India's chief trade negotiator Darpan Jain is leading a Commerce Ministry delegation to Washington from April 20 to 22, the first in-person US-India Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) talks in three to four months, according to Commerce Secretary Rajesh Agarwal. The visit comes two months after a February 7 interim agreement established a framework reducing US reciprocal tariffs on Indian goods from 25% to 18%, and weeks after the US Supreme Court voided those same tariffs entirely in a landmark 6-3 ruling. The deal didn't collapse. But it needs a new legal foundation, and neither side has agreed on what that looks like yet.
What the Data Shows
The February framework was substantive. In a joint statement following a call between President Trump and Prime Minister Modi, both governments committed to a full BTA pathway. India agreed to eliminate or reduce tariffs on all US goods and pledged $500 billion in purchases of American energy, aircraft, precious metals, and technology products over five years. The US, for its part, lowered its reciprocal tariff on Indian goods from 25% to 18% and agreed to continue working to reduce tariffs on Indian goods during BTA negotiations.
Then the Supreme Court intervened. On February 20, the Court ruled in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the president to impose tariffs. The ruling was 6-3 and authored by Chief Justice Roberts. It invalidated the entire IEEPA-based reciprocal tariff framework, including the 18% India rate negotiated just two weeks earlier. Within hours, President Trump invoked Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, imposing a 10% global tariff surcharge that he raised the following day to the 15% maximum Section 122 permits. Section 122 tariffs are time-limited to 150 days and require Congressional approval to extend beyond that window.
That legal switch created a structural problem both delegations will have to address in Washington. India's side is going in with an open mind, according to government sources, but is watching carefully how the deal gets recalibrated after the changed tariff circumstances. Unlike IEEPA, Section 122 does not easily accommodate country-specific rates. The 18% preferential figure India negotiated is not currently operative. India wants clarity on what rate applies and when.
The merchandise trade numbers show why this relationship is worth the difficulty. In FY2026, India's total goods exports to the US reached $87.31 billion, slightly above $86.51 billion in FY25, while US exports to India climbed to $52.9 billion from $45.63 billion in FY25, with higher energy and LPG imports narrowing India's trade surplus slightly. That surplus reduction was one of Washington's stated objectives, and India can point to it as evidence of good faith.
Critically, IT services remain completely outside the goods tariff dispute. India's IT and business process management sector is projected to reach $315.4 billion in FY2026, growing 6.1% year-on-year and crossing the $300 billion milestone for the first time, per the Wisemonk India Investment Intelligence 2026 report. The country's 5.95 million tech professionals and 1,700-plus Global Capability Centers generating $64.6 billion in annual revenue represent a strategic asset that neither government has any interest in bringing into the tariff conversation. US-headquartered firms drive roughly 70% of all GCC formation demand in India, a figure that the Wisemonk India IT Services Analyst Report 2026 shows accelerating rather than reversing as AI engineering demand intensifies.
What This Means
For US companies with India goods supply chains, particularly in pharma, textiles, and manufacturing, the April talks carry real near-term significance. Section 122's 150-day clock started running in late February. That puts the expiry somewhere around late July, after which the tariff picture depends on Section 301 investigations, Congressional action, or a new bilateral instrument. None of those outcomes are certain.
For the much larger segment of US companies that have built India technology operations, the picture is structurally different. IT services have never been in scope, and that isn't changing. What those companies are actually watching is whether offshoring to India remains commercially predictable while goods tariff negotiations drag on. The answer, based on current policy, is yes. But the window to move early in India's AI and engineering talent market isn't indefinite.
AI revenues across Indian IT service providers have already reached an estimated $10-12 billion in FY2026, per Wisemonk's India IT services data. Companies capturing that capacity now are building structural advantages that won't easily reverse when BTA negotiations eventually settle. The companies deferring India hiring decisions while monitoring tariff headlines are, in most cases, not exposed to the goods tariff risk they think they are.
There's also a compliance framing worth noting for any US company now accelerating an India decision in response to this uncertainty. Entity setup in India takes three to six months. The Employer of Record model sidesteps that entirely, allowing compliant Indian employment to start within days without a local entity, with the EOR handling payroll, statutory contributions, and labor law compliance. Wisemonk's data on why US companies offshore to India shows that 70-85% cost advantages at junior engineering levels hold regardless of what happens at the BTA table, because they're driven by structural talent supply, not tariff arbitrage. For companies evaluating the full range of India engagement models, the offshoring versus outsourcing comparison is worth reviewing now, while there's still runway before Section 122 expires.
What to Watch Next
The April 20-22 meetings are designed to finalize the legal framework for the interim agreement and agree on timelines and next steps, with the Indian side noting that both countries need to assess what commitments the US can make now that the original tariff instrument is gone.
Watch specifically for whether India secures written clarity on its tariff rate treatment under Section 122, or a concrete pathway into the Section 301 process with India-specific parameters. Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal had earlier suggested the pact could be operational by April. That deadline has passed, which makes any new timeline that emerges from the Washington talks significant.
The Section 301 investigations launched in March against 15 countries and the EU are the real variable for summer. Section 301 investigations require agency findings and formal rulemaking, which take time, but the tariffs they authorize are not time-bound or capped at 15% the way Section 122 is. If India is brought formally into that process, the tariff trajectory for Indian goods extends well beyond July on potentially higher rates than the current Section 122 maximum. That would reopen goods trade friction exactly when the BTA was supposed to be resolving it.
The Russia oil question hasn't gone away either. India's energy mix choices became a test of sovereignty in the February framework, and they're likely to surface again in April as Washington tries to assess whether India's strategic alignment has actually shifted.
The February interim agreement was a genuine signal of intent on both sides. But signals built on one legal framework don't automatically transfer to a different one, and rebuilding the deal under Section 122 or a new instrument is genuinely complex work. For US companies with goods exposure to India, the April talks are worth following closely. For those building India technology and engineering teams, the more relevant question is whether they've made their India hiring structure durable enough to outlast whatever the BTA negotiations eventually produce. The talent base isn't waiting.