Cheaper electric cars may help oil firms to green their businesses faster

 A decade ago, some of the smartest minds at the US Department of Energy set an ambitious goal: lower the cost of battery packs to $100 per kilowatt-hour from more than $1000 per kWh. If achieved, electric cars would reach cost parity with internal-combustion engine cars — unleashing a revolution.

That moment is here. Later today, at Tesla’s Battery Day event, Elon Musk could announce that the California-based company now makes batteries that cost less than $100 per kWh. Even if he doesn’t, the goal is within reach. In March, General Motors, partnering with South Korean battery maker LG Chem, set a goal of reaching $100 per kWh soon. Volkswagen has hinted that its newest electric car, the ID.3, uses batteries that cost less than $100 per kWh.

chart

So where is the revolution?

It’s not like you see electric cars every where all the time. My environmentally minded friends who have cars or want to buy them (not that there’s a lot of them wanting to buy cars) aren’t choosing electrics just yet. They still complain about the lack of charging infrastructure and the inconvenience of taking battery-powered cars on long weekend trips. That skepticism bears out in the numbers.

Electrics made up less than 4% of global car sales in 2019. Even China, which has invested heavily in promoting a homegrown industry of electric cars, is hesitant about setting a firm timeline for phasing out fossil-fuel vehicles. But revolutions are messy, and signs of big changes are there if you look for them. First, the DOE’s goal, which many in the industry have called the “magic number,” wasn’t so much about the absolute figure, says Venkat Viswanathan, a battery expert at Carnegie Mellon University.

ALSO READ: FAME: Over 27,000 electric vehicles supported till Sept 10 under phase-II

It was about setting the speed of travel for technology improvements and cost declines. That has now become a reality. Batteries are expected to only make up only 15% of a vehicle’s total costs by 2030, compared with 30% today, according to BloombergNEF estimates.

chart

Second, Viswanathan says, the DOE goal was more about spurring industry interest than ensuring adoption. Falling battery costs have made automakers jump on the opportunity. Hyundai plans to launch 44 electric-vehicle models by 2025. GM says it will have 20 by 2023. Volkswagen is lining up 34 of them this year. “As the Covid-19 crisis hammers the auto industry, electric cars remain a bright spot,” the International Energy Agency declared in May. Third, even though China is expected to dominate the electric-car market, other regions are joining in. Europe’s electric-car sales are expected to grow rapidly because of emissions regulations and generous subsidies, after already exceeding China’s in the first half of 2020. Other markets will follow: Boston Consulting Group sees electric cars reaching a tipping point around 2025.

Electric cars cut air pollution, and that will save lives. From a climate perspective, however, the electric-car evolution isn’t just about cutting emissions. Even if all passenger cars were to switch overnight to running on electricity, the total reduction in global emissions will be much less than 10%. Cars make up only about 25% of global oil demand and about 65% of electricity still comes from fossil fuels.

ALSO READ: Electric vehicle charge network ChargePoint nears deal to go public: Report

The switch to electric mobility is indicative of more important trends. If consumers are willing to choose a cleaner car despite some inconveniences, then it might not be that difficult to convince them to move away from eating a lot of meat or flying so much. If governments continue providing sustained policy support to the transport sector -- which costs them much more than other clean-energy subsidies -- then it might be easier to convince them to take on more difficult challenges, such as reducing industrial emissions. A 2018 Harvard study found that the cost of subsidizing offshore wind stood at $105 per ton of CO2 avoided, whereas subsidies for electric vehicles could be as high as $640 per ton of CO2 avoided.

The second-order impacts of the transition could also be profound. Cheaper electric cars will help push oil companies to green their businesses faster. In its energy outlook published last week, BP predicted oil consumption may have already peaked and could fall rapidly if governments continue to embrace more ambitious climate policies. That would keep oil prices, which haven’t budged much from $40 per barrel for the last few months, lower for longer and, in turn, squeeze oil-dependent economies. They may have no choice but to diversify soon, or risk creating more Venezuelas, argues Bloomberg Opinion columnist David Fickling.

Two US-based law firms file class action suits against HDFC Bank

 US-based Rosen Law Firm and Schall Law Firm have filed class action suits against HDFC Bank alleging misleading public statements and for failing to inform investors about the bank's improper internal controls on vehicle loans.

The lawsuits, filed in the US District Court Eastern District of New York, named outgoing managing director Aditya Puri, CEO-designate Sashidhar Jagdishan, and company secretary Santosh Haldankar as ‘individual defendants’ and collectively, with the bank, as ‘defendants’.

Rosen Law filed the suit on September 14 on behalf of investors who purchased HDFC Bank equity between July 31, 2019 and July 10, 2020. Rosen had announced it would file such a lawsuit on September 4, Schall Law Firm also announced such filing on September 8, both for the same period.

The class action filing on Rosen Law’s website says "throughout the class period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the bank’s business, operational and compliance policies.” Specifically, the bank “made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose” that it had “inadequate disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting.”

ALSO READ: Shoutout apps that bring you birthday greetings from a film or sports star

As a result, HDFC Bank maintained “improper lending practices in its vehicle-financing operations," and thus, the earnings generated from HDFC Bank's vehicle-financing operations were unsustainable.

"All the foregoing, once revealed, was foreseeably likely to have a material negative impact on HDFC Bank's financial condition and reputation; and … as a result, HDFC bank's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times,” which lead to investors suffering damages.

The lawsuit pointed out that the bank’s American Depositary Share fell $1.37 per share, or 2.83%, to close at $47.02 per share on July 13 after it was reported in media that the bank was probing its lending practice in the vehicle financing operations involving the unit’s former head Ashok Khanna. Investors who had acquired the shares “at artificially inflated prices during the class period” suffered “significant losses and damages," after the revelation.

HDFC Bank wasn’t immediately available for comment. The shares of the bank fell 0.94 per cent to close at Rs 1083.25 a piece on BSE.

