25 US states challenge Trump tariffs on India, others
The states argue the tariffs, covering countries responsible for 99.4% of US imports, exceed executive authority and risk significant economic consequences nationwide.
- The 25-state coalition filed the case in the US Court of International Trade on August 3.
- Tariffs range from 10% to 12.5% and cover 60 economies, including India, the EU and China.
- States argue the tariffs exceed presidential authority and will raise costs for consumers and businesses.
- India faces a 10% rate after amending its foreign trade policy to ban forced-labour imports.
- The suit claims the forced-labour rationale is a pretext to reinstate previously blocked global tariffs.
- Critics say the USTR skipped required investigations and ignored public comments contradicting its claims.
Washington: A coalition of 25 Democratic-led US states has challenged President Donald Trump’s decision to impose tariffs on 60 economies, including India. The states contend that the measure, which affects countries accounting for 99.4% of US imports, exceeds the administration’s authority and could have far-reaching economic consequences.
Last month, citing failure on the issue of forced labour, the US imposed a fresh round of tariffs ranging between 10 per cent and 12.5 per cent on these 60 countries to replace the 10 per cent global levies that expired on July 24.
The states joining the lawsuit include New York, California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Washington, Wisconsin and 18 others, along with the governors of Kentucky and Pennsylvania, say reports.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, Governor Kathy Hochul and the coalition of the Democratic states are asking the Court of International Trade to declare these tariffs illegal.
India faces 10 per cent tariff. India, along with 16 other countries, faces a 10-per cent tariff rate. Earlier, the US had proposed a 12.5-per cent tariff rate for India.
The reprieve followed India amending its foreign trade policy on June 14 to ban imports of goods made with forced labour.
While the administration claims to be using Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to combat forced labour in global trade, the lawsuit argues that this is a pretext for imposing the same sweeping tariffs the administration has repeatedly tried and failed to enact, the statement said.
It said the administration has violated the law by failing to follow Section 301 requirements for imposing tariffs and implementing new tariffs without any clear connection to their stated goal of combating forced-labour practices.
The lawsuit details how the tariffs are arbitrarily imposed, with little connection to the administration’s stated goal of combatting forced labour.
It contends that the tariffs contain product exemptions that undermine their supposed goal.
The lawsuit explains that the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) failed to engage with testimony from countries and comments submitted during the shortened development of these tariffs, which overwhelmingly contradicted the administration’s claims that the tariffs would address the harms of forced labour.