IPEF talks’ secrecy, limited public input key concerns: GTRI

The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) negotiations have mostly been conducted in secrecy with limited public input and it raises concerns whether the member countries, including India, were able to protect their key interests, think tank Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) said Sunday. It cautioned that the commitments related to the effective administration of tax policy might curtail the ability to raise tax revenue.

It said in the supply chain pillar, a major issue is whether the agreement might restrict members from trading critical materials, particularly with China as this could pose challenges for Association of SouthEast Asian Nations (Asean) countries, whose largest trading partner is China.

“It is hoped that India has negotiated enough flexibility to avoid strict clauses, such as the not to use export restrictions. These are critical during emergencies, as no country can be expected to supply essential goods when facing its own crisis,” GTRI Founder Ajay Srivastava said.

In the clean economy pillar, he hoped that India has not agreed to a “non-derogation clause” which would prevent the government from easing domestic regulations for projects of national importance.

“Such flexibility is essential for India to pursue key infrastructure projects without being hindered by rigid international commitments,” he said, adding that there is concern that India might have committed to minimum standards for clean energy technologies in the domestic market, which could force reliance on imports and negatively impact local producers.

India needs to ensure it can support its own industries during the clean energy transition and its preferential treatment for domestic suppliers in government procurement is a key policy tool for supporting local businesses.“Hope India has not agreed to drop this preference as it could severely disadvantage local manufacturers in favour of foreign competition, potentially harming domestic economic growth,” Srivastava said.On the fair economy pillar, the think tank said India already implements anti-corruption measures, but new obligations could lead to international scrutiny and make domestic actions legally enforceable.

“This could complicate governance, so it is important that India has carefully examined these commitments to avoid unnecessary legal and administrative burdens,” he cautioned.

As per GTRI, sharing the legal text alone will not be enough, as businesses require clear insights into how these commitments will impact sectors, compliance needs, and long-term policy goals and a proactive dialogue between the government and industry is vital to maximise the benefits of the agreements and mitigate any potential risks.