Why Are Americans Paying for AI in India? Trump Aide’s Remarks Stir Fresh Controversy

In partnership with

Your competitors are already automating. Here's the data.

Retail and ecommerce teams using AI for customer service are resolving 40-60% more tickets without more staff, cutting cost-per-ticket by 30%+, and handling seasonal spikes 3x faster.

But here's what separates winners from everyone else: they started with the data, not the hype.

Gladly handles the predictable volume, FAQs, routing, returns, order status, while your team focuses on customers who need a human touch. The result? Better experiences. Lower costs. Real competitive advantage. Ready to see what's possible for your business?

See it in action

has erupted in US–India relations after White House trade advisor Peter Navarro questioned why Americans were “paying for artificial intelligence services in India.” His remarks, made amid a stalled trade deal and rising tariff tensions between Washington and New Delhi, have reignited debates over global technology infrastructure, trade equity, and the increasingly politicised role of artificial intelligence. Speaking during an interview with former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon on Real America Voice, Navarro argued that AI platforms such as ChatGPT operate on American soil, consume American electricity, and rely on US-based infrastructure—yet serve millions of users across countries such as India and China. According to him, this arrangement effectively places the financial burden of AI development and operation on American taxpayers while the benefits are enjoyed globally. “Why are Americans paying for AI in India?” Navarro asked. “ChatGPT operates on US soil and uses American electricity, servicing large users of ChatGPT in India and China and elsewhere around the world.” The remarks quickly went viral, triggering strong reactions both domestically and internationally. AI, Infrastructure, and Global Access Navarro’s comments reflect a growing strand of economic nationalism within US policy circles, particularly under President Donald Trump’s leadership. The argument centers on the idea that advanced technologies developed and hosted in the United States should primarily benefit American citizens—or that foreign users should shoulder a greater share of the cost. However, critics argue that this perspective oversimplifies how modern digital services operate. AI platforms are not government-funded utilities but private, commercial products offered globally. Companies earn revenue from international subscriptions, enterprise services, and partnerships, often reinvesting those earnings into US-based research, jobs, and infrastructure. Moreover, global usage strengthens AI systems by improving scale, data diversity, and innovation—factors that ultimately benefit American firms and users as well. Technology experts also note that cloud computing and AI services are increasingly distributed, with data centers located across multiple countries. While many core operations remain in the US, the global digital economy is inherently interconnected, making national boundaries less relevant than in traditional manufacturing or energy sectors. Trade Tensions Add Fuel to the Fire Navarro’s remarks come at a particularly sensitive moment in India–US relations. The two countries remain locked in a trade deadlock following President Trump’s decision to impose 50 percent tariffs on India, citing New Delhi’s continued purchase of discounted Russian oil amid the Ukraine war. Negotiations over a broader trade agreement have stalled, with both sides accusing the other of inflexibility. Against this backdrop, Navarro’s comments on AI appear less like an isolated observation and more like part of a broader pressure campaign. By framing global AI usage as an economic loss to the US, the Trump administration may be signaling its willingness to extend trade disputes into the digital and technology sectors. A Pattern of Controversial Remarks on India This is far from the first time Peter Navarro has drawn criticism for his statements about India. Over the years, he has frequently portrayed New Delhi as an unfair trade partner, labeling it the “maharaja of tariffs” and accusing it of exploiting global trade rules. Navarro has also been particularly vocal about India’s energy ties with Russia. He previously claimed that India was “fueling Russia’s war in Ukraine” by importing Russian crude oil and controversially described India as a “laundromat for the Kremlin.” In other instances, he referred to Russian oil payments as “blood money” and even called the Ukraine conflict “Modi’s war,” remarks that were widely condemned in India.