Trump impeachment: House of Representatives submits articles to the Senate

The USHouse of Representatives passed a resolution and submitted the articles of impeachment against Donald Trump to the Senate for a historic trial to remove him from office, a move described by the unfazed President as "another con job" by the Opposition Democrats.
The House, controlled by the Democratic Party on Wednesday voted to send articles of impeachment against President Trump to the Senate, in a major development to remove him from office for his alleged abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

In a 228-193 vote, which was mainly on party lines, the House appointed seven impeachment managers who will argue the Democrats' case for removing Trump from the office of the US President.
The managers were named by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
"We are here today to cross a very important threshold in American history," Pelosi said, addressing the House before the vote.
"This is what an impeachment is about," she said earlier, announcing the seven-member prosecution team led by Congressman Adam Schiff, chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
"So sad, so tragic for our country, that the actions taken by the president to undermine our national security, to violate his oath of office and to jeopardize the security of our elections, has taken us to this place," Pelosi remarked, before using several ceremonial pens to sign the articles.
While Pelosi's press conference was in progress, Trump weighed in on Twitter: "Here we go again, another Con Job by the Do Nothing Democrats. All of this work was supposed to be done by the House, not the Senate!"
The 435-member House, where Democrats enjoy a majority, on December 18 charged Trump with "high crimes and misdemeanors" and impeached him for pressuring Ukraine to investigate former US Vice President Joe Biden, a potential Democratic rival for the current president in the 2020 elections.
The Senate, controlled by Trump's Republican Party, will decide whether to convict and remove him from office.
The seven managers, after Pelosi's signature, then walked the articles across the Capitol Rotunda in a procession to the Senate, where majority leader Mitch McConnell received the documents.
The impeachment process now moves to the Senate where Trump's Republican Party has majority of 53-47 in the 100-member Upper House.
The trial - likely to begin on January 21 - would be presided by the Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.
Given that the Republicans have the majority in the Senate, White House is confident that Trump will sail through the impeachment process.
The Senate trial will be only the third of a US president in history.
Conviction in the Senate would require a two-thirds vote, a high threshold that is not expected to be reached given that many Republican senators have been vocal in saying that President Trump's actions do not rise to the level of impeachment.
But regardless of the outcome, the Senate trial will be a historic and momentous event. The Democrats hope the impeachment will carry symbolic weight ahead of this year's General Elections.
During a China trade deal signing ceremony at the White House, Trump described this as a hoax and asserted that the it is going week.
The Trump Campaign also slammed Pelosi for the impeachment process.
"The fact that Nancy Pelosi sat on the articles of impeachment for as long as she did just proves that there was never any urgency and that it was just a failed attempt to politically damage President Trump leading up to his re-election," alleged Brad Parscale, Trump 2020 campaign manager.
"This was a sham impeachment from the beginning and never anything more than Democrats trying to interfere in an election that is now less than ten months away," Parscale said.
Speaking on the House floor, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler said that this trial is necessary because Trump gravely abused the power of his office when he strong-armed a foreign government to announce investigations into his domestic political rival.
"He betrayed our country when he used the powers of his office -- including withholding vital US military assistance -- to pressure that government to help him win re-election," Nadler said.
"He invited foreign interference into our elections - again. He jeopardised our national security. He did it all for his personal, political gain. And then he violated the Constitution by stonewalling Congress' efforts to investigate, ordering an absolute blockade of evidence," the Democratic lawmaker said.
"Despite that, the House was able to uncover powerful evidence that demonstrates beyond doubt the President's betrayal and violations of the Constitution," he said.

US equity outflows to cash, bonds biggest since 2008: Goldman Sachs

The outflow from US equity funds this year has been the biggest since 2008, relative to the flood of money into cash and bonds, according to Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
That still leaves cash exposures “near historical lows,” according to Goldman strategists led by David Kostin. At 12 per cent, the aggregate allocation to cash is only in the fifth percentile of the past 30 years, they calculated.

“High uncertainty, investor fears of a recession, and low starting cash allocations will likely limit a significant increase in equity allocations” in 2020, the Goldman team wrote in an Oct. 25 note.
Just like this year, corporate demand will be the top source of US equity buying in 2020, Goldman projected. While buybacks may drop, net demand is still seen as strong thanks to diminished initial public offerings and a rise in cash-based mergers and acquisitions. Households and foreign investors will also be net buyers, while pension funds keep whittling down their allocation, as they have since 2009, Goldman said.

Among the bank’s 2020 forecasts:
Net corporate purchases for US equities will total $470 billion in 2020, down 2% from this year
Foreign investors will buy a net $50 billion
Households will add a net $30 billion
Purchases by exchange-traded funds will be a net $150 billion, less than the five-year average of $220 billion
American stock funds have seen $100 billion of outflows so far in 2019, on pace for the second-largest drawdown in 15 years, with actively managed mutual funds seeing a $217 billion exodus, according to data compiled by Goldman. Bonds have enjoyed a $353 billion inflow, while cash has seen a $436 billion influx, the Goldman analysis showed.

Trade differences with US narrowing, hope to have a deal soon: Sitharaman

Trade differences have been narrowing between India and the US, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman (pictured) has said, hoping that the countries will be able to enter into a trade deal soon. “I hope to have an agreement sooner. Obviously narrowing (of difference) is happening.”
The commerce ministry is working on it and hope that the negotiations will get concluded sooner, she said.

Sitharaman is in Washington to attend the annual meeting of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. “I know the intensity with which the negotiations are going on and a few issues on which there could be some differences are being sorted out. I hope there will be an agreement sooner,” she said.
‘India still fastest-growing economy’
Sitharaman reiterated that India remains among the fastest-growing economies of the world and efforts are being made to make it grow faster. The IMF has projected a reduced growth rate for India, but the country’s economy is “still growing as the fastest”, she said.
Sitharaman said she is “certainly not risking a comparison” with China, even though the two countries growth rates have been projected at 6.1 per cent in a latest IMF report.
“The IMF (in its latest projections) reduces the growth (rate) for all the global economies. It reduces the growth for India too. But even otherwise, even with that India is still growing as the fastest growing economy," she said.
‘Recalling what went wrong necessary’
Targeting former prime minister Manmohan Singh for accusing the NDA government of always trying to put the blame on its rivals, she said that recalling when and what went wrong during a certain period is absolutely necessary.
Conceding that there were some “weaknesses” in his regime, Singh had on Thursday said the Modi government should stop blaming the UPA for every economic crisis, as five years were sufficient time to come up with solutions.
“I respect Dr Manmohan Singh for telling me not to do the blame game. But recalling when and what went wrong during a certain period is absolutely necessary to put it in context, now that I’m being charged that there’s no narrative at all about the economy,” Sitharaman said on Thursday.
The senior Congress leader’s comments at the press conference in Mumbai came after Sitharaman at an event at the Columbia University in New York held the Manmohan Singh-Raghuram Rajan combination responsible for subjecting public sector banks (PSBs) to their “worst phase”.
“I had to recall that. So, it’s not so much with the sense of wanting to put the blame on somebody,” the finance minister said.

Trump's rule to keep out low-income immigrants gets blocked by courts

A new US Department of Homeland Security rule to screen out immigrants deemed at risk of becoming dependent on government benefits was put on hold by judges on both coasts until there’s a final decision on whether the so-called green card wealth test is legal.
US District Judge George Daniels in Manhattan called the rule “repugnant to the American Dream of the opportunity for prosperity and success through hard work and upward mobility.” In a decision issued Friday, he blocked it from taking effect nationwide. Separately, a judge in Oakland, California, prohibited the policy from being implemented in four states and the District of Columbia.

