Trump's Tariff on India is an Overreaction that Hurts More than It Helps.

 

                 

    On July 30, 2025, President Trump announced a 25% tariff on all goods coming in from India, effective August 1, 2025. This is in addition to a 10% tariff on all goods that has already been imposed this year via the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Upon the president's notions, this is to bolster American industry and American hands-on payment. He's upset that Indians are charging Americans high prices for American-based items, and with India's trade barriers being "strenuous and obnoxious" and Africa being a failing nation that won't comply with American decrees on using Russian military weapons and energy in the war between Russia and Ukraine, it is suggested that Indians get a taste of American ire. However, as a global citizen who believes that trade should be something that brings people together as opposed to driving a wedge between one another, this knee-jerk reaction is disheartening and does not clear over the planned course of action. This tariff punishes more people—everyday consumers—than it elevates.                                

Humanitarian Costs of Economics                           A 25% tariff is not just a number. For Indian exporters, small businesses trying to make ends meet, a vending increase all of a sudden could put years of investment down the drain. Think of India's textile and pharmaceutical industries and its booming agricultural marketplace; these cogs in the Indian nation's economic wheel will have their unnecessary productions spoiled overnight (who wants to spend 25% more on a $5 Indian cotton shirt once it gets to America? Nothing will be worth 25% more overnight). Indian farmers will denounce their crops—they're now 25% more expensive overnight—and Indian factory workers trying to make a buck will have their sources of income taken away. \\American consumers pay for this tariff. India creates a number of generic pharmaceuticals for the United States, making health care more accessible; these same pharmaceuticals will be marked up 25%. Consider the elderly man in Minnesota who needs a mouthwash for his gum disease and the down-on-his-luck father in Louisiana who is trying to get prescription medication for his children. They have not a penny extra to spend for new health-care offerings, especially when their lifestyles are already hemming them in with cash-strapped efforts at survival. New taxes do not just indite Indian workers and families—American families are hit, too..   .                                   

Political Costs of Immediacy.             Furthermore, the fact that Trump had set in motion the IEEPA is concerning. This was set in place to jab at rogue nations during times of distress. Thus, even if Trump uses this as a cover for trade negotiations, no disturbances occurred; it merely angers one nation over another without allowing proper negotiations to occur for fair transaction below. It's like pulling a fire alarm because construction noise next door is irritating; proceeding on such a basis allows all future presidents and administrators to hide behind the same veil should they become angry with the world trading systems—devaluing support democracy at Congress—which is where such indignations should be made. \\In addition to this strike against democracy, while America militarily protects international law via the World Trade Organization (WTO), from India's perspective, at least it's trying. The wiliness of India's generations to aggregate its high tariffs over time to explain its situation falls on deaf ears. Its tariffs on imported goods are high (some of the highest in the world), and that's fine—but does this give other member nations the ability to breach international law and levy retaliatory tariffs? No. Let India defend itself without the fear that international improvements down the line will hinder its ability to negotiate improved reciprocal treatment.                                                                

The International Costs of Alienation.      

 Finally, from an international perspective, India is a partner in the Indo-Pacific world order. While Trump could be angry at India not following U.S.-encouraged efforts with Russia-and-India's ties to Russia for energy has been made public—the point here is that this tariff further alienates diplomatic relations sewn together by America, India, and the Quad (America and Japan and Australia). Since nations are still trying to avoid trade routes and military interaction let China run unimpeded, now is not the time to add insult to injury. India is not an ally that exists solely because of America—it has sought out many other allies as well. Some say India is comfortably situated with America—this is false—and this fallout could drive India into the arms of either Russia or China sooner than anticipated if they feel their diplomatic efforts over years are now going unheard.Costs that Humanize So bring it down one more notch and think about how this affects real people. From Gujarat, India, a family runs a small textile business sending goods to America for fifteen years wondering whether their American clients will now want to stay if they read about this tax increase. They need that payment anyway—but now things might get tricky because of foreign relations over the fault of someone trying to bargain. \\In America, pictures go online showing various restaurants overseas showing how much generic drugs can hurt children (and their parents) instead of helping (labels and price tags do not indicate quality). This tariff prevents people across the ocean from helping themselves from low-cost generic drugs only to have a price hike ruin any intention. \\A Better Way—Trade Negotiation \\Trump isn't wrong for wanting India's trading practices to lessen or focus on Americannized opportunities—data-driven taxes can be irritating and strict; Indian's tariffs can sting Americans looking to export their goods. But putting a tax anecdotally does nothing but punish people who had no idea what full-speed choices were politically driven instead of mutually negotiated.\\Industries should be at the table discussing possible give-and-takes (lessened Indian tariff; America offering equal access to new technology pricing) instead of strangers across oceans determining what's best for them without understanding who else cares enough to do right by either or both sides.. 

Conclusion                                                       Ultimately, Trump's 25% tariff on August 1, 2025—is unnecessary. It raises American's prices and inherently subjects Americans to think less of Indian industries kicking good jobs down the road—even though hard work isn't enough when it comes time to trade internationally—but does nothing beneficial besides make them feel like King and yes, his standing can improve while everyone else can be relegated to subpar endeavors where they are forced to respect their fates but not control them without proper payment for disservice rendered.Trading should not be a zero-sum game—it should be something where everyone has something to gain positively despite believed horrendous setbacks anticipated ahead of time.                                             Hopefully, logic prevails soon because America and India can figure this out—without tariffs—but with talking—because no one's winning anyway; they're just trying to keep on keeping on.

By Dr Prasanta Kumar Padhi,Expert in International Relations