It seems that President Donald Trump is not approaching India with the same vigor he is employing to intimidate other countries when it comes to tariffs.
On July 9, 2025, Trump intensified his global trade pressure campaign by sending formal tariff warning letters to several countries after missing his self-imposed deadline for implementing new trade measures.
The letters, addressed to leaders of the Philippines, Brunei, Moldova, Algeria, Iraq, Libya, and Sri Lanka, warned that their exports to the U.S. could face new tariffs ranging from 20% to 30% unless trade agreements were reached by August 1.
READ: Trump shifts on immigration, supports undocumented farm labor (July 9, 2025)
Brazil was singled out for a steep 50% tariff, which Trump linked to the prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro. This move followed a first wave of tariffs announced on July 7 against 14 countries, including Japan, South Korea, and several Southeast Asian and African nations, with duties ranging from 25% to 40%.
The White House emphasized that while tariffs are imminent, negotiations remain open. The letters stated that tariff rates could be negotiated or modified depending on each country’s willingness to negotiate. So far, only the UK and Vietnam have finalized partial trade frameworks. Talks with major partners like the EU, India, Japan, and South Korea remain unresolved. The approach has raised concerns among economists and business leaders who fear increased consumer prices and disruptions to global supply chains.
However, India has not yet received such a letter from Trump, though it is a significant exporter to the US.
The Economic Times described New Delhi’s avoidance of “the public wrath” of the U.S. president as “a quiet diplomatic victory.”
The fact that India has not yet received a formal tariff warning letter from Trump, unlike many other nations, carries strategic significance for both countries. From the US standpoint, this suggests that India is still viewed as a vital economic and geopolitical partner with whom dialogue is ongoing or potentially close to resolution. It may indicate that the U.S. prefers to preserve leverage and flexibility with India, rather than risk a breakdown in trade or diplomatic ties by issuing threats too early. This is particularly important given India’s growing role in global supply chains and its positioning as a counterbalance to China in the Indo-Pacific region.
For India, not receiving a letter offers a temporary reprieve and an opportunity. It means India remains in a negotiation window and may still be able to shape a favorable trade arrangement without the pressure of imminent tariffs. However, it also signals that the US expects progress or cooperation. The absence of a letter doesn’t guarantee exemption; it may simply reflect a strategic delay or ongoing backchannel talks.
In broader terms, this reflects the complex nature of modern trade diplomacy. Tariffs are not just economic tools; they’re used to signal alliances, exert pressure, and reward cooperation. India’s position, for now, appears to be that of a key swing partner, one that Washington hopes to align with economically and strategically, but which must still navigate its own interests carefully. This deliberate exclusion signals that the U.S. is keeping diplomatic channels open with India, likely in hopes of finalizing a trade agreement without escalating tensions. Whether this turns into a deal or a delayed confrontation remains to be seen.