The recent U.S. decision to impose a 25% reciprocal tariff and an additional 25% penal levy on India’s exports marks a sharp turn in bilateral trade relations. While aimed at narrowing the U.S. trade deficit and influencing India’s crude sourcing from Russia, these measures risk slowing India’s GDP growth, widening the Current Account Deficit, and adding pressure on the rupee, making it a key test for India’s economic resilience in an era of rising protectionism.
Context:
The United States has imposed two major trade measures against India in August 2025:
- 25% Reciprocal Tariff (effective August 7) — in response to U.S. trade imbalance with India.
- 25% Penal Levy (effective August 29) — as a consequence of India’s continued oil imports from Russia.
Both actions together could significantly affect India’s exports, GDP growth, and the Current Account Deficit (CAD).
India–U.S.A Trade Snapshot:
- Merchandise trade surplus in 2024–25: $41.18 billion in India’s favour.
- The U.S. is targeting both exports and imports to narrow this gap.
- The penal levy also acts as a non-tariff barrier pushing India to source crude from costlier markets like the U.S. itself.
Potential Economic Implications for India
The combined effect of these tariffs and the penal levy could have severe consequences for India’s economic health.
- Impact on Trade Balance and Current Account Deficit (CAD):
- Export Decline: The immediate and most direct impact will be a sharp decline in India’s exports to the US. Assuming a high import elasticity of -1, the article suggests that exports could fall by 25%.
- Widening Trade Deficit: Even with this decline, the overall trade deficit for India is estimated to widen by about 0.56% of GDP.
- Current Account Deficit: It is projected to increase from 0.6% to 1.15% of GDP due to the US reciprocal tariffs alone.
- Effect on GDP Growth Rate:
-
- The decline in exports and the widening of the trade and current account deficits will have a ripple effect on the overall economy.
- When both the reciprocal tariffs and the penal levy are taken into account, the total reduction in the growth rate could be even more significant, exceeding 0.6 percentage points.
- Currency and Inflationary Pressures
-
- Currency Depreciation: This can happen due to the uncertainty and trade deficit. The rupee-dollar exchange rate has already seen pressure, hovering over ₹87.5 since the tariffs were announced.
- Inflation: A shift away from Russian oil towards potentially more expensive crude sources, coupled with rising global oil prices, could put significant pressure on domestic inflation.
India’s Strategic Response and Mitigating Factors:
- Diplomatic and Trade Negotiations:
-
- Negotiating with the US: There is still room for negotiation with the US, especially since a comprehensive trade deal has not been finalized.
- Highlighting Unilateralism: India needs to work with other nations to draw global attention to the discriminatory and inequitable nature of the US’s actions, particularly the penal levy imposed over oil imports.
- Domestic Policy Adjustments:
-
- Diversification of Export Markets: In the long term, reducing dependence on a single large market like the US is crucial.
- Review of Import Tariffs: India’s own import tariffs negatively affect its exports. A strategic review and reduction of these tariffs could boost export competitiveness by lowering input costs for Indian producers.
-
- New Trade Agreements: India’s recent Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the UK and ongoing negotiations with the European Union could help moderate the adverse impact on the CAD by opening up new markets.
- Exchange Rate: The depreciation of the rupee, while a sign of pressure, can also act as a natural buffer by making Indian exports cheaper and more competitive in global markets.
To counter the economic impact of US tariffs, India’s path forward must be two-fold: proactive diplomatic engagement to challenge protectionism, and focused domestic policy reforms to boost export competitiveness. By diversifying its trade partners and refining its own tariff policies, India can fortify its economic resilience against external shocks.
Value Addition:
Key Economic Terms
- Current Account Deficit (CAD) – when a country imports more goods, services, and capital than it exports.
- Import elasticity with respect to tariffs – percentage change in imports in response to a percentage change in tariffs.
- Non-tariff barriers – policy measures other than tariffs that restrict imports/exports (e.g., quotas, licensing).
- Merchandise trade surplus – when export value exceeds import value for goods.
- Exchange rate depreciation – decline in the value of a currency relative to others.
Mains Practice Question:
“Unilateral trade measures by major powers pose a significant challenge to the principles of free and fair trade. In light of recent US tariffs on India, discuss the potential economic consequences for India and critically evaluate the policy options available to mitigate these risks.” (Answer in 250 words)
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
The Parliamentary Committee on Welfare of Other Backward Classes (OBCs) has reiterated the need to revise the “creamy layer” income ceiling for OBC reservation benefits. It called the revision the “need of the hour”, citing inflation and rising income levels, which have rendered the current ₹8 lakh per annum limit (fixed in 2017) inadequate. The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (MoSJE), however, stated that there is currently no proposal under consideration for a revision.
Understanding the “Creamy Layer” Concept
- Introduced following the Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) judgment of the Supreme Court, which upheld 27% OBC reservation but excluded the socially advanced among them.
