Tag: Why FDI info is low in India?

  • India What a Decade of Borrowing Actually Bought Us. Are we in a Debt Trap?

    India What a Decade of Borrowing Actually Bought Us. Are we in a Debt Trap?

    India’s Public Debt Story (2015โ€“2025): What a Decade of Borrowing Actually Bought Us. Are we in a Debt Trap?

    India’s combined government debt has roughly doubled over the past decade. Central government debt alone climbed from about โ‚น121 trillion in FY2020 to an estimated โ‚น197 trillion by FY2026. State liabilities nearly tripled, from ~โ‚น32.6 trillion in FY2016 to ~โ‚น94 trillion by FY2025.

    Numbers like these trigger one of two reactions: alarm or indifference. Neither is entirely right.

    The better question is: What drove this rise, where did the money go, and where does it leave India today?

    Here’s the decade, unpacked.

    The pattern: steady drift, then a shock, then a slow climb-down

    Pre-2020, India’s fiscal deficit sat in a fairly disciplined 3โ€“4% of GDP band, broadly consistent with FRBM targets โ€” even if actual numbers occasionally missed the mark (FY2019 came in around 3.4% against a 3.3% target).

    Then COVID hit. The central fiscal deficit spiked to roughly 9.5% of GDP in FY2021 as revenue collapsed and emergency spending โ€” cash transfers, free food grain, MSME credit guarantees, health spending โ€” went out the door. Debt-to-GDP jumped by an estimated 8โ€“10 percentage points in a single year.

    Since then, the story has been consolidation: the deficit has been brought down to around 5โ€“6% of GDP, with a budgeted target of 4.4% for FY2026. It’s real progress, even if the debt base it’s working off is now structurally higher than it was five years ago.

    Three episodes that explain most of the swings Debt to GDP ratio %

    Demonetisation (Nov 2016): Intended to curb black money and push digital transactions, it also slowed activity and tax collections in the short run โ€” GDP growth cooled and the fiscal deficit widened modestly (to around 3.5% of GDP against a 3% target) in FY2017.

    GST rollout (Jul 2017): A genuine structural reform with long-term revenue upside, but the transition wasn’t free. Collections initially undershot expectations, and the Centre had to borrow to compensate states during the changeover โ€” nudging FY2018’s deficit above target.

    COVID-19 (2020โ€“21): By far the biggest driver. A relief package of โ‚น20 trillion, layered onto a collapsing revenue base, took the deficit from roughly 3.5% to 9.5% of GDP in one year. Was it worth it? Most independent analyses โ€” including from the IMF and RBI โ€” suggest yes: the counterfactual (a sharper austerity response) likely meant a materially deeper contraction. The trade-off was a permanently higher debt stock in exchange for a shallower recession.

    Add to this two smaller but persistent pressures: periodic PSU bank recapitalisation (roughly โ‚น2.2 trillion across FY2018 and FY2020, needed to clean up bad loans) and an expanding footprint of welfare and housing schemes (PMAY, Ujjwala, MGNREGA) that keep revenue spending elevated even as capital expenditure has also been rising.

    The quiet number that matters most: interest payments

    Debt totals get the headlines, but the number that actually constrains policy choices is the interest bill. Central government interest payments rose from about โ‚น6.6 trillion in FY2020 to roughly โ‚น8.1 trillion by FY2022 and now consume somewhere in the range of 20โ€“25% of central revenue receipts. That’s revenue that isn’t available for capex, subsidies, or further consolidation โ€” it’s simply the cost of past borrowing. As global and domestic interest rates moved up through 2022โ€“23, this burden has only gotten heavier.

    Where did the borrowed money go?

    It helps to separate how much India borrowed from what it was spent on. The story changed significantly after COVID:

    • FY2020โ€“21: Borrowing largely supported emergency needs โ€” food distribution, welfare support, MSMEs and bank recapitalisation. Necessary at the time, but with limited long-term growth impact.
    • FY2022โ€“24: The focus shifted toward capital expenditure โ€” roads, railways, healthcare and infrastructure. Capex as a share of GDP steadily increased.

    The positive shift: India increasingly moved from borrowing to support consumption toward borrowing to build productive assets.

    The road ahead

    The government’s own glide path targets a fiscal deficit closer to 4% of GDP, with debt-to-GDP expected to ease from its COVID-era peak (above 60%) toward the high-50s by FY2026. Getting there sustainably will likely depend on a few things playing out together: continued nominal GDP growth outpacing debt growth, disciplined targeting of subsidies rather than blanket cuts, tighter oversight of contingent liabilities and off-budget borrowing (state guarantees, PPP obligations), and a continued shift of the expenditure mix toward capital rather than revenue spending.

    None of this is dramatic. Fiscal consolidation rarely is โ€” it’s mostly the unglamorous work of holding a line over several budget cycles. But the direction, so far, has been the right one.

     The takeaway

    The last decade brought demonetisation, GST, COVID-19 and a major infrastructure push. As a result, India’s public debt is roughly twice what it was in 2016.

    But debt is only one side of the story. India also built a stronger digital payments ecosystem, a unified tax system and significantly better infrastructure, while managing a strong post-COVID recovery.

    The key question now isn’t how much India owes, but whether economic growth can continue to outpace the growth in debt.


    What’s your read โ€” was the post-COVID borrowing surge the right call, or did it set a debt base that will constrain policy for years to come? Would like to hear other perspectives on this.