The rule -- which was announced in August and was set to go into effect Oct. 15 -- replaces a current policy that says immigrants shouldn’t receive more than half their income from cash benefits, such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families or Supplemental Security Income from Social Security.
Under the new more expansive definition, immigrants aren’t supposed to use public benefits like Medicaid, public housing assistance or food stamps for more than 12 months over a 36-month period. Immigration officials will consider an immigrant’s age, health, education and wealth to see if they are at risk of becoming a “public charge.”
Asked about the ruling by reporters Friday, Trump cited a Supreme Court ruling last year upholding the final version of his travel ban and pointed to his success appointing judges to the courts.
“We lost on immigration? I haven’t heard that,” the president said. “We’ll win. You know how many cases I’ve lost and then we win? Remember, they said -- I lost the ban, the travel ban. And then they said I lost it again, then I ended up winning it. So I’ve had a great track record and right now, within a couple of weeks, we will have 160 judges.”
White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham, in a statement, called the ruling “extremely disappointing” and said it will prevent the government officials “from ensuring that immigrants seeking entry to the United States will be self-sufficient.” Instead, it will “allow non-citizens to continue taking advantage of our generous but limited public resources reserved for vulnerable Americans,” she said.
Immigrant rights advocacy groups and several states argued that the new immigration rule conflicts with existing immigration laws and would drive up the cost of providing health care and other services to immigrants.
Daniels blocked the rule following an August lawsuit filed by New York, Connecticut and Vermont and the city of New York, which alleged that the policy specifically targets immigrants of color. He ruled that the Department of Homeland Security went beyond its authority under federal immigration law.
“Defendants do not articulate why they are changing the public charge definition, why this new definition is needed now, or why the definition set forth in the rule -- which has absolutely no support in the history of US Immigration law -- is reasonable,” Daniels said.
“This rule would have had devastating impacts on New Yorkers and our nation, and today’s decision is a critical step in our efforts to uphold the rule of law,” New York Attorney General Letitia James tweeted Friday.

Trump's rule to keep out low-income immigrants gets blocked by courts

A new US Department of Homeland Security rule to screen out immigrants deemed at risk of becoming dependent on government benefits was put on hold by judges on both coasts until there’s a final decision on whether the so-called green card wealth test is legal.
US District Judge George Daniels in Manhattan called the rule “repugnant to the American Dream of the opportunity for prosperity and success through hard work and upward mobility.” In a decision issued Friday, he blocked it from taking effect nationwide. Separately, a judge in Oakland, California, prohibited the policy from being implemented in four states and the District of Columbia.

The rule -- which was announced in August and was set to go into effect Oct. 15 -- replaces a current policy that says immigrants shouldn’t receive more than half their income from cash benefits, such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families or Supplemental Security Income from Social Security.
Under the new more expansive definition, immigrants aren’t supposed to use public benefits like Medicaid, public housing assistance or food stamps for more than 12 months over a 36-month period. Immigration officials will consider an immigrant’s age, health, education and wealth to see if they are at risk of becoming a “public charge.”
Asked about the ruling by reporters Friday, Trump cited a Supreme Court ruling last year upholding the final version of his travel ban and pointed to his success appointing judges to the courts.
“We lost on immigration? I haven’t heard that,” the president said. “We’ll win. You know how many cases I’ve lost and then we win? Remember, they said -- I lost the ban, the travel ban. And then they said I lost it again, then I ended up winning it. So I’ve had a great track record and right now, within a couple of weeks, we will have 160 judges.”
White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham, in a statement, called the ruling “extremely disappointing” and said it will prevent the government officials “from ensuring that immigrants seeking entry to the United States will be self-sufficient.” Instead, it will “allow non-citizens to continue taking advantage of our generous but limited public resources reserved for vulnerable Americans,” she said.
Immigrant rights advocacy groups and several states argued that the new immigration rule conflicts with existing immigration laws and would drive up the cost of providing health care and other services to immigrants.
Daniels blocked the rule following an August lawsuit filed by New York, Connecticut and Vermont and the city of New York, which alleged that the policy specifically targets immigrants of color. He ruled that the Department of Homeland Security went beyond its authority under federal immigration law.
“Defendants do not articulate why they are changing the public charge definition, why this new definition is needed now, or why the definition set forth in the rule -- which has absolutely no support in the history of US Immigration law -- is reasonable,” Daniels said.
“This rule would have had devastating impacts on New Yorkers and our nation, and today’s decision is a critical step in our efforts to uphold the rule of law,” New York Attorney General Letitia James tweeted Friday.

Will 'act as appropriate': US Fed chief gives no hint about interest rates

The US economy is in a "favorable place" and the Federal Reserve will "act as appropriate" to keep the current economic expansion on track, Fed chair Jerome Powell said on Friday in remarks that gave few clues about whether the central bank will cut interest rates at its next meeting or not.
The chair, under pressure from President Donald Trump to cut rates soon and deeply, listed a series of economic and geopolitical risks that the Fed is monitoring - many of them, Powell noted, linked to the administration's trade war with China and other countries.

But "the U.S. economy has continued to perform well overall," Powell said in keynote remarks at an annual Fed economic symposium at this mountain retreat. "Business investment and manufacturing have weakened, but solid job growth and rising wages have been driving robust consumption and supporting moderate overall growth."
If the trade wars have disrupted business investment and confidence and contributed to "deteriorating" global growth, Powell said the Fed could not set all that right through monetary policy.
There are "no recent precedents to guide any policy response to the current situation," Powell said, adding that monetary policy "cannot provide a settled rulebook for international trade."
Between that, the possibility of a hard "Brexit," tension in Hong Kong, an economic slowdown in places like Germany and other overseas troubles, Powell said the Fed needed to "look through" short-term turbulence and focus on how the United States is performing.
Powell did note that rate cuts in the 1990s helped keep an expansion intact.
But the overall tone of his statement may disappoint investors expecting the Fed to cut rates at its September meeting and possibly several more times this year. The central bank reduced its benchmark rate by a quarter percentage point in July in what Powell referred to as a mid-cycle adjustment.
The initial response in markets was muted, with bond yields edging lower and U.S. stocks briefly paring some of the drop triggered earlier by China's announcement of retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods.
It is also likely to disappoint Trump, both in focusing on the impact that trade uncertainty is having on the global economy, and in not giving a clear signal that more cuts are coming.
The Fed must "look through what may be passing events, focus on how trade developments are affecting the outlook, and adjust policy to promote our objectives" of 2% inflation and strong employment.
DIVIDED FED, ANGRY TRUMP
No matter what course Powell chooses, it is clear from the minutes of the Fed's most recent meeting released Wednesday and from the range of comments from policymakers also in attendance here that he lacks a broad consensus among his colleagues about the appropriate course of action.
Earlier on Friday, St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank President James Bullard said the policy-setting Federal Open Market Committee would have a "robust debate" about cutting U.S. interest rates by a half percentage point at their next policy meeting in September.
"I think there will be a robust debate about 50," he said in an interview with Bloomberg TV. "I think it's creeping onto the table."
Bullard, who has long advocated for lower rates to address the persistent shortfall in inflation, said he is troubled by signs of a slowdown coming from the bond market - a so-called "inversion" of the Treasury yield curve that has stood as a reliable precursor to U.S. recessions.
He is "not interested" in testing the theory "that this time is different" with regard to interpreting the bond market's signal, Bullard said.
Meanwhile, Cleveland Federal Reserve PresidentLoretta Mester, who did not support the Fed's rate cut lastmonth, said she is not yet convinced of the need to cut rates further.
"At this point, if the economy continues where it is, Iwould probably say we should keep things the way they are,"Mester told CNBC. "But, I am very attuned to the downside risks to this economy and I want to make sure we're always focused on our dual-mandate goals."
The Bullard-Mester divide is emblematic of the wide range of opinion inside the FOMC, which voted 8-2 to cut rates on July 31 for the first time in a decade. That tally did not fully capture the disapproval of the move by those without a vote at the meeting, including Mester.
And, of course, there is Trump. He has been unrelenting in his demands that the Fed cut rates, in part to help take some of the wind out of a strong U.S. dollar that he sees hurting U.S. exports.
The president again took to Twitter on Friday as Powell was set to speak. "Now the Fed can show their stuff," he said.

