CHENNAI: India and the US remain actively engaged in talks on a bilateral trade deal, with the next round of discussions scheduled for Tuesday, 13 January, according to US ambassador to India Sergio Gor, who has just taken charge as America’s envoy in New Delhi.
Gor said on Monday that the two countries are continuing regular dialogue on the complex negotiations and are determined to keep momentum in what both sides hope will become a comprehensive agreement.
According to reports, Gor described the partnership between India and the US as strong and resilient, underlining that even when disagreements arise, they can be addressed through continued engagement and dialogue. The ambassador emphasised the close personal relationship between the leadership in Washington and New Delhi, noting that such ties are an asset in navigating trade and economic issues and in advancing broader bilateral cooperation.
The US ambassador stressed that while finalising a trade deal has its challenges, both sides are committed to the process and will continue to work through outstanding issues with follow-up discussions planned for the coming day. The comments signal that despite past delays and points of contention over tariffs and market access, diplomatic and economic channels remain open and active as India and the US seek common ground on a wide range of trade and economic concerns.
The ongoing effort between India and the US to negotiate a bilateral trade agreement has been marked by constructive engagement as well as deep-seated disagreements that have slowed progress and repeatedly brought negotiations to a standstill. Both sides have expressed commitment to advancing the talks, with regular dialogue and upcoming meetings scheduled to keep momentum alive. The U.S. views India as a critical economic partner, underscoring the strategic importance of the relationship, while India has made clear that it is ready to pursue a balanced agreement that protects its core economic interests.
The friction in the negotiations stems from a range of substantive economic and political concerns on both sides. One of the central issues has been tariffs and market access. The US has pressed India to lower import duties on a wide array of American agricultural products, including corn, soybeans, dairy, nuts and apples, seeking deeper access to India’s large consumer market.
For the US, reducing tariff barriers is tied to efforts to address its own agricultural surplus and support politically important farming constituencies. India, however, has been cautious about opening up sensitive sectors such as agriculture and dairy, where millions of smallholders and rural families depend on farming for their livelihoods. Reducing tariffs on heavily subsidised American farm goods could expose Indian farmers to unfair competition and risk destabilising rural economies, a politically difficult outcome for New Delhi to accept.
Another sticking point has been the structure of tariffs on industrial and manufactured goods. India has sought reciprocal tariff reductions on goods where its exporters have competitive strengths, such as textiles, leather goods, engineering products, gems and jewellery, and automotive components. New Delhi has also pushed back against steep U.S. tariffs on certain Indian exports, seeking more balanced treatment that would support job-intensive sectors at home. These divergent positions reflect broader challenges in aligning India’s development priorities—centered on job creation and industrial growth—with U.S. demands for greater access to Indian markets for specific high-value goods.
Beyond tariffs, there are disagreements over regulatory and non-tariff barriers, such as standards for food safety, certification requirements for telecom and technology products, and rules governing data flows and intellectual property. The US has pressed for stronger intellectual property enforcement and reduced restrictions on digital services and data transfers, while India has been cautious, citing the need to protect domestic industries, data privacy, and digital autonomy. These technical yet critical issues have complicated efforts to bridge the two sides’ negotiating positions.
India has also sought reinstatement of preferential trade status under U.S. programs that grant duty-free treatment to eligible developing countries, a designation that lapsed in recent years and remains a topic of interest in the current talks. At the same time, the imposition of high additional tariffs by the US in response to India’s past energy purchasing decisions introduced an element of tension, making tariff concessions and pricing disputes a flashpoint in the discussions.
Despite these challenges, both governments continue to frame the talks as a work in progress rather than a breakdown in relations. Indian trade officials highlight that many issues have been discussed extensively and that most major concerns can be resolved with continued dialogue. U.S. negotiators, while acknowledging the difficulty of some demands, have repeated their interest in a deal that expands trade and investment ties without forcing either side into politically untenable concessions.
The complexity of these negotiations reflects not just economic calculation but also domestic political imperatives in both capitals. In India, safeguarding farmers and labour-intensive industries remains a priority, while in the US, agricultural states and industry groups exert strong influence over trade policy. These internal pressures mean that finding common ground requires careful calibration of concessions on both sides.