India has taken a firm stand against a proposed 12.5% additional import tariff by the United States, asserting that trade disputes between the two nations should be resolved through mutual dialogue rather than unilateral measures.
Participating in a public hearing by the United States Trade Representative (USTR), Brij Mohan Mishra, Joint Secretary in the Department of Commerce, expressed serious concerns over the move. He urged the US to reconsider its Section 301 investigation and the subsequent tariff proposal, citing flaws and contradictions in the report.
The US move follows allegations that certain countries have failed to ban the import of goods linked to forced labor. Rejecting the claims, India stated that eradicating forced labor is a constitutional duty and that the country strictly adheres to international laws.
In a written submission made public on July 8 during the USTR hearing, India called the investigation methodology completely flawed. Joint Secretary Mishra stated that the USTR report fails to meet the legal standards required under Section 301(D) of the Trade Act. He added that assuming India lacks import prohibitions on forced labor goods without concrete evidence is incorrect.
India argued that the US compiled its report based merely on case studies of a few select economies and general trade data. As many as 46 different economies, including India, were placed in the same category without substantial proof. The report assumed that countries with internal import discrepancies were exporting those goods to the US, without establishing any direct link or evidence.
India clarified that there is no evidence to suggest its policies are causing any harm to American industries.
Meanwhile, Shreyans Gupta, First Secretary at the Indian Embassy in Washington, presented a defense on behalf of the Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA). He strongly contested US claims regarding Indian rice, which alleged that imports of rice linked to forced labor were hurting the US domestic market.
Citing data, Gupta stated that India imports a negligible amount of rice, which is limited to meeting specific variety demands.
He highlighted that the value of rice coming into India from the US is less than three percent of the total rice exported by India to the US. Furthermore, India enforces strict regulations to check the quality of outgoing consignments. Rice exported to the US originates exclusively from mills and processing units registered with the Indian Ministry of Agriculture. Based on these facts, India demanded that the investigation be dropped, or at the very least, Indian rice be exempted from the additional tariff.
Indian industry bodies FICCI and CII also strongly opposed the tariff proposal. FICCI warned that the additional tax would not only hurt Indian exporters but would also burden American manufacturers, importers, retailers, and consumers with inflation.
With Indian industries already adhering to necessary regulations and safety standards, FICCI noted that this unilateral tax would disrupt the strong US-India supply chain.
Supporting the stance, CII stated that the proposed 12.5% tariff lacks an evidentiary basis, noting that the USTR has failed to prove that Indian policies are detrimental to US commerce.
The USTR launched an investigation against 60 countries in March 2026, citing concerns over forced labor and industrial overcapacity. The subsequent report, released on June 3, proposed a 10% additional tariff on countries like Canada, the European Union, Mexico, and Pakistan, and a 12.5% tariff on 54 nations, including India and China. The decision remains a proposal, and the USTR will review all objections before taking a final call.
