Just days after a “historic” breakthrough was announced, the White House has issued a revised factsheet that silently walks back key agricultural and financial claims
On 11 February 2026, a wave of uncertainty hit the global markets as the White House released a corrected version of its fact sheet titled “The United States and India Announce Historic Trade Deal.” This revision comes less than 48 hours after President Donald Trump’s initial “zero tariff” claim was already being clarified by senior administration officials. The semantic shifts in the document have reignited fears that the bilateral trade framework may be more of a “statement of intent” than a binding legal contract.
Also Read: India-US Trade Breakthrough: The End of the ‘Russian Oil’ Era
The Pulse Point: A Sudden Retreat on Agriculture
The most glaring omission in the revised statement is the removal of the word “pulses.” The original document stated that India would eliminate or reduce tariffs on a wide range of American agricultural products, explicitly listing “certain pulses” (lentils and chickpeas). In the new version, the reference to pulses has been entirely scrubbed. This change sparked an immediate backlash from Indian farmer unions, such as the Samyukt Kisan Morcha, who argued that pulse imports would devastate domestic growers in a sector India considers “highly sensitive.”
From ‘Committed’ to ‘Intends’: The $500 Billion Pivot
In a subtle but legally significant linguistic shift, the White House also changed how it describes India’s massive $500 billion purchasing plan. The initial version used the word “committed,” implying a binding obligation for India to buy US energy, technology, and coal. The revised document now states that India “intends to buy,” a phrasing that mirrors New Delhi’s own press releases. This downgrade in language suggests that the $500 billion figure, often touted by the Trump administration as a major win, is a goal rather than a guaranteed quota, adding a layer of fragility to the bilateral trade framework.
The Digital Service Tax (DST) Disappearance
A third major revision involves the contentious issue of Digital Service Taxes. The first fact sheet claimed that “India will remove its digital services taxes” and that it would adopt rules prohibiting customs duties on electronic transmissions. The updated version has dropped the claim of immediate tax removal, stating instead that India is simply “committed to negotiate a robust set of bilateral digital trade rules.” This suggests that New Delhi successfully pushed back against a total surrender of its “Equalisation Levy,” a move that could complicate the path for US tech firms looking for an easier entry into the Indian market.
Why the Revisions Matter for Businesses
These “corrections” have significant implications for supply chain planners and investors. The exclusion of specific sectors, such as pulses, indicates that the “interim” nature of the deal is very real; the most difficult items are still being negotiated. For Indian exporters, however, the core win remains intact: the 25% “Russian oil penalty” has been officially scrapped, and the reciprocal tariff on Indian goods has dropped from 25% to 18%. But the confusion over the fine print has led to a 6-paise dip in the Rupee, as currency traders hedge against potential instabilities in the negotiation process.
Also Read: Building Resilience: India Sets the ‘People-Centric’ Agenda for BRICS 2026
The Hinge Point
The 11 February 2026 revision is the exact moment where the “honeymoon phase” of the Trump-Modi trade deal ends and the “fine print phase” begins. This is the hinge point because it reveals that the US administration’s messaging initially outpaced the actual technical consensus reached between the two trade ministries. The story changes here because the bilateral trade framework is now viewed through a lens of scepticism, with stakeholders realising that the “Zero Tariff” slogan was a marketing wrapper for a much more complex, managed trade arrangement.
What can no longer remain the same is the assumption that a Joint Statement equals a finalised deal. By walking back specific items such as pulses and digital taxes, the White House has signalled that domestic political pressures in both countries are still shaping the final text. This marks the end of the “announcement effect” and the beginning of a period in which industry players must ignore the headlines and wait for official gazette notifications before making multi-million-dollar procurement shifts.