Introduction: Complications That Pushed GST to the Breaking Point
When India rolled out the Goods and Services Tax in 2017, it was hailed as a “one nation, one tax” revolution. But in practice, the system grew into a maze of four tax slabs, dozens of exemptions, and thousands of notifications and circulars.
Businesses often struggled to determine the correct classification for goods, while frequent amendments created uncertainty. The inverted duty structure hurt sectors like textiles and footwear, litigation mounted over input tax credits, and compliance costs ballooned for small and medium enterprises. By 2024, industry bodies and trade associations were openly calling GST a system “in urgent need of simplification.”
This domestic pressure created momentum. The government could not ignore the growing criticism that GST had become too complicated to serve its purpose of ease of doing business. By the time, the 56th GST Council meeting was convened in September 2025, expectations for a structural reset were sky-high.
The Council delivered. Rates were consolidated into two principal slabs—5% and 18%—with a 40% special rate for luxury and sin goods. Essentials were made cheaper, aspirational goods saw steep cuts from 28% to 18%, and even health insurance was exempted. After years of patchwork fixes, India finally attempted a clean overhaul.
Impact of Global Trade Shocks and the U.S. Tariff Wave
While domestic frustration was boiling over, global trade was shaken by a new wave of U.S. tariffs.
In 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump revived his aggressive tariff strategy, reshaping global trade once again. On April 2, his administration imposed a sweeping 10% baseline tariff on nearly all imports and threatened higher “reciprocal tariffs” against countries that, in his view, discriminated against U.S. goods.
This reignited tensions with China, sparking a fresh round of tariff exchanges:
- U.S. tariffs targeted Chinese technology, steel, and consumer goods.
- China retaliated with duties on agriculture, autos, and energy products.
- This reignited tensions with China, where a new tariff exchange escalated into billions of dollars in duties across technology, steel, and consumer goods.
- Trump openly used tariffs as leverage—forcing Beijing back to the negotiating table under the threat of escalating costs for Chinese exporters.
India soon found itself drawn into this storm.
- July 30, 2025: Trump announced a 25% reciprocal tariff on Indian exports.
- August 6, 2025: A further 25% penalty tariff was added, doubling the pain to 50% on key categories such as automobiles, textiles, and medical devices.
The move was framed as retaliation for India’s continued purchase of discounted Russian oil, which Washington argued undermined its sanctions regime.
By the middle of 2025, the U.S. average tariff rate had climbed to its highest level since the Great Depression of the 1930s. China, facing mounting costs on technology and industrial exports, began signalling concessions to Washington.
For India, with exports to the U.S. valued at $86.51 billion in FY 2024–25, the tariff shock was significant.
However, it chose a different path. Rather than bending under pressure, it stood firm—maintaining its strategic autonomy even as exporters faced cancelled orders, piling inventories, and mounting anxiety.
Overlap of Pain and Relief: Tariff-Hit Goods, GST-Boosted Goods
The timing of the GST reform could not have been more consequential.
GST had become increasingly complex over the years, pushing the government toward long-awaited reforms. At the same time, U.S. tariffs dealt a heavy blow to India’s exports. While China showed concessions, India held firm and continued its reform agenda. This created a unique outcome—the very sectors hit abroad found relief at home through GST cuts.
The very sectors hit hardest by U.S. tariffs were the ones that received relief in India’s GST overhaul.
Following categories were impacted by U.S. tariffs and simultaneously received relief through GST rate cuts:
- Automobiles & Auto Components – GST reduced from 28% → 18%
- Textiles & Apparel (below ₹2,500) – GST reduced from 12% → 5%
- Medical Equipment & Devices – Selected hospital equipment reduced from 18% → 5%;
- Consumer Electronics & Appliances (ACs, TVs, Washing Machines, Dishwashers) – GST reduced from 28% → 18%
- Gems & Jewellery (select categories) – Compensation cess rationalised; effective burden eased from ~3% → ~1.5%
From Export Shock to Domestic Demand Engine
India’s strategy in 2025 was unmistakably firm: external shocks would not dictate internal policy. At a time when U.S. tariffs were meant to force compliance, India chose not to bend. Instead, it turned inward—strengthening its domestic market and giving exporters a safety valve.
The GST reforms arrived at a critical moment. By reducing rates on automobiles, textiles, electronics, and medical equipment—the very goods hit hardest by U.S. tariffs—the government effectively lowered prices for Indian consumers. What exporters could no longer sell in the American market became attractive to buyers at home. India’s growing middle class and aspirational consumers absorbed the demand that had been disrupted abroad.
This was not a retreat into protectionism. India did not wall itself off from trade; it rebalanced. The reforms ensured that goods stayed competitive in the domestic market, factories kept running, and jobs were protected. Exporters avoided the grim scenario of warehouses filled with unsold inventory, while households benefited from lower prices on products that had long been seen as luxuries.
In effect, GST rationalisation acted as a shock absorber—transforming tariff pain into a consumption boost. It was a reminder that resilience is not about resisting change, but about adapting swiftly so that external pressures become internal opportunities.
Conclusion: A Lesson in Strategic Resilience
The GST reform was not a knee-jerk reaction to tariffs. It was the result of years of domestic complications, litigation, and dissatisfaction that had long demanded correction. Yet the global tariff war gave these reforms sharper urgency and broader meaning.
Where tariffs forced China into concessions, India chose to stand firm. It refused to let external pressure dictate its policies, pressing ahead with reforms on its own terms. This demonstrated not just resilience but strategic maturity—the ability to convert adversity into opportunity.
India’s stance sends an important signal to the world: nations can withstand external shocks if they strengthen their domestic foundations. By simplifying taxes, boosting internal demand, and maintaining policy independence, India showed a path that other economies—especially emerging markets—can follow when confronted with trade coercion.
The 56th GST Council meeting will thus be remembered not only as a milestone in tax policy but as a case study in economic sovereignty—how domestic reform can absorb global shocks, protect growth, and inspire confidence far beyond national borders.
Article By
