LONDON — The fifteenth time’s a charm, it would seem.

After a series of false starts, missed Diwali deadlines and changes of government, the U.K. and India have finally put their differences aside to strike a free trade agreement.

But the final pact — with some details set out Tuesday — is far from what negotiators imagined when they launched the talks back in 2022, with compromises made on both sides.

From tariffs to visas and services, we talk through the key concessions in the long-awaited agreement, and what they could mean for U.K. businesses, as well as the big unanswered questions.

What we know

Tariffs will be cut across the board

The agreement will cut Indian tariffs on 90 percent of product lines, with 85 percent of those becoming fully tariff-free within a decade, according to basic details published by the U.K.’s Department for Business and Trade (DBT) on Tuesday.

British alcoholic drink exporters look set to be big winners. Whisky and gin tariffs, currently set at 150 percent, will be halved to 75 percent before falling to 40 percent after 10 years. Mark Kent, chief executive of the Scotch Whisky Association, said the change would be “transformational” and create 1,200 jobs across the U.K.. 

There also appears to be positive news for another key sector: car manufacturing. DBT says automotive tariffs will be cut from over 100 percent to 10 percent — but crucially, subject to a quota.

Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds told reporters on Tuesday that the U.K. would get access to a quota to sell 22,000 higher-value electric vehicles to India at the lower 10 percent tariff rate. India would meanwhile get a quota to sell low- and mid-range electric vehicles to the U.K. The government says this quota will be phased in over time in discussion with industry in order to align with their production plans.

Industry group the SMMT welcomed the deal but said the details “will likely feature compromises, and might not offer unfettered market access to all UK automotive goods.”

Other Indian tariffs cut under the FTA include those on imported British cosmetics, aerospace, lamb, medical devices, salmon, electrical machinery, soft drinks, chocolate, and biscuits. The U.K. has in turn cut tariffs on clothes, footwear, and some food products — including, the government is keen to note, frozen prawns.

On the flipside, tariffs remain in areas like dairy and milled rice where both sides wanted to protect domestic industries from competition.

Together with the other changes in the agreement, the government expects a steep 59.4 percent increase in U.K. exports to India — worth £15.7 billion. This is matched by a smaller 25 percent increase in Indian exports to Britain, worth £9.8 billion. 

This all adds up to a 38.8 percent increase in trade worth £25.5 billion — or 0.1 percent of GDP by 2040. The number is tiny when compared to the much larger expected 4 percent hit from leaving the EU single market, but looks a bit more impressive when compared to the 0.08 percent expected benefit from, for example, the FTA the last government signed with Australia. 

India scores concessions on social security payments

Visas have become the most headline-grabbing issue in the negotiations.

After the Indian side talked up an “unprecedented” win on its workers being exempt from employee tax contributions in Britain, PM Keir Starmer’s political opponents hit back at the deal.

Conservative Leader Kemi Badenoch said she refused to sign a deal on similar terms back when she was trade secretary, arguing: “When Labour negotiates Britain loses.”

In the end, it’s a mixed bag when it comes to mobility concessions.

Jonathan Reynolds said on Tuesday that an existing visa route for some temporary workers that’s not currently available to India — and capped at 1,800 people — will now be open to Indian employees.

That list of professions includes musicians, yoga teachers and chefs. Indian applicants will still need to meet the usual visa requirements on salary and skills and the cap won’t be lifted.

The U.K.’s visa concession is a long way from New Delhi’s first requests, with India originally proposing larger quotas for professionals, particularly in sectors like IT and healthcare.

But there are already political fireworks over one big Indian demand in the talks — an easing of social security payments for Indian workers in the U.K.

The U.K. and India have agreed to a Double Contributions Convention, which means that neither Indian nor British workers will be required to pay national insurance contributions in both their home country and the one they are working in — they will only pay it in one for the first three years of a placement. 

The deal also covers employers, who do not have to pay social security contributions in the U.K. for three years. 

This concession means “Starmer has hiked National Insurance on Brits while giving an exemption to Indian migrants,” Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick wrote as Tory MPs criticised the move in parliament Tuesday afternoon.

