The trade coverage of the traded-restrictive measures affecting imports implemented during the review period from mid-May to mid-October2019 was estimated at USD 460.4 billion, ie 3.05 per cent of the value of G20 merchandise imports, according to a just released joint report of WTO, OECD, and UNCTAD on ‘G20 Trade and Investment Measures’. This represents an increase of 37 per cent compared to the previous period (USD 335.9 billion) and is only second to the USD 480.9 billion reported for the period mid-May to mid –October 2018. The last three review periods have seen the trade coverage of import-restrictive measures soar. But the current figures include two measures by India (increases of import tariffs), accounting for 35.5 per cent of the total. The United State comes next with one measure (imposition of additional duties on products from China), accounting for 34.4 per cent, and with two measures (tariffs on imported goods from the United States) China occupies third position, accounting for only 19 per cent of the total. India’s worst concerns are therefore obvious. In trade in commercial services import growth remained positive in India in Q2 at 4.1 per cent, but was down sharply from 11.9 per cent in Q1.

During July 2018 – June 2019 compared with the preceding year, the overall level of anti-dumping initiations decreased substantially from 202 to 138, but it is attributable to decreases in the number of investigations initiated by the G20 countries. India initiated 21 investigations against 44 last year only next to the United States which initiated 33 against last year 43. European Union increased initiation from 8 to 11, the Republic of Korea from 6 to 7 and Saudi Arabia from 3 to 5. All other countries had lesser number of initiations.

Metal products accounted for the largest share of initiations across the reporting period. Steel products accounted for about 75 per cent of these investigations. China continues to be the most frequent target of investigations on metal products with 17 investigations on its products during July 2018-June 2019. The United States initiated 12 investigations, followed by India with 10 and Canada with 8. A total of 121 anti-dumping measures imposed out of which the United States with 33 was at the top while with 20 remained at second, and with 17 China at third. A year before India was at the top with 44 impositions and the US second with 34.

A total of 34 initiations of countervailing duty investigations occurred during July 2018 – June 2019, out of which the US with 18, more than half, was at the top, followed by India with 9, and European Union with 4. China and Australia initiated only two and one respectively. Number of countervailing measures imposed were 29, out of which the United States imposed 18, followed by Canada 6. India imposed only one.

Eight initiations of safeguard investigations were taken place out of which three were initiated by Russian Federation, seconded by Indonesia with two. India did not initiate any safeguard investigations during July 2018 – June 2019 against one in the preceding year. Eight safeguard measures were imposed, Indonesia imposed two and Canada, EU, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, and South Africa one each.

Measures maintained by G20 economies are often discussed in the SPS Committee. Moreover, top ten WTO Members, in terms of complaints about measures they maintain, are all G20 economies. The STCs raised by G20 account for 73 per cent of all STCs raised to date. The objective most frequently identified in the SPS measures notified by G20 economies during the review period was food safety, accounting for 67 per cent of the notifications. Other measures fall under animal health, plant protection, protect humans from animal/plant pest or disease, and protect territory from other damages from pests. The committee discussed previously raised STCs in July 2019 Committee meeting. India had raised concern against European Union for measures with objective of food safety, under the title ‘European Union revised proposal for categorization of compounds as endocrine disruptors’ and ‘EU MRls for buprofezin, diflubenzuron, ethoxysulfuron, ioxynil, molinate, picoxystrobin and tepraloxydim.’

Among the New STCs concerning G20 economies measures were 11, out of which three were against India. The United States and European Union raised concerns against India’s Notification of 2018 draft cosmetic rules, amending provisions of the India Drug and Cosmetics Act of 1940. Canada joined them in their complaint on India’s Toys (Quality Control) order 2019. Indonesia complained against India on Moisture content for Cassia Vera (Cinnamomum Burmani).

Out of seven persistent STCs raised between May 1, 2019 and September 30 2019, two were related to India. One is the India’s New Telecommunications related Rules and other DoT notifications and accompanying template, “Security and Business Continuity Agreement.” It was raised 26 times. Concerns were raised 19 times against India’s Electronics and Information Technology Goods (Requirements for Compulsory Registration) Order 2012.

On Regulations on fish and fish products and the TBT Agreement was discussed because fish and fish products are among the most heavily traded commodities in the world. India is 4th largest exporter with export worth USD 6.9 billion. China (USD 21.5 billion), Norway (USD11.8billion), and Viet Nam (USD 8.9 billion) are the top three. World’s largest importers in 2018 were Uropean Union (USD 57.7 billion),followed by the United States (USD23.8 billion); Japan (USD 15.3 billion); China (USD 14.4 billion) and the Republic of Korea (USD5.9billion). No concerns were raised against India in this sector.
However, concerns were raised in the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG) by Australia, Canada, China, Japan, Republic of Korea, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Switzerland, ChineseTaipei, Thailand;and United States against India’s customs duties on ICT products; against India's quantitative restrictions on imports of certain pulses (raised by Australia, Canada, European Union, Russian Federation and United States).

Concerns were also raised in Committee on Market Access (CMA) against India's customs duties on telecommunication and other products (raised by Canada, China, Norway, Chinese Taipei and United States); and India's quantitative restrictions on certain pulses (raised by Australia, Canada, European Union and United States).
In the Committee on Import Licensing (CIL) concerns were raised by the United States against India's import licensing requirements on boric acid. In the Working Party on State Trading Enterprises (STEs) concerns were raise by Australia and Canada against measures imposed by India,limitingthe importation of pulses.

Out of 35 implementation related matters 23 were discussed. More than half of the question raised (60 per cent) were related to domestic support policies. They included dairy products (i.e. India's National Dairy Plan Phase I), and wheat (i.e. India's wheat public stockholding). India received several questions concerning various of its domestic support programmes. (i.e. itstransparency with GreenBox measures, its NationalFood Security Mission, itsRashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, its increased budget on agriculture and rural development, itsPM-KISAN income guarantee scheme, itsshort-term crop loans, and itsTransport and Marketing Assistance).Some of the questionssought clarification on policies that potentially subsidized exports of agricultural products (i.e. India's Maharashtra State export subsidies and Russian Federation's support to exporting industry in east of the country).

Article 18.6 issues discussed for the first time in June 2019 at CoA meeting. Australia and the US raised questions against India’s Transport and Marketing asistance (TMA), Ukraine on India’s wheat policies, the US on Maharashtra State export subsidies, India’s National Dairy Plan Phase I, India’s National Food Security Mission, India’s Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojna, India’s short-term crom loans, India’s wheat public stockpiling and India’s transparency with Green Box measurs, and European Union on India’s increased budget on agriculture and rural development, and New Zealand on India’s PM-Kisan income guarantee scheme. India’s pulse policies have been subject to review in 8 meetings. India’s skim milk powder export subsidies was subject of questioning for the fourth time. India’s support to rice export was also questioned by Japan, Thailand, and the United States. The US raised questions against India’s dairy loans. There are also several requests for consultation against India on Tariffs on ICT goods (Chinese Taipei, EU), Additional duties (US), Tariff Treatment (Japan), Sugar and Sugarcane (Guatemala, Australia, and Brazil, etc). There are many more challenges and concerns for India.