Rupee declines 12 paise against US dollar in early trade

The rupee slipped 12 paise to 71.39 against the US dollar in the early morning trade on Friday. On Wednesday, the domestic currency rebounded from a six-month low to end at 71.27, up 13 paise.
The forex market was closed on Thursday on account of Independenece Day.

"The Indian rupee has now become Asia's worst performing currency so far this month, Chinese yuan depreciated amid trade worries and foreign investor outflows," said V K Sharma, Head-PCG & Capital Market Strategy at HDFC Securities.
However, a recent poll by Reuters suggested rupee will recoup this year’s losses against the dollar over the coming 12 months as the issuance of sovereign bonds in foreign currencies may help prop it up.
“In the second half of the year, what we are looking for is some sort of positive news on the US-China trade war and maybe a little bit more (rupee) gains if the sovereign bonds issuance comes through,” Reuters reported quoting Sakshi Gupta, senior Treasury economist at HDFC Bank, as saying.
On the domestic front, data showed India’s trade deficit was at $13.43billion as compared to $18.63 billion in the same period last year. Gold imports declined 42.2 per cent to $1.71 billion in July. Oil imports fell 22 per cent to $9.6 billion, while non-oil slipped by 6 per cent to $30.16 billion.
"Weakness in emerging market currencies also accelerated as the interest rates on some long-dated government bonds have fallen below the level for short-term debt. The inversion rattled investors already worried that a US-China trade war might trigger a slowdown in global growth. Today, USD/INR pair is expected to quote in the range of 71.10 and 71.80," said Motilal Oswal Financial Services (MOFSL) in the daily currency report.
On the global front, Asian shares were heading for weekly losses on Friday as conflicting messages on the Sino-US trade war only added to worries for the global economy, while talk of aggressive central bank stimulus drove bond yields to fresh lows, said a Reuters report.
In the commodities market, oil prices were trying to bounce after two days of sharp losses. Brent crude futures added 23 cents to $58.46, while US crude rose 33 cents to $54.80 a barrel, the report added.

From yield curve to labour signs: Tips for spotting a recession in the US

As the US nears a record-long expansion in July, the conversation is increasingly turning to when it will all end.
Recessions are inherently hard to spot. The National Bureau of Economic Research’s Business Cycle Dating Committee, a panel whose determinations of when expansions begin and end are accepted as official, generally waits about a year to make a call. By the time a sustained downturn is evident in data like payrolls or gross domestic product, a contraction may have already begun.

Recession fears ebbed Friday as solid retail sales suggested consumer spending remains healthy. But investors still expect a Federal Reserve interest-rate cut in July after other recent figures showed slower job gains and low inflation, while President Donald Trump’s tariff threats weigh on businesses. And the chance of a recession over the next 12 months has risen to 30% from 25 per cent, according to a June 7-12 survey of economists.
Economists look to a wide range of data -- from government, private and market sources -- to try to figure out just when things are headed downhill. Here’s a sampling:
Yield Curve
The yield curve refers to the difference in rates between Treasuries with short-term and long-term maturities. Most of the time, long-term yields are higher because investors typically demand higher returns for locking up their money for a longer period. But when short-term rates are higher -- known as an “inverted” curve -- it’s a sign economic growth is expected to ebb, with policy rates eventually falling to cushion the slowdown.
The spread between three-month and 10-year securities has inverted before each of the last seven recessions, elevating such an event as a key signal of a future economic downturn. But it’s not automatic, and some argue central bank policies like quantitative easing have made the curve less of a direct predictor.
Credit Conditions
Another weather vane monitored by economists consists of whether borrowing conditions are getting tougher, especially for small- and medium-sized businesses. Surveys such as the Fed’s poll of senior loan officers and the National Federation of Independent Business’s gauge of credit conditions relay this type of information.
“If banks are tightening the spigot because of what they see as excesses out there and increasing risks and that sort of thing, that tends to be a leading indicator,” said Joshua Shapiro, chief U.S. economist at MFR Inc.
Business Sentiment
Surveys like those from the Institute for Supply Management offer a snapshot of economic activity among producers. In May, ISM’s manufacturing index fell to its lowest level since 2016 but still held above the 50 mark that indicates expansion.
The downward trend suggests “there’s been a lingering caution on behalf of businesses,” said Jesse Edgerton, senior economist at JPMorgan Chase & Co. “We have seen that already playing out in declines in capital expenditures, and then I think the big concern is whether it further turns into a slowdown in hiring.”
The ISM survey also contains some sub-indicators that can provide a look at what’s likely to happen like new orders and backlogs, while anecdotes in the report can flag risks like slowing demand or the negative impact of tariffs. Slow orders can precede layoffs if companies already have slack -- or can be manageable if production is already stretched.
Still, manufacturing contracted in 2015 and early 2016 without pushing the economy into a recession.
Labor Signs
Monthly payroll data is often described as a coincident indicator -- it does a good job at showing the health of the labor market in any given month. But by the time companies stop creating jobs or are even possibly laying off workers, economic weakness has already set in.
Initial jobless claims show how many Americans are applying to receive unemployment benefits and can give a sense of where the economy is headed. A significant and sustained pick-up in jobless claims suggests companies are boosting layoffs and a recession could be fast approaching.
A related leading indicator is temporary hiring. The logic goes: When times are good, businesses may recruit temporary hires to meet demand. When times are bad, temporary hires are often the first to go.
“As long as consumers and services hold, the economy holds,” said Simona Mocuta, senior economist at State Street Global Advisors.

