Skip to content
Sign in
Defense & Security · Asia

U.S. official says India trade talks are nearly complete as Jaishankar cites a landing point

A senior U.S. official said negotiations on a proposed India–United States trade agreement are 98% to 99% complete, with the largest issues settled. India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar said the talks were moving toward a “landing point,” while the official said a small number of issues remained.

AI-assisted synthesis · Based on 3 outlets' reportingHow it's made

View timeline · 5 entries
3 outletsLatest reporting 3 min read
Coverage: Center OnlyL 0 · C 3 · R 0
Updat3 graphic: India
Updat3 graphic · Map data: Natural Earth Natural Earth (public domain)

What happened

Key facts

  • A senior U.S. official said negotiations on a trade agreement between India and the United States were 98% to 99% complete (per indianewengland.com, prokerala.com).
  • The senior U.S. official said the largest issues had been settled, with one or two percent of negotiations remaining (per indianewengland.com, prokerala.com).
  • The senior U.S. official said India and the United States remained in regular contact and were continuing discussions at senior political levels (per indianewengland.com, prokerala.com, The Times of India).
  • The senior U.S. official said only a small number of outstanding issues remained (per indianewengland.com).
  • The senior U.S. official said negotiators revisited parts of the proposed agreement after the International Emergency Economic Powers Act was struck down (per prokerala.com).
  • The senior U.S. official said the legal change added several months to negotiations and expressed optimism that the remaining differences could be resolved soon (per prokerala.com).
  • The senior U.S. official said discussions on the trade agreement included President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi (per prokerala.com).
  • India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar said talks were continuing to resolve differences and appeared to be approaching a “landing point” (per The Times of India).
  • S Jaishankar declined to discuss negotiation details publicly, while Goyal said he saw no problem with agreements with the United States and described the relationship as safe (per The Times of India).

The brief

A senior U.S. official said negotiations on a proposed trade agreement between India and the United States are 98% to 99% complete, with the largest issues settled and a small number still open. The account points to a deal nearing completion, but not yet concluded: India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar said talks were continuing to resolve differences and appeared to be heading toward a “landing point.”

The U.S. official described ongoing contact and discussions at senior political levels. The official also said the remaining one or two percent of negotiations concerned outstanding issues. A separate account of the official’s remarks said discussions included President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, placing the negotiations at the highest levels of both governments. The two accounts of the U.S. official’s comments give the same completion estimate and say the major issues have been resolved. One describes a small number of unresolved issues; the other adds that negotiators revisited parts of the proposed agreement after the International Emergency Economic Powers Act was struck down. That account says the legal change added several months to the negotiations and reports the official’s optimism that the remaining differences could be resolved soon. Jaishankar’s public comments offer a more guarded view of the process. He said the two governments were still working through differences and used the phrase “landing point” to characterize the apparent direction of the talks. He also declined to discuss the negotiations in public. His comments do not specify which issues remain or offer a separate estimate of how much work is left. Goyal, speaking at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum, said he saw no problem with agreements between India and the United States and called the relationship safe. His remarks speak to confidence in the broader relationship, rather than confirming that negotiators have resolved the remaining trade issues. The U.S. official’s near-completion estimate and Jaishankar’s account of continuing work therefore describe progress without establishing that an agreement has been finalized. The immediate question is whether the governments can settle the issues still under discussion and conclude the proposed agreement. The public comments establish the U.S. official’s estimate, the Indian minister’s view that talks are approaching a landing point, and continued negotiations; they do not identify the outstanding provisions or announce a completed deal.

Why it matters

  • India and the United States have a proposed trade agreement that the senior U.S. official put at 98% to 99% completion; unresolved provisions remain the concrete negotiating stakes for both governments.
  • The U.S. official said the International Emergency Economic Powers Act’s being struck down led negotiators to revisit parts of the proposal, a documented legal mechanism that added several months to the talks.
  • President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi are named as participants in high-level discussions, while Jaishankar’s description of continuing work underscores that the remaining issues have not been publicly identified as settled.

What to watch next

  • Whether India and the United States resolve the outstanding issues in the proposed trade agreement.
  • Whether the governments announce that negotiations have concluded and the agreement is finalized.
  • Whether India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar or the senior U.S. official identifies the remaining issues publicly.

How it's being covered

Coverage analysisShow details
3 source articles · 3 unique outlets
Coverage mix: Center Only· 3 Center
Where the outlets are based: Asia 67% · Unknown 33%
Coverage mix
Center Only
Left
Center
Right
0 outlets
3 outlets
0 outlets
The marker shows coverage balance: each unique outlet counts once.
Geography
Where the outlets covering this story are based.
3 unique outletsDominant coverage: Asia
Coverage imbalance
  • Coverage is currently concentrated among Center-rated outlets (3 of 3 rated sources); comparatively few Left or Right-rated outlets have published on the event.
How we measure coverage

How outlets' accounts compare

3 framing differences · 3 uncorroborated claims · 3 information gaps
Sources broadly agree on the core facts but frame the story differently.Compared across 3 reports whose full text Updat3 used.
Framing / emphasis differences
Sources agree on the facts but emphasise different angles, actors or consequences.
  • The U.S. official described negotiations as 98% to 99% complete and said the biggest issues were settled; Jaishankar emphasized that the governments were still working through differences while approaching a “landing point.”
  • Goyal expressed confidence in agreements with the United States and described the relationship as safe, while Jaishankar focused on the unresolved negotiations.
  • The claim that the legal change added several months to negotiations is attributed to the senior U.S. official.
Updat3: The underlying facts agree; only the emphasis differs.
One-sided or uncorroborated claims
Claims that come from one party or one source family and are not independently corroborated.
  • The senior U.S. official said the agreement was 98% to 99% complete and that the biggest issues had been settled.
  • Jaishankar said the negotiations appeared to be approaching a “landing point.”
  • Goyal said he saw no problem with agreements with the United States and described the relationship as safe.
Updat3: Not independently corroborated yet — treat as a claim, not an established fact.
Not established by the reporting
Information the available reporting does not contain or confirm. This is a gap, not a disagreement.
  • The sources do not identify the trade provisions that remain unresolved or quantify the agreement’s expected effects on particular industries, workers, consumers, or trade flows.
  • The sources do not describe the legal ruling that struck down the International Emergency Economic Powers Act beyond reporting the official’s account that negotiators revisited parts of the proposal afterward.
  • The remaining issues and the terms still under negotiation are not specified.
Updat3: Updat3 cannot conclude anything about this from the current sources.

Timeline

Developments from this story's sources, dated background we compiled and fact-checked, and our earlier coverage. Each row says which.
  1. IEEPA, enacted in 1977, authorizes the U.S. president to regulate economic transactions during a declared national emergency; it was not created as a trade agreement or tariff code.
    Background · from our historical context
  2. India challenged those measures at the WTO and, in June 2019, imposed retaliatory tariffs on selected U.S. goods.
    Background · from our historical context
  3. On June 5, 2019, the United States ended India’s eligibility for preferential access under its Generalized System of Preferences program, citing insufficient access for U.S. products in India.
    Background · from our historical context
  4. The February 2025 announcement marked a renewed attempt to negotiate one after those earlier mechanisms had managed disputes without replacing them with an overarching agreement.
    Background · from our historical context
  5. The February 2025 plan therefore built on existing trade institutions while seeking a broader bilateral arrangement.
    Background · from our historical context

How we got here

On February 13, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced plans to negotiate a bilateral trade agreement, with a stated goal of more than doubling bilateral trade to $500 billion by 2030. In 2026, the U.S.

Supreme Court struck down the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as a basis for the administration’s tariffs; the law’s use in trade measures had formed part of the negotiating backdrop, and the ruling required negotiators to revisit parts of the proposed agreement.

Original sources

2 of 3 articles · Asia · Show all

Every story links to the reporting it was built from. How we choose sources

Spotted a factual error, a broken link or a misleading summary? Tell us.