President Donald Trump used his Oval Office appearance today to fire back at what he called years of unfair trade practices by India. “They have been fooling us with 100% tariffs for years,” he declared, suggesting those measures have held back U.S. economic interests. But Trump added a twist: “We were not foolishly charging them back. So yes, they’ll have to move forward with the tariffs, but we won’t be doing it.”
A Trade Daydream, But What Does It Mean?
Trump’s framing positions America as the long-suffering adult in a trade relationship, finally refusing to be the “fool” responding in kind. His words lean more toward trade theater than detailed policy: no plans for retaliatory tariffs, but a bold stance of unilateral restraint.
“So we were not doing much business with India, but they were doing business with us because we weren’t charging them — foolishly,” Trump said. “Everything they made, they sent into the US, and we were not sending anything because they were charging us a 100 per cent tariff.”
Fact Check
To prove his point, Trump pulled out his favourite prop: Harley-Davidson. “I’ll give you an example — Harley Davidson. They could not sell in India as there was a 200 per cent tariff on a motorcycle,” he declared.
But here’s the rub- the actual tariff when Trump first made the Harley case in 2018 was 100 per cent. Since then, India has gradually cut duties on imported bikes, down to 40% for engines up to 1,600 cc and 30% for bigger ones, with some talks (now stalled) about a zero-duty quota. Harley’s troubles in India stemmed less from tariffs and more from weak demand, but for Trump, the “200 per cent” line remains a perfect applause cue.
China in the Crosshairs
He did not stop with India. Turning to Beijing, Trump assured the room, “China needs us more than we need them. And they’ll get it.” The comment aligned neatly with his broader narrative of reclaiming leverage over longtime global rivals.
The Supreme Court Shadow
As if that wasn’t enough, Trump also warned that if a recent court ruling against his tariffs stands, America could be on the hook for a refund. “We would have to give trillions and trillions of dollars back to countries that have been ripping us off for the last 35 years. And I can’t imagine it happening on a legal basis. They have no legal basis whatsoever,” he said, insisting an appeal was imminent.
Fact check: As of August 24, the total tariff revenue collected was $65.8 billion, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Far from “trillions,” and those costs are generally borne by importing firms, not by foreign governments.
Referring to an August 29 lower court ruling that declared his tariffs illegal, he claimed, “We would have to give trillions and trillions of dollars back to countries that have been ripping us off for the last 35 years. And I can’t imagine it happening on a legal basis. They have no legal basis whatsoever.”
He added that his administration will appeal, potentially as early as Wednesday.
But the numbers don’t match his rhetoric. As of August 24, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported $65.8 billion had been collected from these tariffs, significant, but nowhere near “trillions.” Moreover, tariffs are typically paid by importing firms, not the exporting countries Trump accuses of “ripping off” America.
Also Read: “That’s Fake News”: Trump Rejects Health Rumours After Labour Day Speculation
Manufacturing, Disclosed, Not Invented
Trump also referenced broader concerns about U.S. manufacturing capacity, saying implicitly that some critical goods are “not manufactured in the U.S., but elsewhere.” That’s a reality echoed by David Halverson, president at Scorpion Biological Services, who noted that “a large percentage” of biomanufacturing capacity, vaccines, medicines, now resides in countries like China, Korea, and India. “Putting biomanufacturing back in the U.S. will enable us to hold our own in the event of another national emergency.”
Asked if he might consider easing up on India’s 50 per cent duties, Trump said he “gets along with India very well” but reminded the room, “for many years it was a one-sided relationship. It’s only changed now after I came along.”