India notifies pact with US for exchange of reports on tax evasion by MNCs

India has notified the inter-governmental agreement with the US for exchange of country-by-country (CbC) reports on multinational companies regarding income allocation and taxes paid in order to help check cross-border tax evasion.
The agreement, which was signed by Central Board of Direct Taxes Chairman P C Mody and US ambassador to India Kenneth Juster in March, was notified by the revenue department on April 25.

This agreement for exchange of CbC reports, along with the Bilateral Competent Authority Arrangement, will enable both the countries to automatically exchange CbC reports filed by the ultimate parent entities of multinational enterprises (MNEs) in the respective jurisdictions, pertaining to the years commencing on or after January 1, 2016.
It will also obviate the need for Indian subsidiary companies of US multinationals to do local filing of the CbC reports, thereby reducing the compliance burden.
A CbC report aggregates country-by-country information relating to the global allocation of income, taxes paid, and certain other indicators of an MNC. It also contains a list of all the group companies operating in a particular jurisdiction and the nature of the main business activity of each such constituent entity.
MNEs having global consolidated revenue of 750 million euro or more (or a local currency equivalent) in a year are required to file CbC reports in their parent entity's jurisdiction. The rupee equivalent of 750 million euros has been prescribed as Rs 5,500 crore in Indian rules.
This information will enable an enhanced level of assessment of tax risk by tax administrations of both the countries.
"The notification would enable both the countries to exchange CbC Reports filed by the ultimate parent entities of International Groups in USA, pertaining to the financial years commencing on or after January 1, 2016. As a result, the Indian entities would not be required to do local filing of the CbC Reports in India," Nangia Advisors (Andersen Global) Partner- Transfer Pricing Nitin Narang said.

Are superstar companies killing competition and taking over the US economy?

Big companies are taking over the US In industry after industry, from telecommunications to retail to banking to health care, larger corporations are gobbling up market share from smaller ones — sometimes by merging with them, sometimes by taking their business.
Nor does the trend toward mega-corporations show any sign of abating. A proposed merger between media giants CBS and Viacom, and another between pharmaceutical companies Bristol-Myers Squibb and Celgene, are only the latest examples. M&A activity has increased in the past few years:

This trend toward ever-larger corporate behemoths has led many economists, politicians and activists to question whether the US economy is being taken over by monopolies. Further evidence of such a takeover comes from signs that price markups are increasing:
And corporate profits have been rising as a share of the economy:
If competition really is dying, the government needs to attack the problem somehow — blocking mergers, breaking up more companies, or enacting policies like minimum wages and union-friendly laws that balance out corporate power. In some extreme cases, like medical care, government health insurance might even be necessary to force down prices on consumers’ behalf.
But a few economists urge caution. Before making big changes to the system, they reason, policy makers and researchers alike should examine alternatives to this narrative. What if companies are getting bigger not because they’ve figured out how to eliminate rivals unfairly, but because they’re simply better at what they do?
A recent paper by Chad Syverson of the University of Chicago Booth School of Business argues that it’s still possible that the rise in markups is an illusion — the result of mismeasurement by economists. Citing research by Nicolas Crouzet and Janet Eberly, he suggests an alternative explanation — that big companies such as Wal-Mart, Google or Pfizer are simply richer in intangible assets, like highly effective management cultures, advanced technological know-how, beloved popular brands and so on.
Economists David Autor, David Dorn, Lawrence Katz, Christina Patterson and John Van Reenen, who wrote one of the first papers to bring attention to the phenomenon of rising concentration, also endorse a story of so-called superstar companies. They point out that the companies that have been establishing dominance tend to use less labor to generate revenue, suggesting that they’re winning because they’re more productive.
A new paper by economists Ufuk Akcigit and Sina Ates makes a similar argument. They cite a wide array of evidence showing that the US economy has become less dynamic — fewer businesses are being started, fewer workers are moving between companies and older businesses are coming to dominate the market. Drawing on evidence from the US Patent and Trademark Office, they show that a few companies have been applying for a larger share of patents, as well as buying up an increasing percentage of the patents that already exist. A recent McKinsey analysis also shows that top companies are spending more on research and development. This evidence suggests hoarding of knowledge. It could also help explain the disturbing fact that a few companies appear to be pulling away from the rest in terms of productivity growth.
Some economists strenuously dispute the idea that top companies deserve the “superstar” label at all. In a recent paper, Germán Gutiérrez and Thomas Philippon argue that since about 2000, top U.S. companies have largely stopped improving the productivity of their operations, and have instead begun simply absorbing capital, employees and other resources from rivals (their increased profitability, the authors claim, is due mainly to paying lower taxes). If Gutiérrez and Philippon are right that top corporations are merely growing bigger instead of becoming more efficient, it blurs the distinction between the monopoly power story and the superstar story.
If some companies are hoarding all of the top employees, technological know-how and patents, it suggests that government should be focused on spreading those riches more widely. One way to do this is to ban employee noncompete agreements, which would help top workers (and the ideas contained in their heads) circulate among many different companies. Another policy is patent reform — severely curtailing patenting in areas like product design and software, and raising the hurdles for patenting in general.
All of this evidence suggests that policy to promote competition needs to open up an additional line of attack. Rolling back market concentration directly with antitrust policy and reduced regulatory barriers to entry is good, as are institutions that support workers and consumers directly. But policy makers should also be thinking about how to diffuse knowledge and talent from top companies to lagging competitors and scrappy startups. The economy could use fewer superstars and more stars of all sizes.

Rising crude prices to adversely impact CAD, rupee, inflation: Report

A possible increase in fuel prices due to the US sanctions on Iranian crude exports can have adverse impacts on the current account deficit (CAD), the rupee and inflation, warns a report.
The country meets a tenth of its crude demand from Iran--making it the third largest customer for the Persian country - and the "immediate challenge" is to find alternate suppliers who will be able to deliver it at competitive prices as Tehran offers after May 2, Care Ratings said Tuesday.

