India could face tariffs as high as 25% if it fails to finalise a trade deal with the US this week, President Donald Trump has said.

“Yeah, I think so,” he told reporters on Tuesday when asked whether Delhi would face higher tariffs in the absence of an agreement.

The US has set a 1 August deadline for India and several other countries to either reach a trade agreement or face increased tariffs.

Indian and American officials have been negotiating a trade deal for the past few months, but officials have alternated between sounding optimistic and cautious about when it will be announced.

When asked about what he expected from a potential deal with India, Trump said: “We’re going to see. India has been a good friend, but India has charged basically more tariffs than almost any other country”.

“But now I’m in charge, and you just can’t do that,” he added.

The BBC has reached out to India’s commerce ministry for a comment.

Tariffs are taxes charged on goods imported from other countries. The US president has repeatedly taken aim at India’s high tariffs, branding it a “tariff king” and a “big abuser” of trade ties.

Trump has not yet sent a letter to India setting a new tariff rate – as he has with more than a dozen other trading partners.

Back in April, Trump had announced tariffs of up to 27% on Indian goods, which was later paused.

Since then, both sides have been racing to negotiate an agreement, with officials sometimes sounding positive and at other times, measured.

“We continue to speak with our Indian counterparts. We’ve always had very constructive discussions with them,” US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said earlier this week.

He also acknowledged that although he had earlier said a deal with India might be “imminent”, it needed to be understood that Delhi’s trade policy has been “protectionist for a very long time” and has been “premised on strongly protecting their domestic market”.

Greer added that Trump has been focused on securing deals that substantially open other markets to the US.

Agriculture and dairy are among the key sticking points for both countries.

For years, Washington has pushed for greater access to India’s farm sector, seeing it as a major untapped market. But India has fiercely protected it, citing food security, livelihoods and the interests of millions of small farmers.

Last week, Indian Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal told CNBC that the agriculture sector is sensitive for India and that it will make sure that farmers’ interests are “well protected”.

Goyal also told news agencies that India remains “optimistic” about striking a deal with Washington soon.

Speaking to Reuters, he said that India was making “fantastic progress” in talks with the US and that he hoped they were able to “conclude a very consequential partnership”.

Until recently, the US was India’s largest trading partner, with bilateral trade reaching $190bn in 2024. Trump and Modi have set a target to more than double this figure to $500bn.

India has already reduced tariffs on a range of goods – including Bourbon whiskey and motorcycles – but the US continues to run a $45bn (£33bn) trade deficit with India, which Trump is keen to reduce.

Follow BBC News India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.

A new law in Brazil could cause “significant environmental harm and human rights violations”, and represents a “rollback for decades” of protections in Brazil, including for the Amazon, a UN expert has told BBC News.

Plans to speed up approvals for development projects were criticised by Astrid Puentes Riaño, a UN special rapporteur, as the country prepares to host the COP30 climate summit this year.

Lawmakers passed plans to simplify environmental licences for infrastructure including roads, dams, energy and mines this month, though the president has not formally approved the bill.

Critics have dubbed it the “devastation bill” and say it could lead to environmental abuses and deforestation.

Proponents say a new nationwide licensing regime would simplify the long and complex process that companies face to prove to authorities that planned developments do not cause unacceptable environmental harm.

Under the changes, some developers would be able to self-declare their environmental impact through an online form for projects deemed smaller – a move supporters say would reduce bureaucracy but critics feel is a major concern.

Ms Riaño told the BBC she feared the lighter regulations would “apply to some mining projects” and will “impact the Amazon region”.

She also said was “very worried” about plans for automatic renewal of some projects’ licences where no major changes have occurred, saying: “This will prevent environmental impact assessments from being done on these projects. Some of the projects will include mining projects or infrastructure projects where a full assessment is needed.

“It will also cause deforestation. Modifications or continuations of projects might mean deforestation in the Amazon without a proper assessment.”

A lot of deforestation and land-clearing in the Amazon has been driven by agriculture and mining, sometimes illegally – but Ms Riaño said the bill is “going backwards” on efforts to prevent that.

Her intervention comes two months after new analysis was published showing vast swathes of the Amazon were destroyed in 2024, with forest fires fuelled by drought adding to man-made deforestation pressures.

Under the new law, environmental agencies would have 12 months – extendable to 24 – to make a decision about whether to grant a licence for strategic projects. If that deadline was missed, a licence could be automatically granted.

Supporters say this would give businesses certainty by preventing delays that have plagued projects, including hydroelectric dams for clean energy, or rail lines to transport grain.

Ms Riaño said she understood the need for more efficient systems but assessments must be “comprehensive” and “based on the science.”

The law would also relax the requirement to consult indigenous or traditional quilombola communities – descendents of Afro-Brazilian slaves – in some situations unless they are directly impacted.

UN experts raised concerns that fast-tracking assessments could remove some participation and affect human rights.

Supporters of the bill say it will encourage economic development, including for renewable energy projects, held to grow the economy, and reduce costs for businesses and the state.

But critics fear weakening environmental protections could increase the risk of environmental disasters and violate indigenous rights.

In particular, UN experts argue it could contradict constitutional rights guaranteeing the right to an ecologically balanced environment – which means legal challenges could lie ahead.

The Senate and Chamber of Deputies have approved the bill and it is now pending presidential approval.

President Lula da Silva has until 8 August to decide whether to approve or veto the new law.

Brazil’s Environment and Climate Change minister, Marina Silva, has strongly opposed the bill, condemning it as a “death blow” to environmental protections.

But she has been at odds with the president on other issues in the past, including proposals to explore oil drilling in the Amazon basin.

Even if the president vetoes it, there is a chance the conservative-leaning congress could try to overturn that.

Brazil’s Climate Observatory has called the bill the “biggest environmental setback” since Brazil’s military dictatorship, in which the construction of roads and agricultural expansion led to increased Amazon deforestation and the displacement of many indigenous people.

Ms Riaño said scientists in Brazil estimate the bill “will lift protections for more than 18 million hectares in the country, the size of Uruguay,” adding “the consequences are huge”.

Alerts for a potential tsunami were issued for parts of the Aleutian Islands in Alaska, Hawaii, the coastline of Russia and Japan after an 8.7-magnitude earthquake struck in the North Pacific Ocean off Russia’s northern Pacific coast, according to the U.S. Tsunami Warning System, which is part of the National Weather Service.

A tsunami advisory, which means people should get out of coastal waters and stay away from beaches and waterways, was issued for parts of the Aleutian Islands. A tsunami watch, which means experts are evaluating the threat, was issued for Hawaii and Guam.

U.S. officials said a tsunami threat exists for parts of Russia and Japan, but they deferred to authorities in other countries for official advisories and warnings. No tsunami warnings — the highest alert — were in place for North America.

Tsunamis are a series of long waves caused by a large and sudden displacement of water in the ocean, usually from a large earthquake on or below the ocean floor. Tsunamis radiate in all directions from the epicenter and can cause dangerous coastal flooding and powerful currents that can last for hours or days.

Experts warn that just before a tsunami hits shore, seawater can first be drawn out to sea — exposing large swaths of beach and giving people along the water a false sense that a coast is safe.

As more information becomes available, officials may update, add or cancel tsunami alerts.

Camille Baker and Natasha Cornelissen contributed reporting.