Donald Trump’s introductory war: Trade expert collapses the warfare war of the United States and India, that consumers are the ones who lose more than others

When Donald Trump re -submitted a “mutual tariff” of Indian exports, it has prepared discussions on the real costs of fever – especially for consumers and global trading partners. While it is designed to punish what Trump sees unfair trade imbalances, this step puts a 26 % tariff on almost all Indian commodities heading to the United States. It is a bold and destructive gesture – but who really ends up?

In response to the customs tariff decision, a trade professional has clearly implicit the effects of a detailed publication that raised online discussion quickly.

“What is the tariff amount? 26 % on all goods exports from India to the United States, with certain exceptions,” the expert wrote.

Who is sufficient for this cost? “On a large scale, American consumers will be. The importing company in the United States will pay the definitions, but it is likely to be transferred to consumers. Just like how to pay high customs duties in India and the consumer.”

Despite the height, Indian exporters are not out of the game. “For most of our exports, our competitors are China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Bangladesh and Turkey. The American definitions of all of them are higher than those in India (except Turkey). Therefore, our competitive products in the American market will not lose.

A specific source of anxiety is luxurious goods: “For example, we export precious stones and semi -precious stones of the United States. The demand may decrease with high prices.”

On India’s possible response, the professional predicted a cautious path. “On a large scale, yes, but not immediately, except perhaps on some specific goods. Negotiations with a trade agreement with the United States began. If it leads to a temporary agreement by the fall of 2025, India will see the definitions of a group of American goods.

What the United States seeks from India is an expansion: “low definitions of cars, agricultural products, dairy and more. Protecting stronger intellectual property for American companies, especially pharmaceutical companies. There is no MSP for Indian farmers on rice and wheat.”

The commercial expert warned against surrender very easily: “The decrease in customs tariffs on agriculture or the removal of MSP will anger Indian farmers. Thus, allowing us to sell dairy products in India. We may offer a privilege on cheese.

Low definitions may mean cheaper imports – but there is hunting. “Yes, they will do. Less prices, more competition, good for consumers, at least in the short term.

The conversation turned into philosophical when one of them asked why India protects local gatherings at all. “Partially, yes, there is definitely a favorite capitalism in India. Yes, American companies threaten the interests of the major Indian blocs. But there is absolutely no certainty that American companies will work better … may enter into joint projects with Indian blocs and add to the problem.”

On the broader horizon, the professional saw an opportunity. “The United States is no longer the Linchpin that brings together the West together, and therefore the Western world order is separated. As a developing country with a huge and growing market, there are opportunities for India here … If we play our cards properly, India can convert huge investments to the country, bring jobs, development and prosperity.”

But it will not be easy. “The realization of this future will require incredible leadership, diplomacy and judgment. I will leave a judgment on whether we have it for you.”

When asked about how to finish the MSP end of the United States, the interpretation was explicit: “The American argument (which I do not agree with) is that India provides excessive MSP support for Indian farmers, which harms American farmers … MSP is usually higher than the local market price, which stimulates the decrease in the number of farmers, which stimulates the decrease in the number of farmers, and leads to a decrease in the number of farmers in India, It leads to a decrease in the number of farmers in India, and leads to a decrease in the number of farmers in India.