- The creamy layer criterion is an economic threshold: those above the prescribed annual family income are excluded from OBC reservation benefits.
- Initially set at ₹1 lakh (1993), it has been revised periodically, ₹2.5 lakh in 2004, ₹4.5 lakh in 2008, ₹6 lakh in 2013, ₹6.5 lakh in 2014, ₹8 lakh in 2017 (last revision)
- As per DoPT norms, revision should occur every 3 years.
OBC Reservations in India: Historical Background
Constitutional Foundation
- Article 15(4): Allows the State to make special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes (SEBCs), Scheduled Castes (SCs), and Scheduled Tribes (STs).
- Article 16(4): Empowers the State to provide reservation in appointments or posts in favour of any backward class not adequately represented in State services.
- Article 340: Empowers the President to appoint a commission to investigate conditions of backward classes and recommend measures.
Significance of Revising the Creamy Layer Limit
- Social Justice: Ensures benefits reach those who truly need them, keeping pace with economic changes.
- Reducing Inequality: Supports more OBC families in accessing education, jobs, and government schemes.
- Compliance with Policy Guidelines: DoPT’s 1993 order mandates periodic revisions.
Challenges
- Balancing Reservation Benefits: Avoiding over-expansion that may dilute benefits for the most marginalized.
- Economic vs. Social Backwardness: Income is only one indicator; social deprivation is harder to quantify.
- Political Consensus: Reservation policy changes are politically sensitive.
Committee’s Concerns on the Current ₹8 Lakh Threshold
- Erosion by Inflation: Rising basic income levels have reduced the effectiveness of the threshold.
- Exclusion of Needy Segments: Many OBC families in need of reservation benefits are above ₹8 lakh but still economically disadvantaged in terms of education and access to resources.
- Socio-Economic Goals: Wider coverage will help raise the social and educational status of more OBC families.
Way Forward
- Periodic & Transparent Revision: Institutionalize automatic inflation-indexed adjustments.
- Comprehensive Backwardness Index: Incorporate education, occupation, and rural/urban disparities along with income.
- Targeted Scholarships: Expand pre-matric support for lower classes to improve educational pipelines.
- Better Data: Conduct regular socio-economic surveys for evidence-based policy.
The creamy layer provision is a critical filter to ensure reservation benefits reach the truly disadvantaged among OBCs. With inflation and rising income levels, the current ₹8 lakh ceiling may no longer serve its purpose effectively. The Parliamentary Committee’s push for revision aligns with constitutional principles of equality and social justice, but implementation will require careful balancing of inclusivity, efficiency, and fairness.
Value Addition
|
Key Developments:
- First Backward Classes Commission (Kaka Kalelkar Commission, 1953) – recommended caste-based reservations, but not implemented due to lack of quantifiable data.
- Second Backward Classes Commission (Mandal Commission, 1979) – recommended 27% reservation for OBCs in government jobs and educational institutions, implemented in 1990.
- Indra Sawhney Case (1992) – capped total reservation at 50% and introduced the creamy layer exclusion for OBCs.
Recent Trends
- The 102nd Constitutional Amendment (2018) gave constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC).
- The 105th Constitutional Amendment (2021) restored the power of states to identify OBCs for their own purposes.
|
Mains Practice Questions:
- “Reservation for backward classes should be based on social and educational backwardness rather than economic criteria alone.” Discuss.
- The creamy layer in OBC reservation is a safeguard for ensuring equity within equity.’ Comment.
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Industrial accidents in India are neither rare nor accidental; they are recurring human tragedies rooted in systemic negligence, regulatory apathy, and corporate cost-cutting. From chemical plant explosions in Telangana to firecracker unit disasters in Tamil Nadu, these incidents underscore a grim reality, industrial safety in India is still treated as a compliance hurdle rather than a fundamental right.
Magnitude of the Problem
- 6,500 workers have died in the last five years in factories, construction sites, and mines averaging three fatalities every day in peacetime.
- Centre for Science and Environment (2022): Over 130 major chemical accidents in 30 months post-2020, causing 218 deaths and over 300 injuries.
- Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are disproportionately involved, often escaping robust inspections.
Root Causes of Industrial Accidents in India
- Regulatory Non-compliance:
- Factories operating without Fire Department No-Objection Certificates (NOCs).
- Missing or dysfunctional firefighting systems, alarms, and sensors.
- Unsafe Work Practices:
- Absence of permit-to-work systems for high-risk jobs.
- Migrant and contract workers without language-appropriate training or signage.
- Infrastructure Failures:
- Locked or blocked emergency exits.
- Poor maintenance of hazardous material storage.
- Weak Enforcement and Accountability:
- Safety audits treated as formalities.
- Negligible penalties and rare convictions for violations.
