This is a once-in-a-generation agreement that gives NZ exporters unprecedented access to 1.4 billion people and an economy set to become the third-largest in the world.
– Christopher Luxon, Prime Minister of New Zealand
Why does this agreement matter for New Zealand exporters?
The India–New Zealand Free Trade Agreement creates significant momentum for New Zealand businesses. It makes India more commercially attractive, more commercially accessible, and harder to ignore.
India is currently New Zealand’s 11th-largest goods and services export market, representing 1.8% of our exports, with NZ$2.03 billion in goods and services exported there in the year ended December 2025. The strongest existing flows are in travel services, forestry, horticulture, aluminium, iron and steel, and wool, with clear headroom for further growth across premium food, beverage, consumer goods, tech, and services.
That matters because this is not a theoretical opportunity or a niche trade relationship. It is a live export market with real traction across multiple sectors. The table below gives a quick sense of where some of the immediate gains are likely to land – and why businesses in those sectors should be thinking now about how to protect the value they are taking into India.
| Sector | Key benefit under the India–NZ FTA |
|---|---|
| Forestry | Immediate tariff-free entry |
| Sheep meat | Significant tariff reductions |
| Wool | Improved competitiveness |
| Kiwifruit and apples | Lower landed costs |
| Manuka honey | Expanded export access |
| Wine | Progressive tariff elimination |
| Dairy ingredients | Fast-track duty-free mechanisms |
Before launch activity gathers pace and products are fully exposed to the market, New Zealand businesses should get their IP ducks in a row – deciding what can be protected, what should remain confidential, and how to stop others from dulling their competitive edge.
How India differs
India’s IP framework is well developed, but it differs from New Zealand and other export markets in ways that can affect filing strategy, timing, evidence, enforcement, and commercial planning. For exporters, the key point is simple: protection may be available, but the usual approach will not always translate neatly. Some of the main differences are set out below.
For example, India requires patentees to report whether inventions are being commercially worked in India, it applies stricter rules in some areas of pharmaceutical patenting, excludes methods of medical treatment from patentability, and takes a more careful approach to software-related inventions than some businesses expect.
None of that means India is not a good market. It means New Zealand businesses cannot assume their usual approach will apply. The examples below illustrate some of the main differences – and why they matter in practice.
Some of the differences worth knowing early
Statements of Working Requirements
One of the more important differences is India’s Statement of Working requirement. Patent owners must periodically confirm whether the patented invention is being commercially worked in India.
This is more than an administrative oddity. It reflects a broader policy position that patents should support real economic activity, not just sit passively on the register. For businesses entering India, that makes commercial planning part of patent strategy, not something to think about later.
Local Commercialisation Expectations
India’s system also places real weight on local working and commercial relevance. Simply importing a product may not always be enough to satisfy the broader expectations sitting behind the patent framework, particularly in sectors tied to public interest or where local manufacture is commercially realistic.
This does not mean every exporter needs immediate local production. It does mean businesses should think early about supply chain design, licensing, partnerships, and how their market presence in India will support the position they want to maintain over time.
Strict Pharmaceutical Patent Standards
For pharmaceutical and biotech businesses, India applies a stricter threshold in some areas than applicants may be used to. The Indian Patents Act can prevent patents being granted for new forms of known substances unless there is evidence of significantly enhanced therapeutic efficacy.
This makes drafting strategy especially important. If the innovation story is incremental, the application needs to be built with care and supported by the right evidence. A filing approach that works elsewhere may not be enough in India.
Medical Treatment Methods Are Not Patentable
India also excludes methods of medical treatment from patentability, including surgical, therapeutic, and diagnostic methods. This is an important boundary issue for medtech and health-sector businesses because it affects how an invention should be framed at the drafting stage.
In practice, the protectable value may sit in the device, system, composition, software-enabled functionality, or supporting workflow rather than in the treatment method itself. Getting that framing right early matters.
Software can be protected – but only if you frame it properly
Software patents in India require careful positioning. Computer programs are not protectable as such, so a software-heavy invention cannot simply be described at a high level and expected to survive examination.
Where software delivers a genuine technical effect, interacts meaningfully with hardware, or improves system functionality in a concrete way, protection may still be available. The key is to draft to the technical contribution rather than to the code in the abstract.
Patents of Addition
India’s Patents of Addition regime can also be commercially useful. It allows improvements or modifications to be protected without requiring a separate inventive step in the same way a standalone application might.
