States Gain Rs 17,000 Crore Under New VB-G RAM G Act, Says SBI Report

An SBI report indicates states will collectively gain approximately Rs 17,000 crore under the proposed VB-G RAM G Act compared to the average allocation of the past seven years. The analysis, based on normative criteria, finds that fears over the revised 60:40 funding ratio burdening states are largely unfounded. Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra emerge as the top gainers, with most states benefiting from the new objective framework. The Act also raises guaranteed wage employment from 100 to 125 days per rural household.

Key Points: States Net Gainers of Rs 17,000 Cr Under VB-G RAM G Act: SBI

  • States gain Rs 17,000 cr collectively
  • Funding shift to 60:40 Centre-State
  • Top gainers: UP, Maharashtra, Bihar
  • Enhances equity & efficiency
3 min read

VB G RAM G Act likely to make states net gainers of Rs 17000 cr despite 60:40 funding shift: SBI Report

SBI report finds states gain Rs 17,000 crore under VB-G RAM G Act despite 60:40 funding shift. UP, Maharashtra top beneficiaries.

"We estimate the States gain around approx. Rs 17,000 crores when compared to average allocation of last 7 years. – SBI Report"

New Delhi, December 29

States are expected to remain net gainers in fund sharing under the proposed VB-G RAM G Act, and the framework can be further scaled up by states through their own contribution, according to a report by State Bank of India.

The report said that using a simulated scenario of a normative assessment based only on the Centre's share, states could collectively gain around Rs 17,000 crore when compared to the average allocation of the last seven years. This analysis is based on seven attributes or parameters, structured around the twin fulcrum of equity and efficiency.

It stated "We estimate the States gain around approx. Rs 17,000 crores when compared to average allocation of last 7 years, hinting at a scenario where most of the states will be net gainers."

SBI noted that since the introduction of the Bill, there has been significant debate, particularly around concerns that the revised funding pattern could shift a higher financial burden to states.

One of the major criticisms relates to the change in the funding ratio to 60:40 between the Centre and states (excluding North-Eastern states, Union Territories, and Himalayan states).

However, the report argued that fears of the revised ratio worsening state finances or forcing higher borrowing are unfounded and largely stem from a lack of understanding of state finances.

According to SBI, the new framework, when assessed through objective and normative criteria, actually improves overall fund distribution to states.

Under the analysis, SBI calculated the share of each state as a percentage of the total allocation for all states across each parameter. It then compared the results of this normative assessment with the average allocation under MGNREGA (Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act) during FY19-FY25, excluding FY21.

The findings show that overall, states gain around Rs 17,000 crore compared to the average allocation of the past seven years.

It stated that only two states showed minimal losses. In the case of Tamil Nadu, SBI highlighted that if the FY24 allocation outlier, which saw a 29 per cent rise compared to the average of FY22 and FY23, is removed, the loss becomes negligible.

The report identified Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra as the top gainers, followed by Bihar, Chhattisgarh, and Gujarat.

Overall, SBI said that adopting objective criteria can enhance devolution for both developed and laggard states, while maintaining a balance between equity and efficiency.

The report added that states can further improve outcomes by effectively leveraging their 40 per cent contribution under the revised funding structure.

During the recently concluded winter session, the Parliament passed the VB-G RAM G bill, with the Rajya Sabha approving the legislation hours after the Lok Sabha passed it.

President Droupadi Murmu, on 21st December, gave assent to the VB-G RAM G Bill, 2025

The Bill guarantees 125 days of wage employment per rural household, up from the existing 100 days, for adult members willing to undertake unskilled manual work.

- ANI

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priyanka N
While the report is optimistic, the 60:40 funding shift still worries me. Many states are already struggling with finances. Asking them to contribute 40% might lead to cuts in other essential schemes like health or education. The devil is in the details.
A
Arjun K
Good to see UP and Maharashtra as top gainers, but what about the North-Eastern states? The article says they are excluded from the 60:40 ratio, which is fair, but I hope they also receive adequate funds. Balanced development across all regions is key for the country.
S
Sarah B
The focus on "objective and normative criteria" for fund distribution sounds promising. If it reduces political bias in allocation and truly rewards efficiency, it could be a game-changer. Hope the states use their 40% contribution wisely to create durable assets. 👍
V
Vikram M
As someone from Tamil Nadu, the mention of "minimal losses" is concerning, even if they call it negligible. Why should any state lose out? The Centre must ensure no state is worse off in this new arrangement. Cooperative federalism should mean all partners benefit.
K
Karthik V
Extending MGNREGA to 125 days is a big relief for rural families. The SBI report gives confidence, but the real test will be on the ground. Timely wage payments and quality of work created are what matter most to the common person. Jai Hind!

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50