It can be noted that the US had on Monday decided to do away with exceptions on sanctions to countries like India who are importing oil from Iran from May 2. Following this, the government said it will stop shipments from that Gulf nation which has the one of the largest crude reserves in the world. China, Japan and India are the biggest three customers for Iran.
A 10 per cent spike in crude prices can result in a 0.40 per cent widening of the CAD, which can consequently play out into a 3-4 per cent depreciation in the rupee and also push up inflation by 0.24 per cent, the ratings agency said.
Crude prices jumped to the highest level at $74 a barrel since November following the US announcement and equities also tumbled the worst in 2019 Monday.
The rating agency report said if the crude prices remain around $75 a barrel for one more month, the Reserve Bank's rate setting panel may postpone a rate cut which it is widely expected to announce in June.
Rising crude prices can have a two-way impact on the domestic economy, which will play out on both the revenue and expenditure fronts, it said.
While higher oil prices will mean more revenue for the states as tax is ad valorem, but for the Centre, it may not matter as the rates are fixed, it said.
Oil marketing companies would earn higher profits if there is a pass-through which can be beneficial for the government too unless the subsidy on kerosene comes in the way, it said.
"With the US-directed sanctions kicking off from May 2, it would be interesting to see how the various macroeconomic indicators of the domestic economy change course owing to increase in crude prices," it said.
Meanwhile, its peer Icra said a $10 a barrel increase in oil prices will lead to a 0.10 per cent increase in the headline inflation.
The discontinuation of Iranian oil imports is a credit negative for domestic refineries, it said, adding there will be an impact of about $350 million on annual operating profit of the domestic refiners.

Scrapping India's trade privileges could hit US consumers, say senators

A US plan to end preferential duty-free imports of up to $5.6 billion from India could raise costs for American consumers, two US senators have told their country's trade office, urging a delay in adopting the plan, and seeking more negotiations.
If President Donald Trump presses ahead with his plan to end the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) for India, it could lose the status in early May, Indian officials have said, raising the prospect of retaliatory tariffs.
India is the world's largest beneficiary of the GSP, dating from the 1970s, but trade ties with the US have widened over what Trump calls its high tariffs and concerns over New Delhi's e-commerce policies.
"While we agree that there are a number of market access issues that can and should be addressed, we do remain concerned that the withdrawal of duty concessions will make Indian exports of eligible products to the United States costlier," the senators, John Cornyn and Mark Warner, wrote.
"Some of these costs will likely be passed on to American consumers".
In their Friday letter, the co-chairs of the Senate's India caucus of more than 30 senators called for withdrawal to be delayed until the end of India's 39-day general elections, which began on Thursday, with results expected on May 23.
Allowing for talks to continue beyond the elections would underscore the importance of the trade ties, presenting an opportunity to resolve market access issues and improve the overall US-India relationship for years to come, they added.
If the United States scraps duty-free access for about 2,000 product lines, it will mostly hurt small and medium businesses in India, such as makers of engineering goods.
Despite close political ties, trade between India and the United States, which stood at $126 billion in 2017, is widely seen to be performing at nearly a quarter of its potential.
Trade relations suffered in the past few months after India adopted new rules on e-commerce reining in how companies such as Amazon.com Inc and Walmart Inc-backed Flipkart do business.
Last June, India said it would step up import duties varying from 20 percent to 120 percent on a slew of US farm, steel and iron products, angered by Washington's refusal to exempt it from new steel and aluminium tariffs.
But it has since repeatedly delayed adopting the higher duties.

US testing 250 objects from Indian ASAT debris; ISS not at risk

The US is tracking 250-270 objects of debris in the space generated due to India's anti-satellite (ASAT) missile test in lower earth orbit, but the International Space Station or ISS is not at risk, the Pentagon said Friday.
US Strategic Command's Joint Force Space Component Command (JFSCC) said 250 pieces of debris associated with an Indian ASAT launch that occurred on Wednesday are being actively tracked.

"Debris from the event is being actively monitored by the JFSCC, and conjunction notifications are being issued to satellite owners/operators in accordance with standard notification processes through the Department of Defense's public space situational awareness sharing website HYPERLINK "http://www.space-track.org," it said.
The JFSCC said it will continue to actively track debris associated with the event and issue close approach notifications as required until the debris enters the earth's atmosphere.
US Air Force Space Command Commander Lt Gen David D Thompson told lawmakers during a Congressional hearing on Thursday that the JFSCC and Air Force's 18 space control Squadron are currently "tracking about 270 different objects in the debris" field.
Responding to questions from members of the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, he said the number is going to grow as the debris field spreads out as the US collects more sensor information.
Thompson, however, refrained from giving any further details of the debris.
"But we do know the altitude at which it occurred. We immediately started providing public notice on our space track website and will provide direct notification to satellite operators, if those satellites are under threat," he said.
Responding to questions from lawmakers, Thompson said, "At this point in time, the International Space Station is not at risk."
The ISS orbits over 100 km higher than the orbit at which India carried out the ASAT test.
"That's another thing that we do and provide warning routinely. That's just an example of -no other nation --no other military force, no other civil or other body could have detected characterised and begun warning and providing the world, the way we do with air force and other joint assets," Thompson said.
Astronomer Jonathan McDowell from the prestigious Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics said India acted in a less irresponsible manner than the Chinese in doing the test.
"We don't know yet how much debris and how high. The United States has said that it's tracking about 250 pieces. But it will take them at least a few days, if not a few weeks to figure to catalog those pieces," he told PTI.
Once the cataloging is done, only then one could analyses how bad the situation is, he added.
Responding to a question, McDowell, who has been following India's space program since 1970s, described the ASAT test as a "much more aggressive stance" even though it is presented as a defensive measure.
This is reflective of the ambitious and military side of the Indian space programme and is in response to the China's aggressive space militarisation programme, he said.
Opposed to such tests, McDowell said, the Indian ASAT test was "relatively responsible" or "less responsible" than the Chinese ASAT test.
"Although I'm opposed to the test, I think that if you're going to do a test, that's a better way to do it.
"There will be debris that ends up in higher orbit but not as much and not as long left. The test at level will ensure that the debris doesn't stay up for long periods of time, in contrast to what happened with the Chinese test, which was much higher up," he said.
"So that is relatively responsible. Certainly they (Indians) have learned from the mistakes of the Chinese," said the American astronomer.
He said the Chinese debris hundreds of pieces in worst possible orbit - are still in the space.
The Indian debris might vanish and burn up when they come down in the next few months, while that of the Chinese might take decades to come down, McDowell said.
Well known space professional, Brian Weeden said China is one reason for India's test.
"India sees itself in competition with China for regional power and prestige and has been internally debating its own demonstration ever since the Chinese ASAT test in 2007," he said.
"The other factor is India's concern about being one of the "have nots" for ASAT weapons like they were for nuclear weapons, in the event of a future ban on ASAT testing," Weeden said.
But more tests like this risk creating space debris that could impact commercial business models for space, plus many of these new space companies feel strongly about social responsibility, he added.

