The sharp 50% tariffs invoked by Trump against Indian products have caused fierce pushback from influential Republicans from his own party. Although Trump defended the increase in the tariff as a reaction to India’s ongoing import of Russian oil during the Ukraine war, many Republican legislators charge him with sabotaging an important bilateral relationship and following policies that disproportionately favour his corporate friends.
Top Republican Critics of the Tariffs
- Chris Sununu, the former Republican Governor of New Hampshire, was among the most vocal critics. Appearing on CNBC, Sununu cautioned that the tariffs are frightening US manufacturers that depend on Indian suppliers. He emphasised that alienating India—the globe’s sixth-largest manufacturing economy and an important strategic ally—could hurt American jobs as well as global partnerships. “Choose your battles carefully, particularly with friends,” he warned, pointing out how India’s emerging position in world supply chains warrants respect instead of punishment.
- Mike Pence, erstwhile US Vice President and Trump’s former deputy, expressed his opposition on social media site X. Pence reasserted the cause of free trade tenets and cautioned that tariffs ultimately hurt American businesses and consumers. His tweets called out the economic consequences of such trade measures, using comparisons such as Ford paying outrageous tariffs while producing cars domestically, indirectly criticising Trump’s economic strategy.
“Trump’s First-Term Space Policy Was The Best in Decades, But this Time Is Different” | https://t.co/hQb0OEW06q
Time to Make American Leadership in Space Great Again🇺🇸 https://t.co/9uUfvP4Qiu pic.twitter.com/J1MKRdVgIG
— Mike Pence (@Mike_Pence) August 9, 2025
- Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican Congresswoman on the far right, had even more negative opinions combining trade and immigration complaints. While Trump imposed tariffs, Greene demanded that “Indian H-1B visas displacing American workers” be stopped, drawing upon the contentious debate on immigration and labor amidst heightened trade tensions. While she has a more extreme viewpoint, it shows how tariff actions are tied to more general partisan issues relating to the protection of domestic jobs.
- Lindsey Graham, Republican Senator and a self-declared hawk on Russia, endorsed tariffs in general but cautioned against harming the overall US-India relationship. He praised Trump for trying to punish India for purchasing Russian oil but cautioned against costs to America’s strategic vision in Asia. Graham highlighted the importance of striking a balance between enforcing sanctions and preserving interaction with an important ally.
Accusations of Trump Treating Corporate Allies with Favouritism
A number of accounts and expert analyses fault Trump for using tariff policies selectively to favour corporate friends. India was hit with tough tariffs up to 50%, yet China was exempted from similar sanctions on essential exports such as rare earth minerals—essential to US defense and technology industries. This uneven treatment, critics say, is determined by lobbying pressures and undercuts a unified US trade strategy.
Ex-US National Security Advisor John Bolton called the tariffs on India a “potentially huge mistake” that would drive New Delhi closer to Russia and China, making US geopolitical interests more challenging. This is also shared by bipartisan critics concerned about Trump’s one-sided tariff escalation.
What to make of it?
The Republican opposition evinces a segment within the party that finds Trump’s 50% tariffs on India economically detrimental, strategically misjudged, and politically driven to benefit special corporate interests. As the deadline of August 27, 2025—the implementation date for the tariffs—looms near, these intra-party dissenting voices point to the intricacy and dangers of the US’s current trade stance towards one of its most significant international partners.
The discord underscores calls for a more balanced, nuanced approach that protects American economic interests without jeopardising vital geopolitical alliances.
