India and the United States are still negotiating their bilateral trade agreement, India's Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) confirmed, while New Delhi pushed back on any expectation that it would redirect energy procurement toward US suppliers as part of a deal.

The MEA's statement, reported by The Tribune, framed ongoing energy sourcing decisions as a matter of national interest rather than diplomatic bargaining chips. For apparel and textile exporters watching the talks, the signal matters because energy policy and tariff terms are moving through the same negotiation channel.

What has been confirmed?

Only the negotiating posture is on the record:

• India-US trade talks are continuing, per the MEA.
• Energy sourcing will be guided by national interest, the ministry said.
• No timeline for concluding an agreement was disclosed.

No tariff schedule, concession package, or sector-specific commitment for textiles and apparel has been confirmed by either government. Any claim that Indian garment exporters have secured relief from US import duties should be treated as market speculation until an official text or joint statement appears.

Why does energy language matter to apparel sourcing?

Energy trade has become a central bargaining lever in India-US negotiations, with Washington previously pressing New Delhi to increase purchases of US oil and gas. The MEA's refusal to link procurement directly to trade terms indicates India is holding that card back.

For the textile and apparel tier — India's largest labour-intensive export sector after gems and jewellery — the stakes are concrete. Any US tariff relief secured in the broader agreement would flow through to costing sheets for woven garments, home textiles and technical textiles shipped from Tirupur, Ludhiana and Panipat clusters. Conversely, a stalled negotiation keeps the threat of higher duties alive.

What should sourcing teams do now?

Buyers with India-based programmes should not price in tariff changes yet. The MEA statement offers no date and no commitment, so compliance and sourcing leads should:

• Treat current duty rates as the planning baseline until an agreement is notified.
• Track MEA and USTR statements rather than intermediated reports of back-channel offers.
• Separately verify whether any energy-linked concessions, if later confirmed, carry conditions affecting other import categories.

The decision the news forces is procedural: hold India sourcing assumptions steady, and trigger re-costing only when a signed agreement or official tariff notification — not a negotiating readout — lands.