In-short:
- Import Transformation: India shifted from corn exporter (3-4 million tonnes annually) to importer of ~1 million tonnes in 2024-25, driven by ethanol blending policy requiring 10-12 million tonnes for E20 achievement
- Source Disparity: Myanmar dominates with 530,000 tonnes (60% share) and Ukraine supplies 390,000 tonnes, while US contributes mere 1,100 tonnes despite being world’s largest producer
- GM Restrictions: India bans 94% of US corn due to genetic modification, with only Bt cotton approved since 2002, while illegal GM detection in 32% food products highlights enforcement challenges
- Trade Barriers: Tiered tariff structure imposes 15% duty on first 500,000 tonnes, then 50% beyond, while Myanmar enjoys duty-free access and Ukraine benefits from preferential 15% rate
- Farmer Protection: Policy prioritizes 22 million small farmers across Bihar, Karnataka, MP with ₹24/kg MSP versus US corn price of ₹15/kg, especially sensitive ahead of state elections
India’s agricultural trade landscape has witnessed a remarkable transformation, with the nation transitioning from a net corn exporter to importer within just two years. This shift has attracted international attention, particularly from US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who recently questioned why India’s “1.4 billion people won’t buy one bushel of US corn” despite America being the world’s largest corn producer.
The numbers reveal a striking disparity in trade relationships. In 2024-25, India imported approximately 1 million tonnes of corn, with 60% sourcing from Myanmar (530,000 tonnes) and the remainder from Ukraine (390,000 tonnes). Remarkably, only 1,100 tonnes originated from the United States, representing less than 0.2% of total imports despite America’s global dominance in corn production and export.
This dramatic shift stems from India’s aggressive ethanol blending policy, which achieved the E20 target (20% ethanol in petrol) by March 2025, five years ahead of the original 2030 timeline. Approximately 10-12 million tonnes of India’s 50 million tonne annual corn production is now diverted to ethanol manufacturing, creating domestic shortages and necessitating imports. faidelhi
India’s Evolving Corn Economy
From Exporter to Importer: The Ethanol Revolution
India holds the position as the world’s fifth-largest corn producer, with annual production ranging between 36-50 million tonnes. Historically self-sufficient in corn, India was a consistent exporter until 2023, shipping 3-4 million tonnes annually to international markets. This export capacity provided foreign exchange earnings while supporting domestic farmer incomes.
The National Biofuel Policy 2018 and its subsequent amendments fundamentally altered this equation. Ethanol production for fuel blending has emerged as a significant consumer of corn, with 165 lakh tonnes of grains required annually to achieve E20 targets. This massive diversion from food and feed markets to fuel production created unprecedented demand pressures on domestic corn supplies. niti.gov
Rising Demand Drivers
Ethanol blending achievements have been remarkable, progressing from 1.53% in 2014 to 20% by March 2025. This thirteenfold increase represents one of the world’s fastest biofuel adoption programs, requiring 10 billion litres of ethanol annually to meet E20 requirements.
Livestock and poultry industries constitute another major demand source, requiring non-GMO corn for feed purposes. India’s growing population and rising incomes are driving increased consumption of milk, eggs, fish, and meat, further intensifying corn demand for animal feed. US Department of Agriculture projections suggest Indian corn consumption could reach 98 million tonnes by 2040 under rapid economic growth scenarios.
Four Critical Barriers to US Corn Imports
1. Regulatory Restrictions on Genetically Modified Corn
India maintains comprehensive restrictions on GM food and feed imports, with Bt cotton being the only approved GM crop since 2002. Approximately 94% of US corn production utilizes GM varieties incorporating genes for herbicide tolerance and insect resistance. These modifications enable crops to withstand glyphosate and glufosinate applications while resisting specific pest attacks through bacterial protein expression. cseindia
Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) mandates GM-free certification for 24 specified food imports since March 2021. The 2022 Genetically Modified Foods Regulations require prior approval for manufacture, sale, and import of any GM food products, creating insurmountable barriers for US corn exports. biotech.co
Recent investigations by the Centre for Science and Environment found illegal GM content in 32% of tested food products, highlighting enforcement challenges. A 2024 study by National Institute of Food Technology detected GM maize in commercially sold products, demonstrating ongoing regulatory violations and biosafety concerns.
2. Tariff Barriers and Price Competitiveness
India’s tiered tariff structure significantly disadvantages US corn imports. Preferential 15% duty applies to the first 500,000 tonnes, while quantities beyond this threshold face punitive 50% tariffs. This policy design protects domestic farmers while allowing limited imports to address supply shortages.
