Trump Signs Law Authorizing Tariffs Up to 100% on the Five Largest Buyers of Russian Oil and Gas
The Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026 became law on September 18; it does not set any tariff by itself, and India, the second-largest buyer of Russian crude, says it is weighing its response.
A Law With No Tariff Attached
President Donald Trump signed a bill on September 18, 2026, that lets him slap tariffs of up to 100% on the five countries that buy the most Russian oil and gas[2]. India is the second-biggest buyer, right behind China[6]. So Indian exporters are now watching Washington closely.
But here's the catch: the law itself doesn't tax anything. It's a ceiling, not a rate[1][3]. Trump still has to pick a country, then pick a number somewhere between 0% and 100%. He can also waive the whole thing if he tells Congress it serves the national interest[1][5][6].
That gap between "the president could" and "the president will" is where this story actually lives. The bill, formally the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, passed the Senate 86-11 back on August 7 and cleared the House 262-159 on September 16, before Trump signed it two days later[1][4]. It's named for Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who died in July 2026 of a torn aorta[1].
The Deal That Already Happened
To understand why nobody expects an automatic tariff on India, you have to go back seven months. In August 2025, the U.S. hit India with a 25% tariff, then tacked on another 25% specifically because of its Russian oil purchases — 50% total[8]. That was a real, active penalty.
Then, in February 2026, Washington and New Delhi struck a deal. The extra 25% oil penalty came off. The base tariff dropped to 18%. In exchange, India signaled it would wind down its Russian oil buying[8][9][10]. That deal is still the backdrop for everything happening now.
India has cut back since then, but it hasn't stopped. Ship-tracking data shows India importing about 2.1 million barrels of Russian crude a day in August 2026, dropping to roughly 1.9 million in September[11][12]. Whether that trend counts as "winding down" fast enough is exactly what's now in dispute.
Two Governments, One Word Doing a Lot of Work
The U.S. side reads those numbers and sees a partner that made a commitment and is still buying nearly 2 million barrels a day from Russia. The new law is meant to raise the cost of that choice without forcing Trump's hand immediately[1][3][15].
India's Ministry of External Affairs sees it differently. It says energy security for 1.4 billion people is a sovereign matter, that India buys crude on ordinary market terms, and that it will take "all necessary measures" to protect its trade interests[7]. That phrase — necessary measures — is doing a lot of work. It commits India to nothing specific while signaling it won't simply comply.
There's a wrinkle worth naming here: the price cap system that lets Russian oil flow at a discount was itself designed by Western governments, including the U.S., to keep the oil moving while capping Moscow's revenue. India's argument is that it has been buying inside rules the U.S. helped write, not breaking them.
What "Secondary Sanctions" Actually Means
Russia and China both call this law an example of "secondary sanctions," a term that shows up in nearly every foreign response but rarely gets explained. Here's what it means.
A primary sanction blocks the sanctioned country itself — Russia — from U.S. markets and dollar transactions. A secondary sanction goes further: it penalizes a third country's own companies, like Indian refiners, for trading with Russia, even though that trade is perfectly legal under Indian law and never touches U.S. soil[13][14].
The U.S. can do this because so much of world trade still clears through U.S. dollars and U.S. banks. That gives Washington leverage over deals it isn't even a party to. Backers of the law argue it's the only tool left that makes sanctions on Russia sting, since Russia itself has already been cut off for four years[1][3][15]. India, China and Russia call it overreach — one government using its grip on the financial system to set terms for trade between two other countries.
Russian spokesman Dmitry Peskov called the law "unfriendly actions" that will "complicate efforts to find a peace settlement in Ukraine"[14]. China's Commerce Ministry said it "consistently opposes" secondary sanctions and reserves the right to respond[13].
Squeeze India, and China Wins the Barrel
Here's the part that gets lost in the sovereignty arguments: Russia doesn't have many customers left. Essentially, it's down to two — China and India[6]. Push India out, and the oil doesn't disappear. It just goes to China instead.