- Cultural Mindset:
- Safety seen as an “overhead” instead of a core operational value.
- Class bias — migrant and contract workers’ lives undervalued.
Comparative Global Perspective
- Germany, Japan: Safety is embedded into industrial design and workplace culture.
- South Korea, Singapore: Corporate manslaughter laws hold senior executives criminally liable for gross safety failures.
|
Policy and Governance Gaps in India
- Industrial safety boards are under-resourced.
- Weak whistle-blower protections discourage reporting of hazards.
- Digital risk-reporting systems are minimal or absent.
- Limited integration between labour inspection, pollution control boards, and disaster management authorities.
India-Specific Legal and Policy Framework
- Factories Act, 1948: Provides provisions on workplace safety, health, and welfare of workers, mandates fencing of machinery, safety officers, and periodic medical examinations.
- Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020: Consolidates 13 labour laws on safety and health, Introduces provisions for free annual health check-ups, safety committees, and hazard communication.
- Environment (Protection) Act, 1986: Framework law for protecting and improving environmental safety, including hazardous process management, Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules, 1989, Requires industries to prepare onsite and offsite emergency plans.
- Explosives Act, 1884 & Petroleum Act, 1934: Regulate storage, handling, and usage of explosive and flammable substances.
- Bhopal Gas Leak (Processing of Claims) Act, 1985: First special legislation to address industrial disaster victims’ compensation
- National Disaster Management Act, 2005: Guides chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear safety protocols through the NDMA.
Way Forward
- Strengthen Enforcement: Make industrial safety audits independent and transparent; link non-compliance to criminal liability.
- Digitisation: Use real-time IoT monitoring for hazard detection and compliance tracking.
- Worker Empowerment: Mandate safety training in local languages for all employees, especially contract labour.
- Corporate Accountability: Introduce Corporate Manslaughter Legislation for gross negligence causing worker deaths.
- Social Responsibility: Shift from post-accident compensation to pre-accident prevention culture.
Conclusion
Industrial accidents are not “acts of God” but acts of neglect. India possesses the legal framework to ensure safe workplaces, but without societal outrage, political will, and corporate responsibility, these frameworks remain on paper. For every worker who risks life and limb, industrial safety must be recognised and enforced as a right, not a privilege.
Practice Mains Question:
“Industrial accidents in India are not acts of fate but outcomes of systemic negligence.” Discuss the causes, implications, and reforms needed, with reference to recent incidents and existing legal frameworks.
(250 words, 15 marks)
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
The Union Cabinet has approved the Multidisciplinary Education and Research Improvement in Technical Education (MERITE) Scheme for implementation in 275 technical institutions across India.
About MERITE Scheme:
- Objective: Enhance quality, equity, and governance in technical education across all States and Union Territories, aligned with National Education Policy 2020.
- Funding: Central Sector Scheme with ₹4,200 crore outlay (2025–26 to 2029–30), including ₹2,100 crore as World Bank loan.
- Beneficiaries: About 7.5 lakh students; aims to boost institutional capacity in technical education.
- Collaborations: Works with Indian Institutes of Technology, Indian Institutes of Management, All India Council for Technical Education, and National Board of Accreditation for implementation support.
Key Features:
- Institutional Coverage: Includes National Institutes of Technology, State Engineering Colleges, Polytechnics, and Affiliating Technical Universities.
- Fund Transfer: Direct funding from a Central Nodal Agency to institutions.
- Academic Focus: Multidisciplinary programs, updated curriculum, faculty training.
- Gender Inclusion: Special programs for women faculty and reducing gender disparity.
- Skill Alignment: Launch of labour market-oriented courses and blended learning models.
[UPSC 2018] With reference to Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana, consider the following statements:
1. It is the flagship scheme of the Ministry of Labour and Employment.
2. It, among other things, will also impart training in soft skills, entrepreneurship, financial and digital literacy.
3. It aims to align the competencies of the unregulated workforce of the country to the National Skill Qualification Framework.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Options: (a) 1 and 3 only (b) 2 only (c) 2 and 3 only* (d) 1, 2 and 3 |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
The World Health Organization (WHO) has reclassified hepatitis D virus (HDV) as carcinogenic, following the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) assessment based on data from The Lancet Oncology.
About Hepatitis D:
- What is it: Hepatitis D is a serious liver infection caused by the hepatitis D virus (HDV).
- Cause: Hepatitis D virus (HDV), an incomplete virus needing hepatitis B virus (HBV) for replication.
- Infection Types:
- Co-infection – HDV + HBV at the same time.
- Superinfection – HDV infects someone already with HBV.
- Transmission: Parenteral exposure (injections, transfusions), mother-to-child, sexual contact.
- Diagnosis: Blood tests for HDV antibodies and HDV-RNA.
- Prevention: HBV vaccination, safe blood practices, safe sex, screening, avoid needle sharing.
