| 
						Exclusive: U.S. considers withdrawal of zero tariffs for 
						India - sources
		 Send a link to a friend 
		
		 [February 08, 2019]   
		By Sanjeev Miglani and Neha Dasgupta 
 NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India could lose a 
		vital U.S. trade concession, under which it enjoys zero tariffs on $5.6 
		billion of exports to the United States, amid a widening dispute over 
		its trade and investment policies, people with close knowledge of the 
		matter said.
 
 A move to withdraw the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) from 
		India, the world’s largest beneficiary of a scheme that has been in 
		force since the 1970s, would be the strongest punitive action against 
		India since President Donald Trump took office in 2017 vowing to reduce 
		the U.S. deficit with large economies.
 
 Trump has repeatedly called out India for its high tariffs.
 
 Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has courted foreign investment as 
		part of his Make-in-India campaign to turn India into a manufacturing 
		hub and deliver jobs to the millions of youth entering the workforce.
 
 Trump, for his part, has pushed for U.S. manufacturing to return home as 
		part of his Make America Great Again campaign.
 
		
		 
		
 The trigger for the latest downturn in trade ties was India’s new rules 
		on e-commerce that restrict the way Amazon.com Inc and Walmart-backed 
		Flipkart do business in a rapidly growing online market set to touch 
		$200 billion by 2027.
 
 That, coming on top of a drive to force global card payments companies 
		such as Mastercard and Visa to move their data to India and the 
		imposition of higher tariffs on electronic products and smartphones, 
		left a broader trade package the two sides were working on through last 
		year in tatters.
 
 The GSP was tied to the trade package and since that deal had slipped 
		further away, the United States was considering withdrawing or scaling 
		back the preferential arrangement, people familiar with the matter said.
 
 The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) was completing a review of India’s 
		status as a GSP beneficiary and an announcement was expected over the 
		next two weeks, they said.
 
 "(The two sides) were trying to sort out the trade package, but were not 
		able to actually finish the deal. In the meantime these other things, 
		data localization and e-commerce, have come along," one of them said. 
		"In a sense its like someone has rained on the parade."
 
 India and the United States have developed close political and security 
		ties. But bilateral trade, which stood at $126 billion in 2017, is 
		widely seen to be performing at nearly a quarter of its potential.
 
 U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross is due in New Delhi next week where 
		he is expected to raise concerns about the e-commerce policy and data 
		localization, officials said.
 
 VARIOUS NEW POLICIES
 
 New Indian rules announced in December for the e-commerce sector banned 
		companies such as Amazon and Flipkart from striking exclusive deals with 
		sellers, restricted their ability to offer discounts and barred them 
		from selling products via vendors in which they have an equity interest.
 
 The move disrupted product listings on Amazon's India website and forced 
		it to change its business structures. Amazon and Walmart, as well as the 
		U.S. government, had lobbied against the move, Reuters reported earlier.
 
		
            [to top of second column] | 
            
			 
            
			 U.S. President Donald 
			Trump holds a bilateral meeting with India's Prime Minister Narendra 
			Modi alongside the ASEAN Summit in Manila, Philippines November 13, 
			2017. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst/File Photo 
            
			 
The new rules, coming ahead of a general election, were seen as a bid by Modi to 
placate small traders, who had for years complained about business practices of 
large e-commerce players.
 They form a key voter base for Modi who is facing a tightening election in the 
next few months.
 
 The idea of the policy was to foster healthy competition and promote India’s 
e-commerce, an Indian government official involved in trade issues said, 
defending the curbs on the big firms.
 
 But companies disagree and decry such sudden policy changes.
 
"These types of actions can really put a negative view on India as an investment 
destination," one of the sources said.
 India last year also announced proposals to force foreign companies to store 
more of their user data locally, in a bid to better conduct legal 
investigations. U.S. lobby groups had voiced concerns about those proposals too, 
saying they made it difficult for companies to do business in the country.
 
 POSSIBLE INDIA SETBACK
 
 If the United States eliminates duty-free access for about 2,000 Indian product 
lines, it will mostly hurt small businesses such as jewelry, said one of the 
sources. The number of goods qualifying for preferential treatment could be 
reduced, or the whole program could be withdrawn.
 
 There was no response to a request for comment from the USTR or the U.S. 
Embassy. India's trade ministry also did not answer questions emailed to them 
about trade differences with the United States.
 
 
But an Indian government official briefed on the trade discussions said the 
trade package under which the two sides were negotiating better access to each 
other's farm and dairy markets was unlikely until the elections in India this 
spring.
 Talks on U.S. demands to relax India's decision to cap prices of medical devices 
made in the United States had also got stuck, the official said.
 
 "The list of grievances is getting bigger, now with e-commerce added in," he 
said.
 
 India fears Trump may demand a free trade agreement if both sides fail to reach 
a compromise on the trade package. Such a pact would mean zero tariffs for U.S. 
goods arriving in India, further threatening local industry.
 
 (Additional reporting by Aditya Kalra; Editing by Nick Macfie)
 
				 
			[© 2019 Thomson Reuters. All rights 
				reserved.] Copyright 2019 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, 
			broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.  
			Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |