NEW DELHI: In a development that could reshape US foreign trade policy and geopolitical alignments, US President Donald Trump has backed a Senate bill proposing sweeping 500% tariffs on countries maintaining economic ties with Russia.
The legislation, known as the 'Sanctioning Russia Act', seeks to economically isolate Moscow by penalising third-party nations — including India and China — that continue importing large volumes of Russian oil.
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who introduced the bill earlier this year, confirmed Trump’s support during an interview with ABC News.
“If you’re buying products from Russia and you’re not helping Ukraine, then there’s a 500 percent tariff on your products coming into the United States,” Graham said. “India and China buy 70 percent of Putin’s oil. They keep his war machine going.”
Graham added that the bill has already attracted 84 Senate co-sponsors, including prominent Democrats such as Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), signalling rare bipartisan consensus on tightening economic pressure on the Kremlin.
A companion bill in the House is also gaining traction, underlining growing political urgency in Washington to escalate costs for countries seen as indirectly financing Russia’s war in Ukraine.
Strategic gamble or bargaining chip?
If enacted, the proposed tariffs would mark a significant escalation in the US economic campaign against Russia, with wide-ranging global implications. The bill targets not only Russian goods, but also imports from countries that maintain substantial trade relations with Moscow, particularly in the energy sector.
India and China, the two largest buyers of discounted Russian crude, are directly in the firing line. Their purchases have provided a critical economic lifeline to Russia, helping fund military operations in Ukraine even as Western sanctions have tightened.
The economic consequences could be far-reaching.
A 500% tariff on goods from China, which accounts for a major share of US consumer imports, could trigger price spikes, further strain fragile global supply chains, and risk inflationary surges and job losses in the US.
Similarly, India, a key US partner in pharmaceuticals, IT and textiles, could face reduced trade access just as it seeks to diversify and grow its export sectors.
Yet, the US itself remains dependent on enriched uranium imports from Russia to fuel its nuclear reactors — a reliance that could put its energy interests at odds with the very sanctions it aims to enforce.
The bill, first introduced in March, initially encountered resistance from the Trump-aligned administration. According to The Wall Street Journal, the White House had sought to soften the draft by changing enforcement from mandatory (“shall”) to discretionary (“may”), thereby preserving executive flexibility.
Graham appears to have accommodated those concerns.
In recent weeks, he offered a carve-out for countries actively supporting Ukraine, likely to address European apprehensions and secure broader international support. “We are going to give President Trump a tool in the toolbox,” Graham said, referring to the bill’s latest version. “For the first time yesterday, the president told me … ‘It’s time to move your bill.’”
Trump’s direct intervention, reportedly during a golf game with Graham, could accelerate legislative momentum. However, how the bill evolves through Congress remains to be seen, and more critically, whether Trump would ultimately enforce it or use it as a strategic bargaining chip with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The legislation could also serve as leverage in potential negotiations with Russia. Trump could, for instance, use the threat of punitive tariffs against India, China or even European partners to extract concessions from Putin on Ukraine. To a degree, this duality — rhetorical toughness paired with tactical flexibility — has long characterised Trump’s approach to foreign policy.
India, which maintains that its Russian oil purchases are legal and aligned with national energy security interests, could find itself in an increasingly precarious position if the bill passes. It may be forced to intensify diplomatic engagement with Washington.
Although still making its way through legislative channels, the Sanctioning Russia Act signals an escalation in US sanctions policy.
With broad bipartisan support and Trump’s personal endorsement, its passage appears increasingly likely. Whether it is used as an enforcement tool or a diplomatic lever, however, remains uncertain — as does the possibility of Trump changing course midway.