Why Hepatitis D is Carcinogenic?
- Causes more severe liver damage than HBV alone.
- HBV–HDV co-infection raises liver cancer risk 2–6 times compared to HBV-only cases.
- Up to 75% develop cirrhosis within 15 years.
- Can cause cancer even without cirrhosis due to HBV DNA integration + HDV-induced damage.
Back2Basics: Hepatitis
- Definition: Liver inflammation from viruses, alcohol, toxins, drugs, autoimmune disorders, or metabolic issues.
- Viral Types:
- A – Fecal-oral; acute; vaccine available.
- B – Blood/body fluids; chronic risk; vaccine available.
- C – Blood-to-blood; often chronic; no vaccine; treatable with antivirals.
- D – Discussed above.
- E – Fecal-oral; usually acute.
- Chronic B, C, D: Major drivers of cirrhosis and liver cancer.
- Prevention: Vaccination (A, B), safe injections, screened blood, safe sex, good hygiene.
|
[UPSC 2019] Which one of the following statements is not correct?
(a) Hepatitis B virus is transmitted much like HIV. (b) Hepatitis B, unlike Hepatitis C, does not have a vaccine. * (c) Globally, the number of people infected with Hepatitis B and C viruses are several times more than those infected with HIV. (d) Some of those infected with Hepatitis B and C viruses do not show the symptoms for many years. |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
A Ground Penetrating Radar survey in Topra Kalan, Haryana, has uncovered signs of a 1,500 BCE settlement, with painted grey ware (PGW), stamped pottery, moulded bricks, and a possible Buddhist stupa.
About Topra Kalan Excavation:
- Agencies: Haryana Archaeology and Museums Department with Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur.
- Method: Ground Penetrating Radar survey in January 2025 to map subsurface features without extensive digging.
- Purpose: Assess archaeological significance and preserve ancient heritage sites in Haryana.
- Location: Topra Kalan, Yamunanagar district — believed to be the original site of the Delhi-Topra Ashokan pillar moved by Firoz Shah Tughlaq in the 14th century.
- Estimated Age: ~1,500 BCE, indicating continuous habitation and possible Buddhist presence.
Key Findings:
- Structures: Buried walls, platforms, and room-like enclosures at 4–5 m depth.
- Religious Feature: Dome-like structure possibly a Buddhist stupa.
- Material Culture: Painted grey ware, black-and-red ware, black-on-red ware, black ware, stamped pottery, moulded bricks, beads.
- Discovery Sources: Both official surveys and artifacts unearthed by locals during construction.
- Historical Links: Accounts by Sir Alexander Cunningham and Hiuen Tsang identify the site as a Buddhist centre.
[UPSC 2024] Consider the following information:
Archaeological Site :: State :: Description
1. Chandraketugarh : Odisha : Trading Port town
2. Inamgaon : Maharashtra : Chalcolithic site
3. Mangadu : Kerala : Megalithic site
4. Salihundam : Andhra Pradesh : Rock-cut cave shrines
In which of the above rows is the given information correctly matched?
Options: (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 2 and 3 only* (c) 3 and 4 (d) 1 and 4 |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
The second part of the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5.2) on plastic pollution has opened in Geneva, Switzerland.
About Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC):
- Formation: Created by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in March 2022 to develop a global treaty on plastic pollution.
- Nature: UN-mandated body with equal participation of all member states.
- Output: Produces consensus-based treaties, sometimes including voluntary provisions.
- Precedents: Similar to the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992) and UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992).
- Mandate: By 2024, draft a legally binding treaty covering plastic’s full life cycle—production, design, use, and disposal.
Negotiation Process & Timeline:
- Method: Plenary sessions, technical groups, and stakeholder consultations.
- Sessions:
-
- Uruguay (Nov–Dec 2022)
- France (May–June 2023)
- Kenya (Nov 2023)
- Canada (Apr–May 2024)
- South Korea (Nov–Dec 2024, final session)
- Key Debates: Scope, binding vs. voluntary rules, financing, compliance, and differentiated responsibilities.
- Outcome: Treaty text refined until consensus or majority approval.
Goals on Plastic Pollution:
- Standards: Global production and waste management norms.
- Targets: Combination of binding goals and voluntary approaches.
- Financing: Creation of funding mechanisms for treaty implementation.
- Sustainability: Promotion of circular economy and efficient resource use.
- Participation: Inclusion of governments, industry, civil society, Indigenous groups, and waste pickers.
[UPSC 2021] The ‘Common Carbon Metric,’ supported by UNEP, has been developed for:
(a) Assessing the carbon footprint of building operations around the world* (b) Enabling commercial farming entities around the world to enter carbon emission trading (c) Enabling governments to assess the overall carbon footprint caused by their countries (d) Assessing the overall carbon footprint caused by the use of fossil fuels by the world in a unit time |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now