    #IndianEconomy #PublicFinance #FiscalPolicy #Macroeconomics #Debt #Budget2026 #EconomicPolicy #India

  • India’s FDI Puzzle: Record Money In, Very Little Staying Back

    India’s FDI Puzzle: Record Money In, Very Little Staying Back

    India’s FDI Puzzle: Record Money In, Very Little Staying Back

    A simple, data-backed look at what’s really happening to foreign investment in India.

    Picture this: India just received its biggest-ever foreign investment cheque โ€” $94.8 billion in FY 2025-26. Worth celebrating, right? But once the dust settled, only $7 billion of that actually stayed back to build something in India. The rest walked right back out. And this isn’t a one-off โ€” it’s been the pattern for four years running. Here’s the simple version of what’s happening, why, and what India can do about it.

    1. Where Things Stand Today

    Two numbers matter here, and once you know the difference, the whole story becomes clear. Gross FDI is every dollar of foreign money that lands in India in a year. Net FDI is what’s left after two things get subtracted: money foreign investors pull back out (called repatriation โ€” they sell their stake, take dividends, or exit), and money Indian companies send abroad to invest in their own overseas ventures. Net FDI is the honest number. It’s the capital that’s actually staying and creating jobs and factories here.

    YearGross FDI InNet FDI (Actually Stayed)% That Stayed
    FY 2020-21$82 Bn$44.0 Bn54%
    FY 2022-23$71 Bn$28.0 Bn39%
    FY 2023-24$71 Bn$10.6 Bn15%
    FY 2024-25$81 Bn$1.0 Bn1%
    FY 2025-26$95 Bn$7.0 Bn7%

    Source: RBI Bulletin; Ministry of Finance (Lok Sabha reply); CareEdge Ratings.

    Notice the trend: gross FDI is sitting near an all-time high, while net FDI collapsed to almost nothing in FY24-25 and has only partly recovered since. That gap โ€” not the headline number โ€” is the real story of Indian FDI right now.

    2. Why Are Outflows So High?

    Two things are pulling money back out, and both are simpler than they sound.

    • Repatriation: Investors who put money in years ago are now cashing out โ€” selling their stake, taking profits, or exiting the business entirely. In FY23-24 alone, $44 billion was repatriated out of $71 billion that came in.
    • Outward investment: Indian companies are investing more abroad themselves, in their own overseas units and acquisitions. That counts as money leaving too โ€” nearly $65 billion of it between FY24 and FY26.

    Together, these two are eating up almost all the new FDI that arrives. It’s a bit like a bucket with a big hole near the top โ€” you can keep pouring water in, but the level barely rises.

    3. External Reasons โ€” Forces India Doesn’t Control

    • Global money got expensive: Higher interest rates worldwide for much of this decade made investors more cautious and more eager to book profits early.
    • Geopolitical shocks: A conflict in early 2026 triggered a broad “risk-off” mood across emerging markets, India included โ€” investors pulled back everywhere, not just here.
    • Trade tensions: Tighter US trade policy created uncertainty for investors weighing India exposure.
    • Tough competition: Vietnam, Thailand, Taiwan and Malaysia are actively out-marketing India with faster approvals and sharper incentives for the same pool of global capital.
    • A natural exit cycle: A lot of India’s FDI over the last decade came from private equity and venture capital, which is built to exit in 4-7 years by design. Many of those funds are simply reaching maturity at the same time.

    4. Internal Reasons โ€” What’s In India’s Own Hands

    • Land is still hard to acquire: Getting industrial land cleared and ready remains one of the biggest headaches for a company trying to set up operations in India.
    • Labour reforms are stuck: The 2020 labour codes still haven’t been fully implemented โ€” six years on, that delay itself signals unpredictability to investors.
    • Clearances are slow and scattered: Investors dealing with multiple states and departments face a much slower, less predictable path than in Vietnam or Thailand’s single-window systems.
    • Manufacturing FDI is still thin: Real, factory-building manufacturing investment is only about 10.6% of effective inflows โ€” most FDI still goes into services and IT, which don’t need to “stay put” the way a factory does.
    • Domestic capital markets aren’t deep enough: When a foreign investor wants to exit, there often isn’t enough Indian institutional money ready to buy them out โ€” so the money leaves the country instead of just changing hands within it.

    5. What Should India Do to Lift Net FDI?

    • Fast-track approvals with fixed timelines โ€” a genuine time-bound single-window clearance for priority projects, not just a policy promise.
    • Finish the labour code rollout โ€” closing a six-year-old gap matters as much for investor confidence as the content of the codes themselves.
    • Make industrial land ready in advance โ€” pre-cleared land banks and plug-and-play parks, the way parts of Gujarat and Tamil Nadu already do it, need to become the norm across states.
    • Put real muscle behind manufacturing, not FDI in general โ€” sharper, PLI-style incentives specifically for semiconductors, electronics and clean-energy manufacturing.
    • Deepen India’s own capital markets โ€” so that when foreign investors exit, Indian institutions can absorb the stake instead of the money leaving the country.
    • Make Centre-State coordination visible โ€” one senior point of accountability per big project, so approvals don’t get lost between jurisdictions.

    The Bottom Line

    India doesn’t have an attraction problem โ€” the last decade of record gross FDI proves that. What it has is a retention problem: turning a strong “come invest here” pitch into an equally strong “stay and build here” outcome. Fix the handful of structural issues above, and the gap between the $95 billion headline and the $7 billion reality starts closing on its own.

    Sources: DPIIT FDI Factsheets ยท RBI Bulletin ยท PIB ยท Ministry of Finance (Lok Sabha reply) ยท Economic Survey 2025-26 ยท CareEdge Ratings ยท IBEF. Figures compiled and cross-checked as of 22 August 2026.