India raised concerns at a U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) hearing, stating that the proposed 12.5% tariff lacks legal basis under Section 301. Dr. Brij Mohan from India’s Ministry of Commerce highlighted the absence of evidence linking India’s policies to harm on U.S. commerce. He urged the U.S. to reconsider its findings against India, emphasizing the need for country-specific evidence.
India argued that the USTR’s investigation relied on broad assumptions rather than specific evidence. Dr. Mohan pointed out that the absence of an import ban on forced labor does not imply permission for such practices. He stressed the importance of tailored policy measures to combat forced labor, rather than solely relying on import bans, as per the International Labour Organization’s approach.
Dr. Mohan emphasized that the USTR failed to demonstrate how India’s policies burden U.S. commerce, a key requirement under Section 301. He highlighted the insufficiency of evidence showing that the absence of import prohibitions in India unfairly benefits the country or harms U.S. industries. Referring to USTR data, he noted contradictions to the adverse findings against India, especially in product categories like cotton, rice, and tobacco.
India also contested the methodology used by the USTR in compiling parts of the report. Dr. Mohan criticized the methodology for lacking evidence linking inputs produced with forced labor to products exported from India to the U.S. He raised concerns about the proposed uniform 12.5% tariff on most Indian imports, citing flaws in the methodology that did not provide sector-specific or contract-specific evidence. Dr. Mohan urged the USTR to reconsider the proposed tariff in light of inconsistencies in the report and Federal Register notice.