For businesses iterating quickly, this can be a practical tool for extending protection around product development while keeping prosecution costs and portfolio complexity under better control.
Expedited Examination Pathways
India also offers expedited examination pathways in specific circumstances, including for startups, small entities, government-supported applicants, and certain other qualifying applicants. In the right case, this can materially improve speed to grant.
This matters because timing is strategic. If India is a priority market, it is worth considering early whether the applicant structure, filing sequence, or ownership model can be set up in a way that supports faster prosecution rather than treating speed as a matter of luck.
Don’t be blocked at the border
Before committing to the Indian market, businesses need to know whether they can enter it and operate in it without running into someone else’s rights. This means asking two early questions: can the brand be used and registered, and can the product, process, formulation, or technology be sold in India without infringing third-party patents?
These questions point to two important pieces of early work. The first is trade mark clearance searching, to check whether the proposed brand is available and registrable. The second is patent freedom-to-operate searching, to assess whether third-party patent rights could restrict market entry or ongoing operations.
Done early, these searches can save businesses from rebranding, delay, redesign, infringement risk, and expensive course correction after launch plans are already underway.
Where protection is likely to matter most
It is also worth looking sector by sector at where the FTA is likely to create momentum, because these opportunities do not all raise the same IP issues. For some exporters the priority will be brand protection and trade marks. For others it may be patents, confidential know-how, plant variety rights, or the way regulatory and commercial strategy intersect. The table below gives a high-level sense of how the IP focus can shift depending on the sector.
Because the IP issues will vary from sector to sector, early professional advice can help businesses focus on the protections that matter most before they enter the market.
| Industry | Primary IP focus |
|---|---|
| Agri-tech | Patents and plant varieties |
| Medical devices | Patents and regulatory strategy |
| Dairy ingredients | Trade secrets and patents |
| Food and beverage | Trade marks |
| Software and AI | Copyright and patents |
| Forestry technology | Mechanical patents |
| Wine and spirits | Brand protection |
| Biotechnology | Patent portfolio management |
A smart India strategy is not just a filing strategy
A strong India strategy is a coordination exercise across legal, commercial, product, and market-entry decisions. The right mix will depend on what the business is taking into India and where its value actually sits.
That usually means thinking about trade marks, patents, confidential information, ownership structures, manufacturing arrangements, distributor terms, and competitor visibility together. Businesses that do this early tend to make better decisions and spend money in the right places. Businesses that do it late often end up paying to fix avoidable mistakes.
The avoidable mistakes that still catch businesses out
The most common mistakes are usually predictable. Businesses file too late in a first-to-file market. They assume a successful New Zealand or offshore strategy will translate neatly into India. They neglect clearance work on brands. Or they leave commercialisation planning disconnected from patent ownership and enforcement strategy.
Early advice helps businesses avoid expensive mistakes.
A few questions worth asking early
What does the India–New Zealand FTA actually change?
It improves market access and reduces tariffs across a wide range of goods, which can materially improve the commercial case for entering India.
Why should IP be part of that conversation?
Because market access creates exposure as well as opportunity. If a business is taking a valuable brand, product, process, or technology into India, it should be clear about how that value will be protected.
Is India a credible patent jurisdiction?
Yes. It is a serious and internationally connected system, but it has its own rules and practical expectations, so strategy needs to be tailored accordingly.
Why does a Statement of Working matter?
It is the mechanism used to confirm whether a patented invention is being commercially worked in India. It matters because it reflects the link India draws between patent rights and real economic activity.
Can software be protected in India?
Sometimes, yes. But the protection case usually needs to be built around technical effect, system functionality, or hardware integration rather than software in the abstract.
What should businesses do first?
Usually, start with identifying where the real value sits, then align brand clearance, filing strategy, confidentiality, and commercial arrangements before launch momentum makes those decisions harder.
Final thoughts
The FTA creates real opportunity in India, but exporters will be better placed to capture it if they identify early where their value sits and how it should be protected. The right strategy will depend on the sector, the product, and the route to market – which is why tailored advice matters.
Practical next steps
- Work out where your real advantage sits – in the brand, the product, the formulation, the process, the technology, theknow-how, or the commercial model.
- Clear and file key trade marks early, before distributors, launch activity, or local interest create unnecessary risk.
- Check whether your patent strategy is actually fit for India, including drafting scope, ownership, timing, and local requirements.
- Align confidentiality, licensing, manufacturing, and distribution arrangements with your IP position so the commercial plan is protecting value rather than exposing it.