US says door open if India has serious proposals to resolve trade issues

Observing that trade has been an area of frustration in bilateral ties, the US has said that the door is open if India is prepared to bring a serious proposal to the table to address the issues related to trade and market access.
The US in November last year revoked duty-free concessions on import of at least 50 Indian products, mostly from handloom and agriculture sectors, reflecting the Trump administration's tough stand on trade-related issues with New Delhi.

A senior State Department official said Friday that the US is proud to be India's largest export market and most important economic partner.
"But we have struggled with regulatory issues that get in the way of the ease of doing business and market access for American companies and products," said the official.
"Trade has frankly been an area of frustration in the relationship, but the door is open if India is prepared to bring a serious proposal to the table," he said.
Despite intensive engagement with the Government of India for nearly a year, India did not assure the US that it would provide equitable and reasonable access to its market, which led to its termination from the Generalised System of Preferences programme, the official said.
"While we were pleased that the growing US exports to India, largely crude oil and LNG, led to a 7.1 per cent reduction in our bilateral goods trade deficit last year, many structural challenges in our trade relationship have yet to be resolved," said the senior State Department official.
During the just concluded visit of the Foreign Secretary, while the focus was on strategic, defence and regional issues, in particular Pakistan and Afghanistan, but the visiting diplomat is believed to have been conveyed that the ball is in India's court on resolving the trade related issues.
The US is understood to have told India that the Trump administration is willing to review its decision to revoke its GSP privileges to India, if New Delhi comes with a credible proposal to address the market access issues that America has been talking about for nearly a year.
The GSP notification is still within the 60 days period, after which the benefits would formally be withdrawn, it is reliably learnt that the US has told India that it is not too late. But it is unlikely to happen, given that India is now into an election campaign mode, officials on both sides said.
While India argues that it is difficult to take any policy decision at this point of time because of the elections and the model code of conduct, American points out that it has decided to take its decision on revoking GSP privileges only after it exhausted all its options with India.
During talks with India, America is believed to have said that "there are creative ways of solving" all the trade related issues that addressed concerns of both the countries.
For instance, there are creative ways of certifying that the dairy products meet Indian standards, and have believed to have talked about creative solutions to certifying vegetarian cows. Similarly access to high end cell phones can be addressed in a way that does not open up the market to China, Americans are believed to have pointed out.
The United States, it is learnt, had been "extraordinarily clear" since April last year on addressing certain market access issues in the absence of which it reportedly told India that it risked losing GSP privileges.
The US still hopes that the issue can still be resolved before the election and certainly after the elections.

India jumps eight places to 36th spot in US Chamber's global IP index

For the second year in a row, India has maintained the upward trajectory in the International Intellectual Property (IP) Index ranking. In the latest edition of the International IP Index, India’s rank moved up to 36 among 50 economies - jumping eight places - as against 44 in 2018.
India’s overall score in the seventh edition of the US Chamber of Commerce’s Global Innovation Policy Center’s (GIPC’s) annual International IP Index has increased substantially to 16.22 (out of maximum score of 45), against 12.03 (out of 40) in the sixth edition. The latest report, Inspiring Tomorrow, analyses the IP climate in 50 world economies, based on 45 indicators critical to an innovation-led economy.

A GIPC statement said the improvement in India’s performance reflects important reforms implemented by Indian policymakers toward building and sustaining an innovation ecosystem for domestic entrepreneurs and foreign investors alike.
“India’s performance on the Index finely captures the Government of India’s incremental, consistent initiatives over time to improve the country’s IP ecosystem, guided by the vision of the 2016 National IP Rights Policy,” said Patrick Kilbride, senior vice-president, GIPC.
Kilbride said the improvement in India’s performance is a result of specific reforms, including its accession to the WIPO Internet Treaties, the agreement to initiate a patent prosecution highway with international patent offices, a dedicated set of IP incentives for small businesses, and administrative reforms to address the patent backlog. “All of these enhance India’s competitiveness in research & development-intensive industries,” he added.
Patting the Narendra Modi government’s pro-IP policies, the GIPC release said these initiatives have the potential to transform the government’s programmes such as ‘Accelerating Growth for New India Innovations,’ ‘Startup India’, and ‘Digital India’ to economic reality. “It presents an objective, data-driven view of competitiveness in a global market, based on criteria used by the business community when determining where to invest,” the release added.
Despite India’s improved show in this year’s Index, the report noted there were still substantial challenges regarding the country’s patenting and IP enforcement environment. These included barriers to licensing and technology transfer, strict registration requirements, limited framework for the protection of biopharmaceutical IP rights, patentability requirements outside international standards, among others.
Commenting on the enforcement environment, the report noted that rights holders continue to face challenges in enforcing their IP rights in India. “India has high rates of substandard and counterfeit medicines, online and physical piracy, and counterfeiting. One area of growing concern has been the long pendency times in the Indian court system,” the report added.

USCIS finalises higher preference for US advanced degree holders for H-1B

Immigration authorities in US have released final rules to ensure higher number of H-1B applicants with advanced degrees from US institutes get an advantage during the filing season that starts on April 1st 2019. Further, online registrations for H-1B visa petitions will not be introduced this year as the platform for registration needs more testing before full implementation, said US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) in a statement on Wednesday.
“These simple and smart changes are a positive benefit for employers, the foreign workers they seek to employ, and the agency’s adjudicators, helping the H-1B visa program work better,” said USCIS Director L. Francis Cissna. “The new registration system, once implemented, will lower overall costs for employers and increase government efficiency. We are also furthering President Trump’s goal of improving our immigration system by making a simple adjustment to the H-1B cap selection process. As a result, U.S. employers seeking to employ foreign workers with a U.S. master’s or higher degree will have a greater chance of selection in the H-1B lottery in years of excess demand for new H-1B visas.”

Changing the order in which USCIS counts these allocations will likely increase the number of petitions for beneficiaries with a master’s or higher degree from a US institution of higher education to be selected under the H-1B numerical allocations. Specifically, the change will result in an estimated increase of up to 16% (or 5,340 workers) in the number of selected petitions for H-1B beneficiaries with a master’s degree or higher from a U.S. institution of higher education, said USCIS in a statement.
The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), posted a final rule amending regulations for H-1B cap-subject petitions, including those that may be eligible for the advanced degree exemption. The final rule reverses the order by (USCIS) selects H-1B petitions under the H-1B regular cap and the advanced degree exemption, and it introduces an electronic registration requirement for petitioners seeking to file H-1B cap-subject petitions.
"The reverse petition selection process, introduced this year from April 1, 2019 means that USCIS will run a lottery on petitions across the board and then those petitions for individuals with advanced degrees (generally called Master’s Cap) that were not selected in the general lottery will be subject to a second lottery to select the 20,000 petitions reserved for this category of beneficiaries. There isn't a separate process or application for Master’s Cap cases but this reversal of selection order is expected to be an advantage of up to 16% for people with US degrees.," said Poorvi Chothani, founder and managing partner of law firm LawQuest.
Following public feedback, USCIS has suspended the electronic registration requirement for the FY 2020 cap season to complete user testing and ensure the system and process are fully functional before implementation. Once implemented, the electronic registration requirement will require petitioners seeking to file H-1B cap petitions, including those that may be eligible for the advanced degree exemption, to first electronically register with USCIS during a designated registration period.
Only those whose registrations are selected will be eligible to file an H-1B cap-subject petition. USCIS expects that the electronic registration requirement, once implemented, will reduce overall costs for petitioners and create a more efficient and cost-effective H-1B cap petition process for USCIS and petitioners.
Earlier in the week USCIS also announced the reinstatement of premium processing for all fiscal year (FY) 2019 H-1B cap petitions only i.e. pending petitions, including those eligible for the advanced degree exemption (the “master’s cap”). Petitioners who have received requests for evidence (RFEs) for pending FY 2019 cap petitions should include their RFE response with any request for premium processing they may submit. When a petitioner requests the agency’s premium processing service, USCIS guarantees a 15-day processing time.

