“100% Tariff Could Destroy India–US Trade”: Shashi Tharoor Warns Against Trump’s Threat Over Russian Oil Imports

New Delhi: Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has issued a stern warning following former US President Donald Trump’s recent proposal to impose a 25% tariff—and potentially much higher penalties—on Indian goods, citing India’s continued oil and gas trade with Russia.

Calling it a “very serious matter” for India’s economy and global trade relations, Tharoor emphasized that the consequences could be devastating if such threats materialize. “The proposed tariff may not stop at 25%. With penalties added, it could rise to 35–45%. Some even speak of a 100% penalty, which would destroy our trade with America,” he said.

The United States is India’s largest export destination, with annual exports exceeding $87 billion. A sharp hike in tariffs could threaten key sectors such as pharmaceuticals, textiles, engineering goods, and information technology services.

Tharoor believes this could be a hardball negotiation strategy from Trump amid broader India–US trade talks. “The negotiations are still ongoing, and there is a possibility the tariffs may not go that high. But if they do, it will severely damage our export industry,” he stated.

Insisting that Indian negotiators must take a firm stand, Tharoor warned against bowing to unfair pressure. “If America’s demands are unreasonable, our side must resist. India must defend its economic sovereignty. Our trade decisions with Russia are rooted in national interest,” he said.

Responding to criticism about India’s tariff regime, Tharoor clarified that the average tariff on US goods stands at around 17%, which he argued is neither excessive nor unfair. “The truth is, American goods are often not competitively priced enough for the Indian market. It’s not about restrictions, it’s about economics,” he added.

Tharoor’s remarks come at a time when India faces increasing global scrutiny for its energy ties with Russia amid the Ukraine war. However, Indian policymakers have consistently defended their position, citing energy security and strategic autonomy.