There will be greater access to Indian government contracts

“For the very first time British businesses will have guaranteed access to India’s vast procurement market covering good services and construction,” Trade Policy Minister Douglas Alexander told parliament on Tuesday.

More than a decade ago, Indian PM Narendra Modi launched the country’s Make in India program, which prevents foreign competitors from accessing the government’s procurement market. India has since been pouring government stimulus into large infrastructure projects throughout the country.

But in a major win for the U.K., Delhi has agreed a carve out allowing British firms to access some areas of the country’s procurement market and compete for tenders.

British firms will now “be able to bid for approximately 40,000 tenders worth at least £38 billion a year,” Alexander said. 

What we don’t know

How will the UK and India resolve their differences over carbon taxes?

India has been vocal about its distaste for the U.K.’s proposed carbon border tax. Wrangling over CBAM has at times seemed likely to sink talks. 

In the end, the solution was to dodge the question entirely. The FTA won’t address the question of CBAM directly.

Draft U.K. legislation for its CBAM anticipates that the levy will apply to imported goods from 1 January 2027, covering carbon-intensive industries like steelmaking, cement, aluminum and fertilizer. Some Indian sectors are expected to be hit hard.

Dialogue is expected to continue on the issue, but not at the expense of doing this FTA. 

Will the two sides sign a bilateral investment treaty?

A key win for the City of London would have been a bilateral investment treaty, which appeared alongside the FTA text. But both sides weren’t able to get this over the finish line. 

The proposed pact, controversial in India, would have given firms the right to sue governments over policy changes they claim would harm their investments, through a mechanism known as the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS). 

In 2016, India scrapped a number of its older treaties with other countries, after facing a wave of arbitration claims, which now total at 29 cases against its domestic regulations and policy measures. 

Although talks on the investment treaty continue, there’s still no clear timeline for when — or if — a deal will ever be agreed.

How much will services firms really benefit?

The British government insisted Tuesday that the pact includes India’s most ambitious services commitments to date, but details were hard to come by and some sectors are less than impressed.

Trade Policy Minister Douglas Alexander said it will ensure U.K. banks and finance companies are placed on an equal footing with Indian suppliers. “It also encourages the recognition of professional qualifications, so that U.K. and Indian firms can access the right talent at the right time, whether they are in Mumbai or indeed in Manchester.”

Yet a trade body for Britain’s legal services sector — the second largest in the world — called it a “failure” and a “a missed opportunity” that the deal doesn’t give them more market access. The sector is “disappointed to see that the U.K.-India FTA has been agreed without reference to legal services,” said Law Society president Richard Atkinson.

Changes to India’s regulations that would allow foreign firms to practice without a domestic partner were unveiled by the Bar Council of India in March 2023, but they remain in limbo following pushback from local legal firms.

The digital trade provisions in the deal also “don’t go as far as we’d have liked to see,” said Julian David, CEO of techUK which advocates for tech giants. David said business groups in both countries are looking forward to working with the U.K. and Indian governments “to turn this deal into real momentum for the sector.”

How long will it take to ratify? 

Opposition parties are already calling for parliament to be given a vote on the new free trade agreement. 

Ed Davey, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, was quick out the gate on Tuesday warning that not consulting MPs would set a “dangerous precedent for future deals” — particularly one with the United States. 

Under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (CRAG), parliament only has the power to delay ratification of a treaty and to force the government to formally explain its rationale.

But even this can only happen if the government actively chooses to set aside time for a debate and vote on the agreement, which it is under no obligation to do. The last government was criticised by a parliamentary committee for not giving MPs time to debate its post-Brexit FTA with Australia. 

The Labour government has only said in relation to the U.S. trade deal that it is committed to the CRAG process. 

Douglas Alexander on Tuesday said the House would “need time to scrutinize this deal before the ratification process” but notably did not commit to a vote.

“My department will follow the process set out in the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010,” he said, which requires the government to lay the treaty in parliament for 21 days.

“The house will, of course, have the opportunity to scrutinize any legislation associated with its implementation.”

Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds told reporters that the ratification process would take “broadly” around 12 months.

That gives the government’s critics plenty of time to find more they don’t like.