US quartz tariffs: India and the United States are still working towards an interim bilateral trade agreement. On August 5, the Ministry of External Affairs said that some issues remained to be finalised. Ten days later, a new American trade barrier took effect against an Indian industry heavily dependent on the US market.
From August 15, the United States imposed safeguard duties on imports of quartz surface products after the US International Trade Commission found that increased imports were a substantial cause of serious injury to American producers. In the first year, imports within a global quota attract an additional 25% duty and shipments above it 50%. The measure runs for four years, with rates declining over time.
READ | India-US trade deal needs a sunset clause
The numbers are painful for India because of the way the industry has grown. The Global Trade Research Initiative estimates that the US bought 72.5% of India’s quartz surface-product exports in FY2026, worth $233.3 million. A policy change in one country can therefore unsettle an industry whose factories, product specifications and distribution networks have been built around that market.
The lesson extends beyond quartz. Export concentration creates efficiencies when demand is strong and market access is stable. It also leaves producers exposed when a major buyer changes its trade policy.
US quartz safeguard leaves India without its own quota
The US action followed a formal process. The industry’s petition was first submitted in September 2025, and the USITC instituted its investigation on November 17. On April 1, the commission, by a 2-1 vote, concluded that rising imports were a substantial cause of serious injury. President Donald Trump announced the safeguard on July 31.
For the first year, Washington has fixed a global quota of 13.006 million square metres, divided into quarterly allocations. India has no country-specific allocation and must compete for quota space with other suppliers covered by the measure. Canada, Mexico, Australia, South Korea, Singapore and several other US trade partners are excluded.
READ | Trump’s generic drug tariffs threaten India’s pharma trade
That distinction matters commercially. An Indian exporter faces an additional 25% duty while quota space is available and 50% once it is exhausted. For covered goods already carrying an ordinary 5% tariff, the combined burden can reach 30% or 55%. Existing anti-dumping and countervailing duties can also continue to apply because the safeguard is cumulative.
A buyer comparing suppliers will therefore look beyond the quoted factory price. The predictability of tariff treatment becomes part of the purchasing decision.
That puts Indian producers at a disadvantage even before the higher duty is actually paid. Quartz products supplied to the US have been adapted to local demand in design, slab dimensions, certification and distribution. Manufacturing is concentrated mainly in Gujarat, Rajasthan and Telangana. Finding buyers elsewhere requires changes in specifications, certifications, dealer relationships and pricing.
Diversification is possible. It is neither instant nor costless.
WTO consultations offer a route to negotiated relief
India moved on August 14, requesting consultations with the United States under Article 12.3 of the WTO Agreement on Safeguards. This point matters because the request has sometimes been described as the start of a formal WTO dispute. It is not one at this stage. Article 12.3 consultations allow an exporting member with a substantial interest to discuss the proposed safeguard and possible ways of addressing its effects.
That may be more useful to exporters in the immediate term than litigation. The US proclamation itself authorises the US Trade Representative to negotiate arrangements under which the safeguard could be reduced, modified or suspended for a trading partner. India can therefore press for better access, including an exemption or a more predictable quota arrangement, while retaining its rights under WTO rules.
The chronology also deserves attention. The petition was before the US authorities from September 2025, the investigation formally began in November, and the injury determination came in April. India sought consultations only on August 14, one day before the measure took effect.
Trade-remedy cases move through published procedures. Exporting countries therefore have opportunities to intervene before the final tariff arrives. An industry supplying nearly three-quarters of its exports to one market warrants close monitoring by the Commerce Ministry, Indian missions abroad, export promotion bodies and the firms themselves.
READ | India trade deficit exposes gaps in manufacturing supply chains
US quartz tariffs exposes the cost of export concentration
The safeguard has landed during an unsettled period in India-US trade relations. The two countries announced a framework for an interim agreement in February, but negotiations have continued through the year. India has also faced separate American tariff actions and investigations, which make future market access harder for exporters to price into investment decisions.
Quartz producers were already under pressure. GTRI estimates that India’s quartz surface-product exports to the US fell about 35% in FY2026, before the new safeguard took effect. The causes are harder to apportion with confidence, so the fall should not be attributed solely to US policy. Existing trade-remedy duties, demand conditions and competition all affect shipments.
There is also a danger of drawing the wrong conclusion from the episode. The US remains too large and valuable a market for Indian exporters to retreat from it. Companies concentrated there did so for an understandable reason: American demand offered scale. Replicating that volume across several smaller markets may reduce margins and raise marketing and compliance costs.
The case for diversification is therefore an argument about risk management. A company selling 70% of its exports to one market carries a policy exposure alongside its commercial exposure. That risk becomes material when tariffs, safeguards and trade-remedy investigations can alter market access within months.
India’s export policy should identify sectors where dependence on a single destination has reached levels that could threaten an industrial cluster. Exporters in those sectors need better intelligence on foreign trade-remedy proceedings and practical assistance with certification and market entry elsewhere. Government support is most useful where the fixed cost of entering another market is too high for individual firms to bear.
India’s current export strategy already places greater emphasis on certification, testing, trade finance and overseas market access. The quartz episode shows why those programmes should also track destination concentration.
An exemption or favourable quota from Washington would provide immediate relief. India should seek it. The harder task is to ensure that the next foreign tariff does not place an entire export cluster in the same position. Quartz is a modest export industry by India’s overall trade numbers. Its dependence on one market makes it a useful warning.