Or “big, beautiful” transaction in trouble?

Does the “big, beautiful” trading deal in India-will slip?

In a few days, to pass until July 9, the US President Donald Trump administration was hoped, hopes to stop the temporary trading pact between Delhi and Washington will remain alive but more confused in tough negotiations.

Despite the White House press secretary Carolyn Levit Hizing that the transaction was inevitable, and in response to Trump’s statement with Trump’s statement, Trump will have to trade with Delhi that Delhi welcomes “great, beautiful” – in response to Trump’s statement that the trading deal from Delhi will “open” the Indian market – the negotiating participants remain blocked.

The key points are followed, especially in access to agriculture, automatic components and tariffs on Indian steel.

Indian trading officials extended their stay in Washington to the next round of negotiations, even if Delhi’s signals “Very big red lines” On the farm and dairy products, and the US press wide market holes. The tone remains optimistic – but the window to make a deal is narrowed.

“The next seven days can determine whether India and the US can agree with a limited” mini-year “or moving away from the negotiating table,” says Aji Srivstava, a former Indian trade official who manages the global trade research initiative (GTRI), Delhi Analytical Center.

This uncertainty depends on several key outbreak points – no more controversial than agriculture.

“There are two real problems to conclude an initial agreement. The first in the list is access to the US main agriculture market. India will need to defend its main agricultural and political reasons,” said BBC Richard Rosov, which tracks India’s economy at the Washington Strategic and International Studies Center.

For many years, Washington has pushed to more access to the Indian agricultural sector, considering it as the main unused market. But in India there is brutally defended itReferring to food security, livelihood and the interests of millions of small farmers.

Mr. Rosov says “the second issue is non-tariff barriers in India. Problems such as a growing set of” Quality Control “(QCO) are significant obstacles to US market access and may be difficult for meaningful trading deal.”

The United States has caused concern about what India calls the growing and drafted import rules. More than 700 QCOs – part of “Independent India” – seek to stop the import of substandard and promotion of domestic production. Suman Berry, a senior member of the Government Analytical Center Niti Aayog, also called these rules “malignant interventions”, which limits imports and increases the costs of internal and small industries.

The elephant in the room is an export of farms. India and US farms remain modest at $ 8 billion, and India exports rice, shrimp and spices, and the United States sends nuts, apples and lentils. But since the progress in trade negotiations, Washington is looking at the greater export of farms – corn, soybeans, cotton and corn – to help narrower trade deficits of $ 45 billion with India.

Experts are afraid of tariff concessions that may put pressure on India to weaken their minimum support prices (MSP) and public procurement – key protection that enclose farmers from accidents, guaranteeing fair prices and stable harvest purchases.

“No tariff cuts are expected for dairy products or key foods, such as rice and wheat, where they relate to the state on farms. These categories are politically and economically sensitive, affecting more than 700 million people in the rural economy of India,” says Mr. Srivstak.

Interestingly, the recent Niti Aayog document recommends tariff cuts on US farms – including rice, dairy products, poultry, corn, apples, almonds and GM – under the proposed trading pact of India and the USA. It is unclear, however, whether the proposal of official thinking of the government or remains a policy on paper.

“If the US said that” not a deal “, if India does not include access to basic agriculture, then clearly US expectations were not established correctly. Any government that is distinguished by political restrictions on the choice of commercial policy,” says Mr. Rosov.

So what can happen to the deal now?

Experts such as Mr. Srivastava believe that “a more likely result is a limited trading pact” -style after May 8, announced by the American -Uk -Min -Trade Deal.

According to the proposed transaction, India can reduce tariffs for a number of industrial goods – including cars, long -standing demand in the US – and offer limited access to agricultural access through tariff cuts and quotas on individual products such as ethanol, almonds, walnuts, apples, ovoca.

In addition to tariff cuts, the US is likely to push India to large -scale commercial purchases – from oil and BCG to Boeing, helicopters and nuclear reactors. Washington can also seek the FDI weakening in retail trade, benefits firms such as Amazon and Walmart, and ease of product processing rules.

“This” mini -speech “, if it is over, would be focused on reducing tariffs and strategic commitments, leaving more problems with FTA – including trade services, intellectual property rights (IP) and digital rules – for future negotiations,” says Mr.

At the beginning, trade talks in India and the US were justified in a clear and fair vision.

“Two leaders (Trump and Modi) outlined a simple concept in their first summit this year. The United States will focus on the produced goods in capital, while India will focus on items working at work,” says Mr. Rosov. But since then everything has changed.

When negotiations fail, experts believe that Trump is unlikely to resume 26% of the tariffs for India.

While the 57 countries have encountered these levies in April, the UK has yet made a deal. Signing on India may seem unfair. “However, the surprises can not be ruled out with Trump,” says Mr. Srivstava.