Price disparities further complicate trade dynamics. US corn farmgate prices average $4.29 per bushel (approximately ₹15 per kg), compared to Indian wholesale prices of ₹22-23 per kg and the Minimum Support Price of ₹24 per kg. Despite US cost advantages, transportation, tariffs, and compliance costs eliminate competitive benefits.
Myanmar offers duty-free access under Least Developed Country status, while Ukraine imports attract only 15% duty under existing trade agreements. These preferential arrangements make non-US sources economically attractive for Indian importers seeking competitive pricing.
3. Farmer Protection and Political Economy
Corn cultivation supports millions of smallholder farmers across states including Bihar, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, and Madhya Pradesh. Bihar ranks as India’s third-largest corn producer, making agricultural policy particularly sensitive ahead of assembly elections in these key states.
Import competition from subsidized US corn could severely impact domestic farmer incomes and rural livelihoods. The government’s farmer-first approach prioritizes agricultural sovereignty over trade liberalization, particularly given the political importance of agrarian constituencies.
MSP mechanisms ensure guaranteed purchase of farmer produce at ₹24 per kg for 2025-26, significantly above international prices. This price support system reflects government commitment to farmer welfare despite fiscal costs and trade inefficiencies.
4. Trade Diplomacy and Geopolitical Considerations
US pressure on corn imports occurs within broader trade negotiation contexts, including disputes over Russian oil purchases and agricultural market access. Commerce Secretary Lutnick’s criticism represents escalating trade tensions rather than isolated agricultural concerns.
China’s withdrawal from US corn markets has intensified American export pressures. Chinese imports from the US dropped from 31% in 2020-21 to below 6% in 2023-24, with Brazil capturing increased market share. This loss of a major buyer has created surplus corn supplies requiring alternative outlets.
India’s energy partnerships, particularly Russian oil imports, complicate bilateral trade discussions. American officials link agricultural market access with broader geopolitical alignment, creating complex negotiation dynamics beyond simple trade considerations.
Stakeholder Perspectives and Interests
Indian Farmers and Agricultural Communities
Small and marginal farmers constitute the primary beneficiaries of import restrictions. Corn cultivation provides livelihoods for millions across traditional growing states, with Bihar alone producing significant quantities that support rural economies. Protection from cheap imports ensures price stability and income security for these vulnerable agricultural communities.
State governments in major producing regions strongly support restrictive import policies. Political considerations around farmer votes and rural support base influence policy decisions, particularly with upcoming elections in key agricultural states.
Industrial Users and Processing Industries
Poultry and livestock industries face dual challenges from corn import policies. Rising domestic prices due to ethanol diversion increase feed costs, while GM restrictions limit access to potentially cheaper international supplies. These industries advocate for policy flexibility to address supply constraints.
Ethanol manufacturers benefit from government mandates but require consistent corn supply at competitive prices. E20 blending requirements create guaranteed demand while E30 targets by 2030 promise further expansion.
Starch and processed food industries compete with ethanol plants for limited corn supplies, facing price pressures that affect manufacturing competitiveness.
US Exporters and Trade Interests
American corn producers face record output of 427 million tonnes in 2025-26, creating surplus disposal challenges. Midwestern farmers constitute a core political constituency for the Trump administration, intensifying export promotion pressures.
Agribusiness lobbies advocate for GM crop acceptance and tariff reductions to access India’s growing market. Projected demand growth to 200 million tonnes by 2050 represents enormous commercial opportunities worth billions of dollars.
Current Challenges and Policy Implications
Supply-Demand Imbalances
Ethanol policy success has created unintended consequences for food and feed markets. Rapid E20 achievement diverted substantial corn quantities from traditional uses, creating supply shortages and price volatility.
Livestock industry concerns about feed availability and cost escalation require policy attention. Poultry farmers particularly affected by corn price increases advocate for import liberalization or alternative feed sources.
Regional supply variations due to monsoon impacts and quality concerns necessitate strategic reserves and buffer stock management to ensure market stability.
Regulatory Enforcement Challenges
Illegal GM detection in food products highlights enforcement gaps in import controls. Contamination risks from field trials and seed imports require strengthened monitoring and accountability mechanisms.
Testing infrastructure and certification processes need enhancement to ensure GM-free imports while facilitating legitimate trade flows. International cooperation on standards harmonization could reduce compliance costs while maintaining biosafety objectives.
