Government says agriculture and dairy have been protected in the India–US trade deal, but no formal text has been released
US claims of greater access for farm exports have raised concerns among Indian farmers’ groups
Experts warn headline figures on trade flows may reflect long-term political signalling rather than binding commitments
Farmers fear subsidised US produce could undercut domestic prices if tariffs are reduced
Union Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal told Parliament on February 4, 2026 that India has been successful in safeguarding its agriculture and dairy sectors in the India-United States (US) trade deal.
His statement came amid growing debate over the scope and implications of the agreement, particularly for sectors traditionally treated as sensitive in India’s trade negotiations.
Since February 2, when US President Donald Trump announced that a trade deal between the two countries had been reached, there have been concerns about the nature of the commitments involved.
Trump said the US would reduce its “reciprocal tariff” on Indian goods from 50 per cent to 18 per cent. In return, India would move to cut tariffs and non-tariff barriers on US products to zero. However, it remains unclear how many products are covered under this ‘zero’ tariff commitment and whether agriculture and dairy are included in any form.
India has historically viewed agriculture and dairy as highly sensitive sectors, given their direct links to rural livelihoods, food security and domestic producers. Against this backdrop, uncertainty persists over which specific products, if any, could enter the Indian market at zero or substantially reduced duties under the agreement.
Addressing the Lok Sabha on February 4, Goyal said that after a year of negotiations, “India has ensured that its sensitive sectors, especially agriculture and dairy, have been taken into account. India has been successful in safeguarding its interests. There were also certain sectors on the American side that were sensitive from their perspective.”
However, ambiguity deepened after US Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins said in a social media post that the deal would allow greater exports of American farm products to India, describing it as a major win for American farmers and rural communities.
The absence of a formal joint statement or a negotiated legal text has added to the uncertainty. There is little clarity on enforcement mechanisms, dispute resolution processes or timelines for implementation, raising questions about how political announcements will translate into binding trade rules.
In his social media post, Trump also said India would buy over $500 billion worth of US goods.
India’s current annual imports of goods and energy from the US are under $50 billion, according to Ajay Srivastava, founder of the think-tank Global Trade Research Initiative.
“Reaching $500 billion would likely require more than 20 years, suggesting the figure refers to a long-term aspiration rather than a near-term commitment. Until there is a joint statement, negotiated text, and clarity on enforcement, this should be seen as a political signal — not a final deal. Caution, not celebration, is needed,” he said.
On February 4, Goyal said the framework of the agreement would be announced after the completion of the process.
“I would like to inform the members that, with regard to the next steps, both sides will work together to complete the necessary technical procedures related to the trade agreement and finalise the documentation, so that its full potential can be realised,” he said.
Farmers’ organisations, however, remain unconvinced.
“People are apprehensive that something is being concealed. If there is clarity, then what is the need to hide it? US agricultural products are heavily subsidised and we can’t compete with them in the international market. How will the government protect the farmers?” said Yudhvir Singh of the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU).
The US government is among the world’s largest agricultural subsidisers, providing support exceeding 100 per cent of the value of production for some crops. In certain years, US farmers received subsidies ranging from 50 per cent to 215 per cent on cotton, sugar, rice, wool and coffee.
Farmers’ groups fear that any duty-free access could flood Indian markets with cheap, subsidised imports, destabilising domestic prices and harming local producers.
The Indian Coordination Committee of Farmers Movements (ICCFM) had last year urged the government to exclude all aspects of agriculture from the US trade deal to protect farmers’ interests.
In a letter to Goyal, the ICCFM warned of serious consequences of granting duty-free access to US agricultural products, especially as the US has been engaged in trade disputes with China, Mexico and Canada since 2018, affecting its farm exports.
“For example, soybean exports from the US plummeted from $34.4 billion in 2022 to $24.5 billion in 2024, and corn exports fell from $18.6 billion to $13.9 billion during the same period1. As a result, the US trade deficit in agriculture has nearly doubled, indicating a significant surplus that they may seek to offload onto markets like India,” it had said.
Meanwhile, K V Biju, national coordinator of the farmers’ group Rashtriya Kisan Mahasangh, pointed to past trade decisions to underline why farmers remain sceptical of government assurances.
He said that during negotiations on the trade agreement with New Zealand, it was claimed that agriculture had been kept out of the deal, yet import duties on apples were later reduced by 25 per cent.
“For the sake of the success of the G20, import duties on apples, almonds and walnuts from the United States were quietly reduced. At the same time, while the United States was continuously increasing its import tariffs, India eliminated the import duty on cotton from October 2025 onwards,” he said.