50 Indian items hit as US scraps duty-free privilege on 90 products' import

The US on Thursday revoked duty-free concessions on import of at least 50 Indian products, mostly from handloom and agriculture sectors, reflecting the Trump administration's tough stand on trade-related issues with New Delhi.
The federal register issued a notification, listing out 90 products which were so far subject to duty-free provisions under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP).
President Donald Trump issued a presidential proclamation on Tuesday, leading to the removal of these products from the privilege beginning November 1.
As of November 1, these products "will no longer qualify for duty-free preferences under the GSP programme but may continue to be imported subject to regular Most Favored Nation duty-rates," an official of US Trade Representative told PTI.
A review of the products indicates that the presidential proclamation is not country-specific, but product specific.
ALSO READ: Arvind Panagariya bats for better deals with US on trade front
With India being the largest beneficiary of the GSP, it has been hit the most by the latest decision of the Trump administration.
The GSP, the largest and oldest US trade preference programme, is designed to promote economic development by allowing duty-free entry for thousands of products from designated beneficiary countries.
A count of these products indicated that at least 50 of them are from India. Notably, India is the largest beneficiary of the GSP. In 2017, India's duty-free export to the US under the GSP was to the tune of more than $5.6 billion.
The volume of India's export to the US impacted by the latest move of the Trump administration is not known yet, but the list of products from which duty-free import provision has been removed reflects that a large number of small and medium-size business could be impacted, in particular handloom and agricultural sector.
ALSO READ: India, US have exchanged offers for possible trade deal, says Suresh Prabhu
In his presidential proclamation, Trump said that certain 'de minimis' waivers will no longer be granted for any product, regardless of the country source, that exceeds the GSP's Competitive Need Limitation (CNL) thresholds. The CNL thresholds are quantitative ceilings on GSP benefits for each product and designated beneficiary country.
Trump said he had determined in 2017 certain beneficiary developing countries exported eligible articles in quantities exceeding the applicable competitive-need limitations.
"I hereby terminate the duty-free treatment for such articles from such beneficiary developing countries," he said.
Products from other countries like Argentina, Brazil, Thailand, Suriname, Pakistan, Turkey, the Philippines, Ecuador and Indonesia have also been removed from the GSP list.

ALSO READ: To cut trade deficit, India plans to boost export of 200 products to China
Some of the prominent Indian products removed from the duty-free provisions of the GSP include dried pigeon pea seed; areca nuts, fresh or dried, in shell; turpentine gum; mangoes, prepared or preserved by vinegar or acetic acid; sandstone, merely cut into blocks or slabs of a rectangular (including square) shape; tin chlorides; barium chlorides; salts and esters of tartaric acid, nesoi; and trimethyl phosphite.
Full grain unsplit or grain split buffalo hide or skin; grain split whole buffalo leather, without hair on; whole buffalo skin leather (not full grain unsplits/grain splits); and full grain unsplit buffalo leather (not whole), have also been removed from the duty-free the GSP list.
Dyed, plain weave certified hand-loomed fabrics of cotton, containing 85 per cent or more cotton by weight; plain weave certified hand-loomed fabrics of cotton, containing 85 per cent or more cotton by weight, hand-loomed carpet and other textile floor coverings, not of pile construction, woven, made up of man-made textile materials have also been removed.
ALSO READ: Lack of convergence, FTA hurdles to plague any US-India trade deal: Report
Base metal clad with gold mixed link necklaces and neck chains and keyboard musical instruments, like harmoniums and similar keyboard instruments with free metal reeds are among the other products.
These products can still be exported to the US from India but they will be subject to regular tariffs.
In April, the US announced eligibility review of India for the GSP. According to the USTR, the total US imports under GSP in 2017 was $21.2 billion, of which India was the biggest beneficiary with $5.6 billion, followed by Thailand ($4.2 billion) and Brazil ($2.5 billion).
The programme has now been renewed through December 31, 2020.
ALSO READ: 'Forgoing India, US trade deal will send negative signals to investors'
FICCI in a submission to the USTR had said that the termination of the GSP would be contrary to the legislative objective and the history of the Trade Reform Act of 1974 of furthering the economic development of developing countries.
It would cause significant distress to the export-oriented sector leading to increased cost for US industries that use products under the GSP, it said.
In June, India urged the Trump administration not to withdraw it from the GSP.

Rupee falls Rs 20 paise, closes at 73.47 against USD amid strong greenback

The rupee depreciated by 20 paise to close at 73.47 against the US dollar on Friday amid a strengthening greenback and sustained foreign capital outflows.
At the Interbank Foreign Exchange, the rupee opened on a weak note at 73.44 and further slipped to hit an intra-day low of 73.47 against the US currency.

The local unit gained some ground to reach 73.28 during the day. However, it finally settled at 73.47, showing a loss of 20 paise over the previous close.
On Thursday, the rupee fell 11 paise to close at 73.27.
The dollar rose to a 10-week high on Friday ahead of US GDP data.
Oil prices fell over fears of possible drop in oil demand amid a rout in global markets. Brent crude was trading at $76.20 per barrel.
The BSE Sensex crashed more than 1 per cent for the second straight session Friday to close at a fresh seven-month low of 33,349.31, while the broader NSE Nifty slipped 94.90 points to 10,030.00.
Foreign funds pulled out Rs 13.56 billion from the capital markets on a net basis, while domestic institutional investors bought shares worth Rs 18.75 billion Thursday, provisional data showed.
The Financial Benchmark India Private Ltd (FBIL) set the reference rate for the rupee/dollar at 73.3740 and for rupee/euro at 83.4077. The reference rate for rupee/British pound was fixed at 94.0503 and for rupee/100 Japanese yen at 65.41.