International Trade Pressures
WTO compliance questions regarding tariff structures and import restrictions may require policy justification based on legitimate domestic concerns. Non-discrimination principles and trade facilitation obligations create legal constraints on protectionist measures.
Bilateral trade negotiations with the US involve broader issues beyond corn, requiring comprehensive approaches to market access, regulatory cooperation, and strategic partnership development.
Strategic Way Forward
Enhancing Domestic Production Capacity
Productivity improvements through hybrid seed development, precision agriculture, and mechanization could reduce import dependence while supporting farmer incomes. Research investments in non-GM varieties with enhanced yields address technology gaps without biosafety concerns.
Supply chain infrastructure development including storage facilities, transportation networks, and processing capacity would reduce post-harvest losses and price volatilities. Cold storage and quality preservation technologies ensure better market integration.
Crop diversification programs could reduce over-reliance on corn for ethanol production by developing alternative feedstocks including agricultural waste and dedicated energy crops.
Regulatory Framework Modernization
Risk-based regulation of GM crops based on scientific assessment rather than blanket restrictions could provide policy flexibility while maintaining safety standards. Segregation protocols for industrial use versus food applications offer compromise solutions.
Enhanced testing capabilities and certification processes would strengthen import control while facilitating legitimate trade. International cooperation on standards development reduces compliance costs for trading partners.
Transparent public consultation on GM policy involving farmers, scientists, industry, and civil society could build informed consensus on technology adoption.
Trade Strategy Optimization
Diversified import sources reduce geopolitical risks while maintaining competitive pricing. Long-term supply agreements with reliable partners ensure price stability and supply security.
Strategic reserves management through buffer stock policies provides market intervention capacity during supply disruptions or price volatilities.
Bilateral dialogue with the US addressing broader trade issues while protecting core agricultural interests requires skilled diplomacy and mutual understanding.
Sustainable Development Integration
Climate-smart agriculture practices enhancing productivity while reducing environmental impacts support sustainable intensification goals. Carbon sequestration and soil health improvements provide additional farmer benefits.
Circular economy approaches utilizing agricultural residues for ethanol production reduce crop diversion pressures while addressing stubble burning concerns.
Water use efficiency and drought-resistant varieties ensure production stability under climate change scenarios, reducing import vulnerabilities.
Conclusion
India’s reluctance to import US corn represents a complex intersection of biosafety concerns, farmer welfare priorities, trade policy, and geopolitical considerations rather than simple protectionism. The nation’s transition from exporter to importer within two years demonstrates how policy-driven demand changes can rapidly alter traditional trade patterns.
GM restrictions remain the fundamental barrier, reflecting deep-seated concerns about food safety, environmental impact, and farmer autonomy in seed selection. Recent illegal GM detections validate these concerns while highlighting enforcement challenges in complex global supply chains.
Tariff structures and preferential arrangements with Myanmar and Ukraine create competitive disadvantages for US corn beyond regulatory restrictions. Duty-free access for least developed countries reflects developmental priorities over purely commercial considerations.
Political economy factors cannot be ignored, particularly with Bihar elections approaching and 22 million farmers dependent on corn cultivation. Government commitment to farmer income protection through MSP mechanisms demonstrates agricultural sovereignty priorities over trade liberalization.
Future policy evolution will likely depend on domestic production capacity, alternative feedstock development, and international pressure management. E30 targets by 2030 will intensify supply-demand imbalances, potentially requiring policy recalibration to balance energy security with food security and farmer welfare.
Compromise solutions might emerge through segregated GM approvals for industrial ethanol use, enhanced productivity programs, and diversified import strategies. However, fundamental concerns about genetic modification and farmer protection will likely persist, limiting US market access in the near term.
The corn import debate exemplifies broader challenges in balancing domestic priorities with international trade pressures in an interconnected global economy. India’s approach reflects sovereign policy choices based on legitimate developmental concerns rather than arbitrary trade barriers.
Key Terminology for Analysis
Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs): Crops engineered with foreign genes for enhanced traits, raising biosafety and environmental concerns.
Minimum Support Price (MSP): Government-guaranteed purchase price ensuring farmer income protection despite market volatilities.
Ethanol Blending Programme (EBP): Policy mandating biofuel integration with petroleum products for energy security and emission reduction.
Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ): Trade mechanism allowing limited imports at preferential rates beyond which higher tariffs apply.
+ There are no comments
Add yours