The Indian team negotiating the Indo-US trade agreement has postponed its scheduled visit to Washington following the US Supreme Court’s decision on Friday to invalidate reciprocal US tariffs imposed on partner countries, official sources said.
While exporters say they can absorb the 15 per cent global tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump as long as no new tariffs are added, experts suggest India should halt negotiations now or carefully recalibrate its position in light of the ruling.
Sources in the Ministry of Commerce said, “Both sides believe that the proposed visit of the Indian chief negotiator and the team will be scheduled after each side has sufficient time to evaluate the latest developments and their ramifications. The meeting will be rescheduled at a mutually convenient date.”
The Indian team was scheduled to visit Washington on February 23-25 to finalize the legal text of the interim trade agreement, the framework of which was approved by Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi on February 2.
Video credit: BusinessLine
Experts say India should not accept the deal, as envisioned by Trump, as it imposes stringent conditions on the country and things have changed on the tariff front. “In exchange for a reciprocal tariff rate of 18 percent, India was expected to make significant concessions — cutting tariffs, aligning economic policies with American interests, easing regulations affecting American goods, and signaling significant purchases of American products. Now, even without a trade agreement, without making any sacrifices, India, like other countries, faces a 15 percent tariff on most goods, making the negotiating arrangement cumbersome and one-sided,” noted Ajay Srivastava of Trade Research Authority. GTRI.
He added that the US Supreme Court ruling should prompt India to withdraw from the ongoing trade deal negotiations.
India’s decision not to send its negotiating team to the US immediately is a welcome one, and India must carefully recalibrate its position, said Abhijit Das, an independent trade expert and former head of the Center for World Trade Organization Studies.
“It (the Security Council resolution) reduces the pressure on us to make concessions in order to secure lower tariffs compared to our competitors. It remains to be seen whether our negotiators are able to benefit from this,” Das said.
Most Indian exporters of labour-intensive goods are relieved by the reduction in additional duties, but are concerned about Trump’s warning about duties under other headings in the future.
“After the tariff correction from 50 to 18 per cent/25 per cent, the outlook for India has improved again. Now with global tariffs of 15 per cent, India is on par with any country. We just have to make sure that India does not get any further tariffs under Sections 301 or 201. An early closure of the bilateral trade agreement will help in this regard,” said Israr Ahmed, a leather goods exporter in Chennai.
Sanjay Jain, an apparel and textile exporter, pointed out that the 15 per cent tariffs on Indian exporters after the US Supreme Court ruling are almost at the levels agreed in the trade deal (18 per cent), so not much has changed on the tariff front. With things changing so quickly, Jain said there was no point in overestimating the situation. “We must now just focus on work and let the game continue,” he said.
There is also hope of a refund of some of the “illegal” tariffs paid since 2025. “Some exporters and buyers have been sharing the burden of mutual tariffs (from August to September 2025). Now if there are refunds, these exporters may get their share back,” said Ajay Sahai of FIEO.
Last week, the US Supreme Court ruled by a vote of 6 to 3 that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which Trump used to impose “reciprocal” tariffs, does not actually give the president the power to impose taxes or duties.
Trump immediately turned to Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows the president to bypass Congress and impose temporary surcharges on imports of up to 15% for a maximum of 150 days to address a “large and serious” balance of payments deficit.
Posted on February 22, 2026
