Mumbai: As Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman presented her eighth consecutive Union Budget proposals on Saturday morning, did she mean what she said? Or did she say what she meant? Answer: mainly no, and a bit of yes. She didn’t say so, but the people of Bihar have every reason to rejoice. She got the longest applause when she announced changes in the personal income tax regime that would benefit a big section of the middle class, however you choose to categorize this section of the population.

The FM announced a slew of measures to benefit micro, small, and medium enterprises, with easier access to credit being the most important. As for others she named, she merely paid lip service to them: the poor, farmers, and women. In real terms, the Indian government’s budgetary allocations for education, healthcare, Dalits, tribals, subsidies on food and cooking gas, and rural employment have shrunk in nominal and real terms (that is, after adjusting for inflation) or, at best, remained stagnant. This is what the fine print of the budget documents indicates.

The FM, and everyone else, wants India to be a viksit (developed) nation. But like the US$5 trillion economy that was supposed to happen this year, the claims made by the FM and her boss, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, would remain a mirage for quite some time to come, perhaps as long as two decades from now when India celebrates a century of her political independence. This is not what one is saying but what the government’s chief economic adviser, V. Anantha Nageswaran, said in his Economic Survey 2024-25 document presented on Friday.

The country’s gross domestic product is expected to grow at a rate between 6.3% and 6.8% in the financial year that would end on 31 March 2026. But India’s GDP has to grow by an average of 8% per year till 2047 for us to say we are a “developed” nation. One of his predecessors, Arvind Subramanian (who was CEA between October 2014 and June 2018), has said that the three biggest changes required as far as the country’s economic policies are concerned are giving up favors to barely a handful of oligarchs who are called “national champions” (read Adani and Ambani), stopping the weaponization of the State politically and economically, and reducing protectionism to domestic industry.

Elections to the assembly of Bihar are scheduled for October and November. Appropriately attired in a Madhubani print sari, the FM said a Makhana Board would be set up (for the health food rich in antioxidants that Bihar produces in large quantities), a greenfield airport will be established, existing airports would be revamped, the IIT in Patna would be revamped, a new institute for food processing and entrepreneurship would come up, as well as irrigation and flood control projects for the Mithilanchal region (that was devastated by the unruly Kosi River in 2008).

Will Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar continue to demand a “special status” for his state? Probably not. Besides the Janata Dal (United), the other political party that is keeping the third Modi government from sinking, the Telugu Desam Party led by Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu, was assured that the Polavaram irrigation project would be financed and expeditiously completed. The other state mentioned in the FM’s speech is BJP-ruled Assam, which will get a new urea plant. PM Modi sought the blessings of Ma Lakshmi for the poor and the middle class. Only the latter has been benefited by the goddess of wealth.

The personal income tax benefits in the budget may be seen in the following perspective: out of 140 crore Indians, 8 crore citizens have a PAN (Permanent Account Number) card, but only half of them actually pay income tax. The Union government will forego Rs 1 lakh crore by way of revenue on this count alone. Could this largesse have been more evenly distributed? Yes indeed, as has been suggested. This could be done by reducing the rates of goods and services tax (GST) that impact the rich as well as the poor. The FM has belatedly paid attention to the one crore registered MSMEs in the country that employ 7.5 crore people, generate 36% of our manufacturing output, and 45% of exports.

Ravaged by the November 2016 demonetization, hamstrung by a hastily-implemented, cumbersome, and constantly changing GST system, and crippled by a harsh nationwide lockdown in March 2020, small and medium enterprises are now going to be given a slew of benefits, including enhancement of availability of credit. As for farmers, there is no separate budgetary allocation for the Dhan-Dhaanya Krishi Yojana to cover 100 agriculturally backward districts that was announced by the FM.

If one compares the revised estimates (RE) for the current financial year with the budget estimates (BE) for 2025-26, certain stark facts are revealed. The allocations by the central government are down by various amounts under the following heads: education, health, subsidies on food and cooking gas, besides the allocations for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and the North-East region. The expenditure on the program under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act is more or less stagnant.

The central government has cut down transfers of funds to state governments by Rs 1.12 lakh crore if one compares the figures for RE 2024-25 and BE 2025-26. The fall under the abovementioned heads of expenditure would be even steeper if inflation is factored into the calculations. The Modi government has, in fact, spent roughly Rs one lakh crore less than what it had promised in terms of total expenditure.

So, has the fact that four individuals have held the post of Revenue Secretary in North Block, where the Ministry of Finance is headquartered, helped FM Sitharaman frame her budget proposals? To return to the questions raised at the outset: Did she say what she means and does she mean what she says? This correspondent says a big “no.” The writer is a senior journalist who has covered the Union budget for more than three decades.