That's already starting to happen. In August 2026, Chinese refiners outbid Indian ones for Russian barrels, one reason India's imports slipped that month[12]. Squeeze India harder, and Beijing likely gains even more pricing power over Russian crude — the opposite of weakening Russia's position.
There's also a mismatch inside India's own economy that rarely makes headlines. The companies that buy Russian oil — India's refiners — are not the same companies that would pay a U.S. tariff. That burden would fall on exporters of textiles, gems, shrimp and machinery, businesses with no say in where refiners buy their crude[6][16]. A shrimp exporter in Andhra Pradesh has no vote on refinery sourcing decisions in Mumbai, yet would absorb the penalty if one lands.
Coverage That Splits Along Predictable Lines
How this story got covered tracked pretty closely with where the outlet sits. CBS News led with Graham's legacy and the Washington process, pushing India and China well below the fold[3]. NBC News leaned into the waiver clause, quietly raising the question of whether Trump will ever actually use the power he just signed into law[4].
Indian business outlets like Business Today built their coverage around reassurance, repeatedly stressing that nothing is automatic and leaning on trade researchers who argue the sanctions won't bite right away[6]. The Wire, a left-leaning Indian outlet critical of the government, foregrounded the phrase "necessary measures" itself, inviting readers to ask whether that's a plan or just words[7].
State media in Moscow and Beijing went further. RT's headline said the sanctions law itself "threatens" the Ukraine peace process, backgrounding the war that prompted the sanctions in the first place[14]. Global Times used the phrase "so-called secondary sanctions," scare-quoting the legal category, while leaving out that the same law also sanctions Russian banks and the tanker fleet moving its oil[13].
As of September 23, five days after signing, Trump hasn't designated India or any other country under the new law, and no tariff rate has been announced[6][16]. The 180-day review clock is running. What happens when it does is still an open question.
Summary
President Donald Trump signed the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026 into law on September 18, 2026[2]. The law lets the president put tariffs of up to 100% on goods from the five largest buyers of Russian crude oil and natural gas[1][3]. India is the second-largest buyer, behind China[6]. So Indian exporters are now watching Washington closely.
The law does not tax anything on its own. It is an authorization — a ceiling, not a rate. Trump must first designate a country, and he can pick any number up to 100%. The list of top buyers gets reviewed every 180 days, and he can waive the penalties if he tells Congress it serves the national interest[1][5][6].
There is important recent history that shapes how both sides read this. In 2025 the U.S. hit India with a 25% tariff, then added a 25% penalty specifically over Russian oil, for a total of 50%[8]. In February 2026 the two governments struck an interim framework: the extra 25% penalty came off, the base rate dropped to 18%, and India signaled it would wind down Russian oil purchases[8][9][10]. India has cut its buying since — but has not stopped[11][12].
That is the real dispute. The U.S. side says India made a commitment and is still importing roughly 1.9 million barrels a day of Russian crude[12]. India's Ministry of External Affairs says its duty is energy security for 1.4 billion people, that it sources on market terms, and that it will take "all necessary measures" to protect its trade interests[7]. Russia calls the law an "unfriendly" act that hurts peace talks[14]. China says it opposes secondary sanctions and reserves the right to respond[13].
The Event
On September 18, 2026, President Trump signed H.R. 5334, the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, into law[2]. The Senate had passed it 86-11 on August 7, and the House agreed to the Senate version 262-159 on September 16[1][4]. The law sanctions Russian officials, banks and the "shadow fleet" tankers used to move Russian oil around Western restrictions, extends the Iran Sanctions Act for five years, and authorizes tariffs of up to 100% on the five largest purchasers of Russian crude and gas[1][5]. The bill is named for Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who died in July 2026 of a torn aorta[1].
Undisputed Facts
- Trump signed H.R. 5334 into law on September 18, 2026[2].
- The Senate passed the measure 86-11 on August 7, 2026; the House cleared the final version 262-159 on September 16, 2026[1][4].
