Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) and India's Model BIT (2016)

A Bilateral Investment Treaty, or BIT, is an agreement between two countries to protect each other's investors. If a company from Country A builds a factory, buys a mine or sets up a business in Country B, the BIT promises that Country B will treat it fairly. If Country B breaks these promises, the investor can take the matter to an international tribunal (a special court made of independent judges called arbitrators).

Why do BITs exist?

Imagine you lend your shop to a relative in another town. You would feel safer with a written agreement that says they will not suddenly take it over. Foreign investors feel the same way. A government could suddenly seize a factory, cancel a licence without reason, or treat foreign companies worse than local ones. A BIT gives written protection against such risks. In return, the host country hopes to attract more foreign investment, which brings money, jobs and technology.

How does a BIT work?

A typical BIT has three main parts:

1. Definition: Who counts as an "investor" and what counts as an "investment".
2. Promises (protections): For example, the host country will not take over an investment without paying fair compensation, will not discriminate against it, and will give it basic legal fairness.
3. Dispute settlement: If a promise is broken, how the investor can get justice. This is called Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS). It lets a private company sue a government before an international arbitration tribunal, instead of only in the host country's own courts.

India's first phase of BITs (1994 to 2015)

After the economic reforms of 1991, India wanted more foreign investment. Its first BIT was signed with the United Kingdom in 1994. By the 2010s, India had signed BITs with more than 80 countries. India used the term Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (BIPPA) for these. The India-Australia BIT was signed on 26 February 1999.

Why did India change course?

Foreign investors began to use these treaties to sue India.

• White Industries v. India (2011): An Australian company, White Industries, had won a commercial arbitration award against Coal India. It then waited about nine years for Indian courts to enforce it. In November 2011, a tribunal under the India-Australia BIT held that India had broken the treaty by failing to give "effective means" of enforcing rights. It was the first known investment treaty ruling against India.
• After that, more cases followed, many linked to tax demands made with retrospective effect (taxes applied to past deals). In 2020, tribunals ruled against India in cases brought by Vodafone and Cairn Energy.
• The government felt the old treaties were too broad and limited its power to make policy in the public interest, for example on taxes or health.

The Model BIT of 2016

A "model BIT" is a country's standard template that it uses as the starting point in every negotiation. The Union Cabinet approved India's new Model BIT in December 2015, and it was released in 2016. Its key features are:

• Enterprise-based definition: Only a real business set up in the host country, with actual operations, counts as an investment. Short-term portfolio money (like buying a few shares) is not covered.
• No Most Favoured Nation (MFN) clause: An investor cannot borrow better terms that India gave to some other country in a different treaty.
• No broad "fair and equitable treatment" promise: Instead, the model lists specific wrongs the state must not commit, such as denial of justice, a basic breach of due process, targeted discrimination and manifestly abusive treatment.
• Excluded areas: Taxation, government procurement, subsidies and compulsory licences are kept out of the treaty. So a tax dispute cannot be taken to an international tribunal under the BIT.
• Exhaust local remedies first: An investor must first try Indian courts and remedies for at least five years before going to international arbitration.
• Investor obligations: Investors must also follow local laws, pay taxes and avoid corruption.

Terminating old treaties

After adopting the new model, India sent termination notices for most of its old BITs and asked partners to renegotiate on the new template. In March 2017 alone, India terminated treaties with 58 countries. The India-Australia BIT ended on 23 March 2017. India's 1997 BIT with Switzerland also ended in 2017 (UNCTAD records the date as 6 April 2017). Investments already made before termination stay protected for a further period under the "sunset clause" of each old treaty.

The newer phase

Few countries accepted the strict 2016 model, so India signed only a handful of new BITs. The India-UAE BIT was signed on 13 February 2024 and came into force on 31 August 2024. It shortened the local-remedies period to three years. The India-Uzbekistan BIT was signed on 27 September 2024 and came into force on 15 May 2025.

It also lets the host country file counterclaims (its own claims back against an investor) if the investor breaks its duties under the treaty. The India-Israel BIT was signed on 8 September 2025 and came into force on 4 July 2026. It also cut the local-remedies period to three years. Israel is the first member of the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, a group of mostly rich countries) to sign a BIT with India since the 2016 model.

Unlike the 2016 model, this treaty also covers portfolio investment. Like the model, it has no MFN clause and keeps taxation out. The Union Budget 2025-26 announced that the Model BIT would be revamped to make it more investor-friendly. In September 2026, India and Saudi Arabia concluded negotiations on a BIT; it still has to be signed.

The Finance Minister said this treaty goes beyond the 2016 framework in protecting investors from both sides. As of October 2026, a new Model BIT template is ready. It is waiting for Union Cabinet approval and aims to fix the shortcomings of the 2016 model. India is also negotiating BITs with several other partners, including Australia.

Commonly confused concepts

• BIT vs FTA/CEPA: An FTA or CEPA is mainly about trade in goods and services across borders. A BIT is only about protecting investments already made inside the other country. Sometimes an investment chapter sits inside a big trade deal; sometimes the BIT is separate, as India prefers. For example, the India-EFTA Trade and Economic Partnership Agreement (TEPA), signed on 10 March 2024 and in force since 1 October 2025, has an investment chapter. EFTA (the European Free Trade Association) is a group of four European countries: Switzerland, Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. Under TEPA, the EFTA countries aim to bring US$100 billion of investment into India over 15 years. But this chapter mainly promotes investment and sets a target. It does not give investors BIT-style protection or the right to sue India before an international tribunal (ISDS).
• ISDS vs commercial arbitration: ISDS is a dispute between a private investor and a government, based on a treaty. Commercial arbitration is a dispute between two companies (or a company and a state-owned firm) based on a business contract. The White Industries case began as commercial arbitration and later became an ISDS case.
• BIT vs DTAA: A BIT protects the investment itself. A DTAA only makes sure the same income is not taxed twice. Under India's model, tax matters are kept outside the BIT.
• FDI vs portfolio investment: Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) means a lasting stake with some control, like owning a factory. Portfolio investment means buying shares or bonds, often short-term. India's model BIT protects FDI-type investments, not portfolio money.

Issues, criticism and the way forward

• Investor view: Critics say the five-year local-remedies rule is far longer than international practice and that Indian courts are slow. This may make investors avoid India or demand higher returns for the risk.
• Government view: Supporters say the 2016 model protects India's right to make laws in the public interest, and stops costly cases over tax and policy decisions.
• Few partners: Since 2016, very few countries have signed BITs on India's terms, leaving many foreign investors without treaty protection.
• Outbound investment: Indian companies now invest abroad a lot, for example in Australian mines. They too need BIT protection in other countries. So a balanced treaty helps both inbound and outbound investors.
• Way forward: A shorter local-remedies period (as in the UAE and Israel treaties), faster Indian courts and a clearer, more balanced model can attract investment while still protecting policy space.

Concepts to Know

• Arbitration / tribunal: A way to settle a dispute outside regular courts. Both sides accept a panel of independent experts (arbitrators), whose decision (the "award") is binding.
• Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS): A system that lets a foreign investor sue the host government before an international tribunal for breaking a treaty.
• Most Favoured Nation (MFN) clause: A promise to give a partner the best treatment you give to any other country. In a BIT, it lets an investor copy better terms from another treaty.
• Exhaustion of local remedies: The rule that an investor must first try the host country's own courts and authorities before going to an international tribunal.
• Retrospective taxation: A tax law that applies to deals already completed in the past.
• Sunset clause: A clause that keeps old investments protected for some years even after a treaty ends.