In a significant development that has sent ripples through global commerce, India and the United States have postponed their crucial trade negotiator meeting scheduled for this week in Washington DC. The decision comes as both sides scramble to assess the implications of a seismic US Supreme Court ruling that struck down President Donald Trump's tariff regime, followed by his immediate imposition of a flat 15% tariff on all trading partners .
Why the Talks Were Put on Hold
The Indian team, led by chief negotiator Darpan Jain, was slated to depart for a three-day meeting beginning February 23 to finalize the legal text of an interim bilateral trade agreement . That visit has now been paused.
Official sources confirmed to multiple news agencies that both nations mutually agreed to reschedule. "The two sides are of the view that the proposed visit of the Indian chief negotiator and the team be scheduled after each side has had the time to evaluate the latest developments and their implications," a commerce ministry source told PTI .
The Supreme Court Earthquake
The postponement traces directly to Friday's landmark 6-3 Supreme Court decision, which delivered a stinging rebuke to Trump's trade agenda. The court ruled that the president had overstepped his authority by using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977—a law designed for sanctions and embargoes—to impose sweeping "reciprocal" tariffs .
Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the decisive opinion: "Based on two words separated by 16 others—'regulate' and 'importation'—the President asserts the independent power to impose tariffs on imports from any country, of any product, at any rate, for any amount of time. Those words cannot bear such weight" .
Trump's Rapid Response
Within hours of the ruling, Trump pivoted sharply. He announced a 10% global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974—then dramatically raised it to 15% on Saturday, the maximum permitted under that provision .
Unlike the struck-down IEEPA tariffs, this new 15% levy comes with critical limitations: it's temporary (capped at 150 days unless Congress approves extension) and applies uniformly to all nations .
What This Means for India
Here's where the math gets interesting for Indian exporters. Under the February 7 framework announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Trump, India was set to receive a reciprocal tariff rate of 18%—down from the punishing 50% cumulative duties (25% reciprocal plus 25% Russian oil penalty) imposed earlier .
Now, without any trade agreement and without offering any concessions, India automatically lands at 15%—actually lower than the negotiated rate . The joint statement itself contains a crucial clause: "In the event of any changes to the agreed upon tariffs of either country, the United States and India agree that the other country may modify its commitments" .
Experts: India Should Recalibrate
Trade analysts suggest this changes everything. Ajay Srivastava of the Global Trade Research Initiative argues India should reconsider entirely: "In exchange for an 18% reciprocal tariff rate, India was expected to offer major concessions—cutting tariffs, aligning economic policies with U.S. interests, easing regulations. Now, even without a trade agreement, without making any sacrifices, India faces a 15% tariff. The negotiated arrangement has become burdensome and one-sided" .
Abhijit Das, former head of the Centre for WTO Studies, offered a more measured view: "The Supreme Court decision eases the pressure on us to offer concessions in order to secure lower tariffs compared to our competitors. Whether our negotiators are able to leverage this remains to be seen" .
Sectoral Impact: Relief and Caution
For India's labor-intensive sectors, the reaction is mixed but cautiously optimistic.
Kama Jewelry managing director Colin Shah called the tariff revocation with a 15% surcharge "a major relief to Indian gems and jewellery exporters," noting it would address the demand-supply vacuum created by earlier steep duties .
Textile exporters remain wary. Confederation of Indian Textile Industry chairman Ashwin Chandran said the developments "have cast a fresh spell of uncertainty," emphasizing that clarity on the interim deal's terms is urgently needed since the US remains India's single-largest textile market .
Chennai-based leather exporter Israr Ahmed struck a pragmatic note: "After the duty correction from 50% to 18%, prospects improved. Now with 15% global tariffs, we're on par with any nation. We just need to ensure India doesn't face additional tariffs under Section 301 or 232. Early closure of the bilateral agreement would help" .
What About Refunds?
A fascinating subplot involves potential refunds of the "illegal" tariffs collected since 2025. The US has gathered over $175 billion in tariffs, with more than 1,000 lawsuits already filed by American importers seeking reimbursement .
Some Indian exporters who shared the tariff burden with their US buyers might eventually recover portions of those payments—though Trump himself predicted this will "end up being in court for the next five years" .
The Road Ahead
The 15% tariff under Section 122 is temporary by design, expiring after 150 days unless Congress intervenes. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has signaled the administration will explore other authorities—Sections 232, 301, and 122—to maintain pressure on trading partners .
For India, the path forward requires careful navigation. The unchanged commitment from both sides to pursue a broader trade agreement remains, but the negotiating leverage has shifted. As one government official candidly admitted, waiting out the IEEPA litigation wasn't feasible—Trump had made the call, and the joint statement was already issued. But now, with the legal landscape transformed, Indian negotiators have room to breathe .
Bottom Line
The India-US trade relationship has entered uncharted waters. What began as a straightforward negotiation toward an interim deal has morphed into a complex recalibration exercise, with fundamental assumptions overturned by judicial intervention.
For now, exporters should watch closely as their governments hit the reset button—and hope the eventual outcome delivers the predictability that businesses crave.
.jpg)
.jpg)