- The law authorizes, but does not itself impose, tariffs of up to 100% on the five largest buyers of Russian crude oil and natural gas; the list is reassessed every 180 days[1][5][6].
- The president may waive sanctions, restrictions or duties under the law if he determines it is in the national interest and explains the decision to Congress[1][3].
- The law also extends the Iran Sanctions Act for five years and targets Russia's "shadow fleet" of tankers[1][5].
- In August 2025 the U.S. put a 25% tariff on Indian goods, then added a 25% penalty over Russian oil purchases effective August 27, 2025, for a combined 50%[8].
- In February 2026 the two governments announced an interim framework that removed the 25% oil penalty and set the U.S. reciprocal tariff on Indian goods at 18%[8][9][10].
- India's imports of Russian crude fell from about 2.1 million barrels a day in August 2026 to roughly 1.9 million barrels a day in September, per preliminary ship-tracking data[11][12].
- As of September 23, 2026, the administration has not designated India under the new law or announced any tariff rate under it[6][16].
The Pressure
Strip away the moralizing and blame. What structural realities persist regardless of which narrative wins?
- A discount is a subsidy to the buyer
- Russian crude sells below market because sanctions shrink the pool of buyers. That discount is India's actual interest here — not loyalty to Moscow. India took about 37% of Russia's crude exports between December 2022 and August 2026, second only to China[6]. Any policy that removes the discount removes most of the reason to buy.
- Authority is worth more unused
- The law's value to the White House is as a threat. Once a tariff is set, the leverage is spent and the bargaining stops. The 180-day review cycle and the national-interest waiver keep the threat permanently live and permanently deniable[1][5].
- Two buyers, one seller
- Russia has essentially two large customers left. Pressure that pushes India out does not strand the oil — it hands China more pricing power over it. Chinese refiners already outbid Indian ones in August 2026[12].
- Exporters pay for refiners' choices
- The people who buy Russian crude and the people who would pay the tariff are different Indian companies. A textile or shrimp exporter has no say in refinery sourcing but absorbs the penalty[6][16].
- What 'secondary sanctions' actually means
- A primary sanction bars the sanctioned country itself (here, Russia) from U.S. markets and dollar-clearing systems. A secondary sanction extends the penalty to a third country's own companies — Indian refiners, in this case — that trade with the sanctioned party, even though that trade is legal under Indian law and does not touch U.S. soil. The U.S. can do this because most global trade still clears through U.S. dollars and banks, giving Washington leverage over transactions it isn't formally a party to. Backers argue this is the only tool that makes sanctions on Russia bite, since Moscow itself is already cut off; India, China and Russia call it extraterritorial overreach — one government using financial-system access to dictate terms of a second and third government's bilateral trade[13][14].
How Each Side Sees It
Each major actor’s view — how it frames things, its underlying incentive, and how it’s materially affected. Tap a side to read it.
Frames it asRussia funds the Ukraine war by selling oil, and the biggest buyers are what keeps that revenue flowing. Cutting off the buyers is more effective than sanctioning Moscow directly, because Moscow has already been sanctioned for four years. Backers also argue the law is a bargaining chip, not a plan: the ceiling is 100%, the floor is zero, and the waiver power means the White House can trade relief for behavior. Graham's supporters make a moral argument too — a country that buys discounted war-time crude is not neutral[1][3][15].
WhyMaximize leverage at the lowest cost. The 86-11 Senate vote gave the White House a credible threat it did not have to negotiate for, while the waiver clause means it never has to use it[1][3].
Impact on themA 100% tariff on India or China would raise U.S. consumer prices and could blow up a trade deal the administration has been negotiating since February[9][16]. Not using the law invites criticism that the pressure is theater[3].
Frames it asIndia's position is that energy security for 1.4 billion people is a sovereign responsibility, not a favor to Moscow, and that it buys on market terms from diversified sources[7]. Officials note India was buying Russian crude within a Western price-cap system the U.S. itself designed, which was built to keep Russian barrels flowing at a discount rather than to remove them from the market. New Delhi also argues it has already moved — imports are down and falling — and that punishing a partner mid-negotiation is the wrong instrument. The MEA says India will take "all necessary measures" to protect its trade and economic interests[7].
