- | 7:30 pm
India says White House edits reflect shared understanding on US trade deal
New Delhi reaffirmed the 7 February joint statement as the basis for negotiations after the White House softened language on purchases, tariffs and digital trade in its updated factsheet
India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said revisions to a White House fact sheet on the proposed interim India-US trade agreement do not alter the substance of the understanding between the two countries, insisting the 7 February joint statement remains the basis for the talks.
Speaking at a weekly media briefing on Thursday, MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said the amendments “reflect the shared understandings contained in the joint statement” and that both sides will now work toward implementing the framework and finalizing the interim agreement.
The clarification followed changes to the White House fact sheet that softened language around India’s commitments.
An earlier version of the US document said India “committed” to buy more American products and to purchase over $500 billion across categories that included agriculture. The revised version shifted that wording to India “intends” to buy more US products and removed references to “agricultural” categories.
References to “certain pulses” were also deleted from a list of items where tariffs would be reduced or eliminated. In addition, language stating that India would remove digital services taxes was dropped, with the updated version retaining only a commitment to negotiate digital trade rules.
The US did not issue a separate explanation before amending the documents online, according to Indian media reports.
The episode underscores the sensitivity of trade messaging in India, particularly on agriculture and digital taxation, as negotiations move from a political framework toward a legally binding interim agreement.
The timing is politically delicate. India witnessed a nationwide strike on 12 February led by trade unions and supported by farmer groups, with organizers citing labor codes, privatization and broader economic concerns. While the strike was not centered solely on the trade framework, opposition leaders have questioned aspects of the proposed agreement.



