently available domestically in the US.
For India, these are commercially meaningful sectors. If the interim arrangement is carried through to a concluded deal, duties on PTAAP-covered exports could fall from 18% to near zero. That is where the real competitiveness shift sits.
READ | India-US trade deal: A pact with promise and plenty of fine print
Section 232 sectors: selective relief, hard walls remain
In strategically sensitive sectors governed by national-security tariffs, the approach is narrower. The US has committed to remove tariffs on certain Indian aircraft components, introduce preferential tariff-rate quotas for auto parts, and offer “negotiated outcomes” on generic pharmaceuticals after the Section 232 investigation is completed. Aluminium and copper remain largely protected under Section 232, with only tight exemptions, mainly for products used in aircraft manufacturing.
The coverage is still opaque. India’s commerce minister has indicated that exports worth about $44 billion will enter the US market without reciprocal tariffs under the first phase of the bilateral trade agreement, expected by mid-March. The figure, and the definition of “without reciprocal tariffs”, will matter more than the headline rate.
India’s tariff cuts: industrial goods open, farm lines ring-fenced
In return, India has agreed to reduce or eliminate tariffs on all US industrial goods and a defined set of agricultural products, including dried distillers’ grains, red sorghum for animal feed, tree nuts, fresh and processed fruits, soybean oil, and wine and spirits. Sensitive domestic sectors such as cereals, pulses, and poultry remain protected. A detailed HS code schedule is yet to be published, which keeps the political and distributional impact hard to judge.
Buried in the text is the clause that does the real work: if either country changes its agreed tariff structure, the other may modify its commitments. That protects both sides against policy shocks. It also makes nearly every benefit provisional. Exporters get a corridor of opportunity, not a guaranteed runway.
India has expressed an intention to purchase $500 billion in US goods over five years—energy, aircraft and parts, technology products, precious metals, and coking coal. It is not a legal commitment. It is a signal of long-term alignment between strategic partners and large firms, and a way to anchor the relationship in recurring transactions. The number is large enough to shape expectations even without enforceability.
READ | India-US trade deal: Tariff relief and trust deficit
Energy and Russia: the subtext is enforcement
Energy trade sits at the heart of the deal’s geopolitical logic. The US has lifted a 25% penalty it had applied to Indian imports of Russian crude, linking relief to diversification. Over the past two years, Russian crude imports into India have reportedly fallen sharply, while US LNG and LPG sales to India have grown. The White House messaging emphasises monitoring of India’s Russian oil purchases and keeps open the threat of reinstating tariffs if Russian volumes rise again.
India’s public position remains unchanged: energy security for 1.4 billion people is non-negotiable. The gap between the two narratives is not a footnote. It is a future stress point.
Non-tariff barriers: the quiet battlefield
The framework also turns to non-tariff barriers that often matter more than duties: licensing, standards recognition, quantitative restrictions, testing and certification. If the two sides can produce credible pathways on standards and approvals, the investment impact could outlast the tariff cuts. If they cannot, the deal will remain a set of numbers without an operating system.
Cooperation in advanced technologies—including data-centre components and GPUs—signals alignment on economic security and domestic industrial policy. India’s recent budget incentives, including tax-linked support for data-centre investments, fit this direction. This part will be less visible than tariff changes, but it is where supply-chain integration and investment decisions will accumulate.
India-US tariff framework: What this deal is—and what it is not
Taken together, the interim deal is transactional and leverage-aware. Concessions are tied to expectations. Market access comes with alignment conditions. The gains are tangible, but conditional. The real test is whether this framework can be converted into a full bilateral trade agreement without the “flexibility” becoming an exit ramp.
For now, the deal shows a familiar pattern in US trade policy: use tariffs as pressure, offer relief through structured alignment, and keep enforcement tools close. India has kept room to manoeuvre on market access and geopolitics, while protecting red lines in agriculture and strategic autonomy. What comes next will depend less on celebratory headlines and more on the HS schedules, quota design, and enforcement language that follow.
Priya is a Mumbai based economist. Views are personal.