US lawmakers move resolution to end 50% tariffs on India

Democratic lawmakers in the US House have introduced a resolution to terminate President Donald Trump’s national emergency that imposed tariffs of up to 50 per cent on Indian imports, calling the move illegal and harmful to jobs, consumers and US-India ties.

Washington: A group of influential Democratic lawmakers have introduced a resolution in the US House of Representatives to terminate the 50 per cent tariff on imports from India, which they describe as illegal and economically damaging.

Led by Indian American Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi, along with Congresswoman Deborah Ross and Congressman Marc Veasey, the resolution moves to terminate President Donald Trump’s national emergency authorising tariffs of up to 50 per cent on imports from India, which they describe as illegal and economically damaging.

---

The initiative follows a bipartisan, Senate-passed measure to end tariffs imposed on Brazil and curb what lawmakers see as the president’s misuse of emergency authorities to raise import duties.

According to the sponsors, the resolution would terminate the national emergency that President Trump invoked under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs on Indian products. It would also rescind the additional 25 per cent “secondary” duties that took effect on August 27, layered on top of earlier reciprocal tariffs. Together, those actions raised duties on many Indian-origin goods to as high as 50 per cent.

“President Trump’s irresponsible tariff strategy toward India is a counterproductive approach that weakens a critical partnership,” Congressman Krishnamoorthi said. “Instead of advancing American interests or security, these duties disrupt supply chains, harm American workers, and drive up costs for consumers. Ending these damaging tariffs will allow the United States to engage with India to advance our shared economic and security needs,” he said.

Ross said the impact of the tariffs extends beyond Washington’s trade policy debates and is being felt directly in states such as North Carolina, which has close commercial and community ties with India.

“North Carolina’s economy is deeply connected to India through trade, investment, and a vibrant Indian American community,” she said. “Indian companies have invested over a billion dollars and created thousands of good-paying jobs in our state – especially in the Research Triangle’s life sciences and technology sectors.”

Ross asserted that the relationship is two-way, with North Carolina manufacturers exporting large volumes of goods to India each year.

“Meanwhile, North Carolina manufacturers export hundreds of millions of dollars in goods to India each year, including pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and advanced machinery,” Ross said. “When Trump destabilizes this relationship with illegal tariffs, he puts North Carolina jobs, innovation, and our long-term competitiveness at risk.”

Veasey, in a statement, underscored the consumer impact of the tariffs, particularly amid broader affordability pressures across the United States. “India is an important cultural, economic, and strategic partner, and these illegal tariffs are a tax on everyday North Texans who are already struggling with affordability at every level,” he said.

The three lawmakers have emerged as leading voices in Congress opposing the Trump administration’s tariff agenda and pressing for a reset in US-India relations.

In October, Ross, Veasey and Krishnamoorthi joined Congressman Ro Khanna of California and 19 other House members in urging President Trump to repair what they described as America’s strained relationship with India and to reverse tariff policies they view as harmful.

Supporters of the resolution argue that using emergency powers to impose wide-ranging tariffs sidesteps legislative authority and creates uncertainty for businesses and workers on both sides of the trade relationship.

Ending the India tariffs, they say, fits into a wider effort to stop the president from “using emergency powers to unilaterally impose his misguided trade policies,” and to restore predictability to US trade relations with key partners.