The United States and India recently announced a framework for an interim trade deal, which included commitments to reduce tariffs on a range of goods and address digital trade barriers. Shortly after the announcement, the White House revised its official fact sheet, removing references to “certain pulses” and altering language regarding India’s purchase commitments. These changes have prompted scrutiny from stakeholders in both countries, particularly regarding agricultural imports and digital trade regulations.
According to Hindustan Times, the initial fact sheet released by the White House on 9 February 2026 stated that India would eliminate or reduce tariffs on all US industrial goods and a wide range of food and agricultural products, including “certain pulses.” However, the revised version removed “certain pulses” from the list and changed the language from India “committing” to purchase $500 billion worth of US products to “intending” to do so.
As reported by The Hindu, the updated fact sheet also omitted any mention of India removing its digital services taxes, which was present in the earlier version. The joint statement issued by both countries did not reference “pulses” or digital services taxes, aligning with the revised fact sheet’s omissions.
Further coverage revealed that the removal of “certain pulses” is significant for India’s agricultural sector, as the country is the world’s largest producer and consumer of pulses. High tariffs on these imports have been maintained to protect Indian farmers, and the revision addresses sensitivities around this issue.
Political reactions in India have been mixed. Debate in Parliament saw opposition parties questioning the government on the impact of the deal, particularly regarding its effects on farmers and economic inequality. Treasury benches defended the agreement, highlighting India’s economic growth and the strategic importance of the deal.
“Congress MP Jebi Mather Hisham asked what was ‘wonderful’ in the deal for ‘our farmers’,” the proceedings noted.
On the regulatory front, analysis showed that India introduced stricter social media rules shortly after the trade deal announcement. These rules require platforms to remove certain types of content within two to three hours, a move that could increase compliance burdens for US tech firms operating in India. The new regulations apply broadly, not just to American companies, but the dominance of US firms in India’s digital space means they are particularly affected.
Economic experts and legal analysts have raised concerns about the feasibility of these new digital rules. Following reports, the US has previously objected to similar regulations in other countries, and the compressed takedown timelines in India are expected to face pushback from the technology sector.
In addition to digital trade and agricultural tariffs, the revised fact sheet also changed language regarding India’s planned purchases of US goods. Reporting indicated that the shift from “committed” to “intends” in reference to the $500 billion figure reflects a less binding approach, which may impact future trade negotiations and expectations.
“India intends to buy more American products and purchase over $500 billion of U.S. energy, information and communication technology, coal, and other products,” the revised fact sheet stated.
Broader implications for India’s agricultural sector have also been discussed. Analysis suggested that the inclusion of agriculture in the trade deal marks a significant policy shift, with potential consequences for Indian farmers’ livelihoods and the country’s approach to food security.
Internationally, the deal has drawn attention from other stakeholders. As details emerged, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov expressed hope that the US-India trade agreement would not negatively impact India’s longstanding relationship with Russia, particularly in the context of energy imports and geopolitical alignments.
Note: This article is produced using AI-assisted tools and is based on publicly available information. It has been reviewed by The Quint's editorial team before publishing.