India and the US move closer to a broader trade understanding, the country’s $1-billion-plus nuts import basket is emerging as a quiet but significant test case. With India heavily reliant on US almonds and the US also being a key supplier of pistachios and walnuts for India, any duty rationalisation could materially reshape landed costs, retail pricing, and consumption patterns. In an interaction with ET Digital, Gunjan Vijay Jain, President of the Nuts and Dry Fruits Council (India), says meaningful tariff reductions on almonds, walnuts, and pistachios could influence not just pricing but also margins, volumes, and long-term trade dynamics in one of India’s fastest-growing food categories. Edited excerpts:
India is highly dependent on the US in at least two of these categories. Recent data shows that the US accounts for about 93% of India’s almond imports, with the almond import basket valued at around $1 billion in 2024-25, which is a strong indicator of near-single-source reliance in practice.
Pistachios are also heavily US-linked in popular perception, although India does source from multiple origins. Trade data for 2024 shows the US as one of the top suppliers by both in value and quantity. In walnuts, the dependence is meaningful but typically more diversified than almonds; the US is a major supplier, but sourcing tends to be spread across origins depending on crop cycles and pricing.
A duty reduction can materially lower landed costs because import duties have historically accounted for a significant portion of the final price of these nuts. With tariffs typically in the range of 30% to 50%, even a phased cut changes the economics for importers and branded players.
The government has indicated a phased approach with safeguards, such as quotas or staged liberalisation, so the impact may not be uniform or immediate across categories. In retail, pass-through will vary by channel, but the direction is clear: lower duties reduce the base price, which tends to reflect first in branded packs and institutional demand.
It is likely to do both, but the larger story is volume expansion over time. In the initial phase, part of the duty benefit may help importers rebuild margins, given higher logistics and financing costs. However, nuts are price-sensitive for consumers beyond the affluent segment. When entry prices soften, usage expands into regular snacking, baking, and daily consumption. Earlier instances of importers delaying clearance in anticipation of duty cuts show how strongly pricing influences trade decisions. If reductions are sustained and supply predictable, the benefit should gradually shift from margin support to demand creation, especially in almonds and walnuts.
Tariffs have been the biggest structural cost blocker, but day-to-day friction often comes from port processes and compliance procedures. Importers have spoken about delays around customs clearances when policy expectations shift, which can create congestion-like behaviours in the supply chain.
Food consignments move through an online clearance pathway linked with customs, and documentation scrutiny plus sampling/testing can add time depending on risk flags and product category. Quality and testing requirements are not new, but they can become a bottleneck when lab capacity, sampling timelines, or paperwork readiness is uneven. In short, tariffs decide whether trade is viable; clearance, paperwork and testing determine how smooth each shipment becomes.
Yes, these norms can add both cost and time, particularly for consignments selected for sampling and lab analysis. However, food safety checks for risks such as aflatoxin are standard global practice.
The regulations provide for document scrutiny, inspection, and testing before clearance. Delays typically arise from incomplete documentation or extended test turnaround times. The industry’s concern is not the checks themselves but predictability. When procedures are consistent and labs are timely, non-tariff measures are manageable. But when timelines stretch, demurrage, warehousing and working-capital costs rise.
Yes, the trade is structurally one-sided today because the US has scale, consistency, and strong export systems in the categories India imports. Rather than seeking symmetry in raw nuts, India should negotiate improved access for value-added and branded formats. Easier entry for processed cashews and shelf-stable snack products, along with clearer compliance pathways, would be more practical. Mutual recognition or alignment on testing documentation could reduce repeat inspections. Modern trade agreements increasingly focus on reducing non-tariff friction alongside tariffs.
India can build opportunity, but success will depend on treating the US as a compliance-intensive, brand-competitive market rather than a diaspora-only play. The strongest prospects lie in segments where India already has processing and flavour expertise, particularly cashew-based snacks and gifting.
Products with consistent grading, clear labelling, and reliable shelf life scale better than niche ethnic offerings. The US rewards packaging discipline and repeatable quality, so exporters must invest in traceability and documentation. With the right compliance framework, value-added formats offer meaningful scale potential.
Yes, it can meaningfully reshape trade, but only if smoother execution matches the tariff relief. Pricing benefits will be the most visible impact, as high duties have materially affected landed costs.
The durability of change will depend on how phased reductions, quotas, and clearance predictability are handled. If economics improve and processes become more predictable, the market could shift toward steady year-round consumption. If non-tariff friction persists, gains may appear mainly as periodic price dips rather than structural category expansion.
Source Name : Economic Times