WhyKeep cheap crude and keep U.S. market access, without conceding that a foreign government sets India's energy policy. Domestically, visibly bending to Washington is costly for Prime Minister Narendra Modi[7][19].
Impact on themThe U.S. is a top export market. A duty near 100% would price out Indian textiles, gems, shrimp and machinery almost overnight[6][16]. Exporters also face a second cost that is harder to see: buyers stop placing orders while the rate is uncertain, even if no tariff ever lands.
Frames it asRefiners say the Russian discount is real money in a thin-margin business, and that replacing 1.9 million barrels a day is not a phone call — it means new contracts, different crude grades and higher freight[11][16]. Exporters, who are a different set of companies entirely, argue they are being asked to pay for someone else's oil purchases. Trade groups say the 180-day review cycle is itself the problem: it makes long-term contracts unsignable[6].
WhyRefiners want the cheapest barrel. Exporters want tariff certainty. Those two interests point in opposite directions, which is why Indian industry is not speaking with one voice[16].
Impact on themSome Indian buyers have already started trimming Russian cargoes ahead of any designation[11]. Analysts also credit non-political causes — attacks on Russian oil infrastructure tightened supply, and Chinese buyers outbid Indian ones in August[12].
Frames it asBoth governments cast this as extraterritorial overreach: one country using market access to police trade between two others. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called the law "unfriendly actions" that will "complicate efforts to find a peace settlement in Ukraine" — the argument being that pressure hardens Moscow rather than moving it[14]. China's Commerce Ministry said it "consistently opposes" secondary sanctions imposed over a third party and reserves the right to take necessary measures[13]. Both frame the law as proof that the dollar-and-tariff system is a weapon, which is itself their strongest argument for building alternatives to it.
WhyRussia needs buyers for its crude and wants the pressure campaign to look futile. China wants to deter the U.S. from ever designating it, and to recruit India away from Washington[13][14].
Impact on themRussia's two biggest customers are now both under explicit tariff threat. If India pulls back, China gains bargaining power over Russian crude prices — a shift already visible in August, when Chinese buyers outbid Indian refiners[12].
Like this article?
The Bias Ledger average rating 4.9
The same story, as framed by outlets across the spectrum, ordered least to most biased. The bias score (1 = straight, 10 = heavily spun) is an AI assessment of that framing — click an outlet to see its track record. The tell is the word choice or omission that reveals the angle.
| Outlet | Vantage | Bias | How they frame it | The tell |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CBS News | U.S. center | 2 | "Trump signs Russia sanctions bill championed by Lindsey Graham" — leads on the signing and the late senator's role. | Frames the story as legacy and Washington process. India and China, the countries actually exposed to the 100% ceiling, appear well below the fold. |
| NBC News | U.S. center-left | 3 | "House passes Russia sanctions bill named for Lindsey Graham, sending it to Trump" — roll-call focused. | Emphasizes the discretion and waiver clauses, which subtly sets up the question of whether Trump will actually use the law — a skeptical frame, though a factually grounded one. |
| Business Today | Indian business press | 4 | "100% tariff threat immediately? What Trump's new Russia sanctions law means for India" — explainer built around reassurance. | Repeatedly stresses that nothing is automatic and leans on GTRI, a New Delhi trade research group whose founder is a former Indian trade official. Reads as calming for a domestic exporter audience. |
| The Wire | Indian left-of-center, critical of the Modi government | 4 | "MEA Says 'Taking Necessary Measures' as India Faces 100% Tariff Threat Over US Sanctions on Russia". | Foregrounds the government's language rather than the statute, inviting the reader to weigh whether "necessary measures" is a plan or a phrase. |
