Pavan K. Varma | Nirmalaji, Are You Willing To Take Some Risks?

Finance minister (FM), Nirmala Sitharaman, deserves to be congratulated for presenting the Budget for seven consecutive years. In a few hours, she will be presenting her eighth Budget. But even at the last minute, literally, I have a question to ask her: Are you now willing to take risks that would propel India to the next economic level?

A leading corporate magnate recently told me that the government repeatedly asks businessmen to increase their risk appetite. He said that Indians, as born entrepreneurs, thrive on risk. But is the risk worth it in a milieu where failure is conflated with fraud, and even success is threatened with predatory investigative agencies if one is perceived to be not fully towing the government line? According to available statistics, between 2014 and 2024, 43,000 High Net-worth Individuals (HNIs) left India for Singapore, UAE, Australia, Canada and the US, taking with them personal wealth estimated to be in billions of dollars. In 2025 alone, approximately 26.8 billion dollars of personal wealth is estimated to have migrated out of India. Most of those leaving are young, and among the reasons cited by them is an unsafe business environment and arbitrary scrutiny by tax authorities and investigative agencies. Nirmalaji, can you risk dismantling the system that creates these apprehensions, to create greater investor confidence?

For two terms the Narendra Modi government has had an absolute majority, and currently enjoys a stable majority. Our fiscal deficit is under control, inflation is largely contained, foreign reserves are strong, and at over six per cent, we are one of the fastest growing economies in the world. Now is the time to expedite economic reforms, and create greater Ease of doing Business, where we still rank 63rd in the 2020 World Bank global index. Some reforms have been implemented, but far more lie on the backburner — including land and labour law reforms, and the plethora of obsolete regulations that nurture corruption which is still rampant. Nirmalaji, although many years have been less than optimally utilised for this purpose, can the government, at least now, take the risk of radically furthering the reform agenda, not through statements of intent, but verifiable change on the ground?

True, the global environment is volatile, and many coordinates which were earlier predictable, can no longer be taken for granted. But in dealing with this situation, India can only compete if it is an attractive destination for FDI, and for production lines that are seeking a more competitive, safer and easier business environment. Proceeding full speed with more economic reforms and Ease of doing Business is the need of the hour. Also, we need to do more to invest in R&D and encourage innovation (where we are still ranked 33rd out of 133 countries), because in a hostile world, Indians must invent the wheel itself instead of being a cog in that of somebody else’s.

Secondly, will the government take the political risk of reducing its overreliance on doles, subsidies and income supports without corresponding production and employment pathways? Yes, in a society as unequal as India’s, some degree of social protection is both humane and economically rational. But the real challenge is to convert these supports into springboards — not permanent sustenance, but platforms from which people climb into secure employment or enterprise. Nirmalaji, is the government ready to take the risk for such structural reforms?

Also, how do you propose to resolve unemployment when automation and AI threaten to displace labour even as they create new opportunities? Routine tasks in manufacturing, logistics, and even services are being performed by machines. Here, the real issue is the mismatch between skills and opportunities. A farmer with decades of experience in paddy transplantation does not suddenly become employable in an AI ecosystem without structured re-skilling. India’s young workforce offers a demographic dividend only if education and vocational training are radically reimagined. Moreover, India’s manufacturing share in GDP has long hovered at around 15-17 per cent, with structural constraints like logistics bottlenecks, compliance costs and inconsistent policies. Nirmalaji, can the government take the risk, even in the age of AI, to radically incentivise labour-intensive manufacturing, and skill development, to reduce unemployment?

The Indian middle class is anxious — not just about income, but about vulnerability to health shocks, education costs, retirement insecurity, job instability, housing affordability, childcare support and student loan reforms. A secure middle class spends, invests, and educates its children — all of which fuel aggregate demand and human capital formation. Nirmalaji, can the government take the risk of doing more for the middle-class, instead of the usual tokenism of a few minor tax concessions?

Agriculture employs nearly half of India’s workforce yet contributes less than a fifth of GDP. The structural imbalance is unsustainable, and a key reason for our still pervasive poverty. The plateau in agricultural productivity calls for a fresh wave of innovation — climate-resilient seeds, precision irrigation, post-harvest infrastructure and market linkages that eliminate middlemen. Nirmalaji, can the Budget take the risk of initiating a concrete plan for a second Green Revolution, instead of tinkering with a few schemes hear and there?

The number of billionaires in India is growing, but we also have too many of the unacceptably poor. We may be the world’s third largest economy, but at US $2,800-2,848, our per capita income global rankings in 2025 are abysmal: 136th to 146th on a nominal basis, and 119th to 125th on a Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) basis. In the 2025 Global Hunger Index — although the government discounts such ratings — India ranks at 102nd out of 123 countries, placing us in the “serious” hunger category. Any economy must endeavour to lift all boats, not only those visible at high tide, but also those mired — for too long — in the sand. Nirmalaji, can you, in your Budget vision this time, take the risk of not only balancing figures on a page, but like the landmark liberalisation of the economy in 1991, kickstart major policy changes?