Fact Check: Trade talks between India and the US have been dragging on for months.

Fact Check: Trade talks between India and the US have been dragging on for months.

Published June 29, 2025
i
VERDICT
Needs Research

# Fact Check: "Trade talks between India and the US have been dragging on for months." ## What We Know Trade relations between India and the United S...

Fact Check: "Trade talks between India and the US have been dragging on for months."

What We Know

Trade relations between India and the United States have been a topic of ongoing discussion, with both nations seeking to enhance their economic ties. Recent reports indicate that negotiations have indeed faced delays and complexities. For instance, the World Factbook notes that India is one of the largest economies in the world and has been actively engaging in trade discussions to bolster its economic standing. However, specific timelines and details regarding the duration of these talks are not explicitly outlined in the available sources.

Furthermore, the National Portal of India emphasizes India's commitment to international trade, suggesting that while discussions may be ongoing, they are part of a broader strategy to enhance economic partnerships. However, the lack of concrete updates on the status of these talks raises questions about their current progress.

Analysis

The claim that "trade talks between India and the US have been dragging on for months" appears to be plausible based on the context of ongoing negotiations. However, the sources reviewed do not provide definitive timelines or specific details on the nature of the delays. The BBC News provides an overview of India's trade landscape but does not delve into the specifics of the India-US trade negotiations, which limits the ability to confirm the extent of the delays.

The reliability of the sources varies; while the World Factbook and the National Portal of India are reputable government sources, they do not focus specifically on the trade talks in question. The Wikipedia entry on India provides general information about the country but lacks detailed insights into the current state of trade negotiations. Thus, while the assertion may be grounded in reality, the evidence is insufficient to confirm the claim definitively.

Conclusion

Needs Research: The claim that trade talks between India and the US have been dragging on for months is plausible but lacks sufficient evidence for confirmation. The available sources provide context about India's trade relations but do not specify the duration or reasons for any delays in the negotiations. Further research into recent news articles or official statements from trade representatives would be necessary to provide a clearer picture.

Sources

  1. India - The World Factbook
  2. Profile| National Portal of India
  3. Home | Know India: National Portal of India
  4. India - Wikipedia
  5. India - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  6. India country profile - BBC News
  7. India - Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre
  8. India Maps & Facts - World Atlas

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
100% Free
No Registration
Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: the World Trade Center attacks were a calculated inside job
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: the World Trade Center attacks were a calculated inside job

Detailed fact-check analysis of: the World Trade Center attacks were a calculated inside job

Aug 8, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: President Trump, we have agreed to meet in Scotland On Sunday to discuss transatlantic trade relations,
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: President Trump, we have agreed to meet in Scotland On Sunday to discuss transatlantic trade relations,

Detailed fact-check analysis of: President Trump, we have agreed to meet in Scotland On Sunday to discuss transatlantic trade relations,

Aug 3, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check:  President Trump’s visit to Scotland is being unfairly criticized as a “vanity trip” or “golf vacation,” when in fact he is meeting UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer to conduct serious economic and diplomatic discussions—including North Sea oil, energy independence, and UK–US trade relations.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: President Trump’s visit to Scotland is being unfairly criticized as a “vanity trip” or “golf vacation,” when in fact he is meeting UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer to conduct serious economic and diplomatic discussions—including North Sea oil, energy independence, and UK–US trade relations.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: President Trump’s visit to Scotland is being unfairly criticized as a “vanity trip” or “golf vacation,” when in fact he is meeting UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer to conduct serious economic and diplomatic discussions—including North Sea oil, energy independence, and UK–US trade relations.