| Forbes (Opinion) | U.S. business-right, signed contributor column | 5 | "U.S., Russia, India In Oil Tariff Triangle—Who Wins?" | Frames a policy question as a game with winners, which presumes the pressure campaign is a contest to be scored rather than a legal authority that may go unused. |
| RT | Russian state-funded | 8 | "Kremlin warns US sanctions law threatens Ukraine peace efforts" — the law is the obstacle to peace. | Inverts cause and effect: the war is backgrounded, and the sanctions response becomes the thing endangering a settlement. Peskov is the only voice given weight. |
| Global Times | Chinese state-run | 8 | "China opposes US secondary sanctions under new Russia-Iran law, reserves right to take necessary measures." | Uses "so-called secondary sanctions" — scare-quoting the legal category itself — and omits that the law also sanctions Russian banks and tankers, keeping the story purely about U.S. coercion of third countries. |
References
- Sanctioning Russia Act — Wikipedia · crowd-edited encyclopedia; used here for roll-call votes and statutory summary, cross-checked against news reports
- Congressional Bill H.R. 5334 Signed into Law — The White House · official U.S. executive branch statement
- Trump signs Russia sanctions bill championed by Lindsey Graham — CBS News · U.S. commercial broadcast network, center
- House passes Russia sanctions bill named for Lindsey Graham, sending it to Trump — NBC News · U.S. commercial broadcast network, center-left
- US President Signs Russia and Iran Sanctions Bill with New Tariff Powers — Baker McKenzie · international corporate law firm client alert; written for companies managing sanctions compliance
- India faces fresh US tariff threat over Russian oil: What happens next? GTRI explains — Business Today · Indian business magazine (India Today Group); cites GTRI, a Delhi trade research group founded by a former Indian trade official
- MEA Says 'Taking Necessary Measures' as India Faces 100% Tariff Threat Over US Sanctions on Russia — The Wire · Indian nonprofit outlet, left-of-center and critical of the governing BJP
- Trump cuts India tariffs to 18% as Modi agrees to stop buying Russian oil — Al Jazeera · Qatari state-funded international broadcaster
- United States-India Joint Statement — The White House · official joint U.S.-India government statement
- U.S. Reduces India Tariffs, Citing Oil-Related Pledge — Sullivan & Cromwell · U.S. corporate law firm client memo
- India's Russian crude imports set to fall in September amid tighter supply, Iraq a key alternative — ThePrint · Indian digital news outlet, centrist-liberal
- India's imports of Russian crude fell in August; could fall further in September: Report — Business Today · Indian business magazine; reporting Kpler ship-tracking data
- China opposes US secondary sanctions under new Russia-Iran law, reserves right to take necessary measures — Global Times · Chinese Communist Party-run newspaper
- Kremlin warns US sanctions law threatens Ukraine peace efforts — RT · Russian state-funded broadcaster
- What the latest US sanctions bill means for Russia—and for China, India, and Iran — Atlantic Council · Washington think tank; funded in part by Western governments and defense firms, generally Atlanticist and pro-sanctions
- US' 100% tariff threat: India may find it difficult to cut Russian oil buys — Business Standard · Indian business daily, market-oriented
- Trump Signs Russia-Iran Sanctions Bill, Putting New Pressure Tools At His Disposal — Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty · U.S. government-funded broadcaster targeting Eastern Europe and Eurasia
- Trump Signs Sweeping Russia Sanctions Bill — The Moscow Times · Russian independent outlet, now Amsterdam-based and designated 'undesirable' by Moscow
- Trump's New Russia Sanctions: What It Means And Can India Face 100% Tariffs — Outlook India · Indian newsmagazine, centrist
- Will India, China face 100% tariffs over Russian oil, gas deals? — The Week · Indian newsmagazine (Malayala Manorama Group)
- Trump Signs Russia Sanctions Bill Into Law — U.S. News & World Report · U.S. general-interest outlet carrying wire coverage
- U.S., Russia, India In Oil Tariff Triangle—Who Wins? — Forbes · U.S. business magazine; signed contributor column, not staff reporting