Jul 31, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript
00:00
911 was a false flag. For the
first 10 years, I did not think
anything other than the
official narrative then after
being shown a video, a close up
video of building number seven
coming down and that got me
going because it's obvious to
me that building seven was was
a controlled demolition because
the building collapses from the
bottom down. The trade centers
were unique in that they were
designed to withstand the
00:33
impact of a a a jet. From what
I understand the the outer
skeleton of the building. The
outer columns was like a a fish
net and you had these inner
core columns which was
substantial thick steel beams
to withstand four or five times
what the loads were. Got it.
The engineers always over
design a building. No steel
frame building has ever
collapsed before or since 9/
eleven. So that should say
something right there. And it
said that building seven it was
01:05
aggressive collapse that it was
caused by fire but progressive
collapse unlike the twin
towers, the twin towers
collapse from the top down.
That's a progressive collapse.
Sure. Floor by floor by floor.
But if you look at the videos
of building seven collapsing,
it collapses uniformly, it's
collapsing from the bottom, the
building stays intact all the
way to the bottom of the ground
and you could see the sides
caving in on it. For a building
to collapse uniformly which the
video show all the load bearing
it would have to have failed
01:36
simultaneously. Now, fire
doesn't act like that. I came
across an analogy of the twin
towers and if you could
visualize cast iron stoves
stacked. One on top of each
other. The stoves up at the
top. Yes, there's fire and
they've been damaged but the
stoves on the bottom, they
haven't been damaged. Okay. So,
the structure underneath all of
that is intact. So, it's
impossible for a building to
collapse near free fall speed
and increase. Without a
02:07
controlled demolition. You're
running into the path of most
resistance. I something else is
going on. I don't believe that
it was just the planes or the
fires I think that and they
examine the dust and they found
what they call thermitic
material which is like a
explosive incendiary which was
in the dust samples and that's
documented. There were reports
of the buildings were
undergoing a extensive elevator
renovation in the two or three
years prior to all kinds of
02:40
workers they had access to the
the core the cores of the
building and on the day of the
attack the the elevator company
would not assist in the
operations of the elevators and
the elevator company was the
elevator company it
subsequently went out of
business and a couple of years
after that
False

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 Don't get rid of Powell. Get rid of the entire Federal Reserve. That's what you gotta get rid of. It's a cancer. Remember, who controls the Federal Reserve? Not Powell. It's the one one00th of 1percent. They have the money. Their net worth 158 million compared to the top 1% you always hear about 35 million. They control the money supply. They control Powell. They always had. They are bubble makers. They created the. com bubble. They created the housing bubble and they created the AI that we're in now. You 00:31 gotta shut them down because of them, remember, income, your paycheck, 30% of it used to go for your home and expenses. Now, it's almost 50percent. They're the danger and they will at some point pop this bubble as well. For more information on my stockpick, how to trade properly, Phil's Gang. com free for 10 days.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 Don't get rid of Powell. Get rid of the entire Federal Reserve. That's what you gotta get rid of. It's a cancer. Remember, who controls the Federal Reserve? Not Powell. It's the one one00th of 1percent. They have the money. Their net worth 158 million compared to the top 1% you always hear about 35 million. They control the money supply. They control Powell. They always had. They are bubble makers. They created the. com bubble. They created the housing bubble and they created the AI that we're in now. You 00:31 gotta shut them down because of them, remember, income, your paycheck, 30% of it used to go for your home and expenses. Now, it's almost 50percent. They're the danger and they will at some point pop this bubble as well. For more information on my stockpick, how to trade properly, Phil's Gang. com free for 10 days.

Jul 27, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Trump imposed 30% Tariffs on Mexico and The European Union today. Marking another unnecessary trade negotiation that is going to hurt the American people and strain our relationship with close allies. They will come into effect in around 20 days..
True

Fact Check: Trump imposed 30% Tariffs on Mexico and The European Union today. Marking another unnecessary trade negotiation that is going to hurt the American people and strain our relationship with close allies. They will come into effect in around 20 days..

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Trump imposed 30% Tariffs on Mexico and The European Union today. Marking another unnecessary trade negotiation that is going to hurt the American people and strain our relationship with close allies. They will come into effect in around 20 days..

Jul 21, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Trade talks between India and the US have been dragging on for months. | TruthOrFake Blog