The Reserve Bank of India's October monetary policy decision presents an interesting combination. The repo rate has been raised by 25 basis points to 5.50%. The policy stance has shifted to calibrated tightening. FY27 inflation forecast has been pushed to 5.2%. At the same time, the real GDP growth forecast has been raised from 6.7% to 7.1%.
The RBI is tightening monetary policy despite healthy economic growth to ease broadening inflationary pressures. Inflation in India is becoming more broad-based. Commodity prices remain elevated, and the external environment is becoming less favourable for the Indian economy. Consumer Price Index has been rising by more than 5% every month for a few months. It rose from 4.% in July to 4.8% in August to 5.54% in September 2026. The average core inflation over a few months increased to 4.2%. 37% of commodities in the CPI basket are continuously recording inflation above 4%. So at present, RBI’s concerns are not just confined to food or fuel prices, as price pressures are spreading across a wider range of goods and services.
The RBI is tightening monetary policy despite healthy economic growth to ease broadening inflationary pressures. Inflation in India is becoming more broad-based. Commodity prices remain elevated, and the external environment is becoming less favourable for the Indian economy. Consumer Price Index has been rising by more than 5% every month for a few months. It rose from 4.% in July to 4.8% in August to 5.54% in September 2026. The average core inflation over a few months increased to 4.2%. 37% of commodities in the CPI basket are continuously recording inflation above 4%. So at present, RBI’s concerns are not just confined to food or fuel prices, as price pressures are spreading across a wider range of goods and services.
The external environment adds another layer to the challenge. The yield on India's benchmark 10-year government bond touched 7.498% in late October 2026. This is the highest level in the last four years. Brent crude is trading near $115/barrel. This is adding to concerns about imported inflation and the rupee. These developments in internal as well as external economies are making the financing environment more difficult even before the full effects of tighter monetary conditions are yet to be experienced through the economy.
Higher oil prices and a weak rupee increase the domestic cost of imported energy, machinery and intermediate goods. On the other hand, higher bond yields will raise borrowing costs for the government and private borrowers, making money costlier. The interest rates paid on government bonds, the risk evaluations of corporations, and the risk evaluations of lenders all affect the viability of new investment. As capital becomes more costly, growth depends more on how efficiently capital is allocated. However, the key policy issue is not just about accessing additional capital. It is the extent to which the financial system allocates resources to the most efficient uses.
At this point in time, the RBI can neither ignore these pressures nor can it offset every external shock through monetary policy. This situation raises an important question: can India sustain its investment ambitions in this environment when the cost of capital is rising?
India is entering a phase in its economy where quality of allocation will become more important than the quantity of capital mobilised. The next phase of India's financial reform has to focus on quality of allocation rather than quantity of capital mobilisation.
A Larger Financial System, but Uneven Access
India in recent decades has significantly expanded access to finance. Bank credit has grown. The equity markets have deepened. The corporate bond market has grown three times in the last ten years at an annual growth rate of more than 14%. According to the Economic Survey 2025–26, outstanding corporate bonds increased from ₹17.5 trillion in FY15 to ₹53.6 trillion in FY25. Fresh corporate bond issuances have reached a record ₹9.9 trillion in FY25. By December 2025, outstanding corporate bonds had increased further to approximately ₹58 trillion.
These are substantial changes in the structure of Indian finance, but the corporate bond market in India is still relatively very small compared with the size of the economy in comparison to other emerging economies. Outstanding corporate bonds amount to approximately 15–16% of GDP, while these figures are around 79% for South Korea, 54% for Malaysia and 38% for China.
Concentration of access is also high. It is estimated that the top-rated AAA and AA-rated borrowers represent 85-90% of corporate bond issuance. Market finance is generally available to large established companies, but appears difficult for smaller ones to access, relying on banks, promoters' funds and retained earnings. Even for municipal corporations, it is not easy to raise capital from the bond market.
It is important since economic returns on the investment are not dependent on the size of the firm or credit rating. Young companies may have sizeable growth but little collateral, and short credit history and cash flows. If they are not given the option to expand their business due to heavy reliance on collateral and existing credit histories, they will be unable to do so.
The policy goal, therefore, should be to further broaden access to suitable types of financing while not lowering underwriting standards.
Credit Growth Is Not the Same as Productive Investment
Despite good growth in corporate bond issuance, bank financing of industry is still rising. Year-on-year data on sectoral credit shows a rise of around 23% and 30.3% respectively in the credit of micro and medium industries in June 2026 in comparison with the previous year.While these are all positive, the overall picture of aggregate credit growth is incomplete. It does not provide information on the amount of financing used for new machinery, technology purchases, capacity increases or productivity enhancements, instead of working capital and refinancing. This is a distinction that is important for the economy to efficiently allocate finances. The two companies can take out the same loan and have vastly different economic returns. If credit is not reliably allocated to the best borrowers based on less favourable collateral, then credit may go to the other borrowers with better collateral even if the other borrowers have better investment opportunities.
India requires improved credit information, cash flow-based lending, and financial disclosures, along with key intangible assets. Digital transaction records can be helpful, but prudent underwriting practices are mandatory.
India should start evaluating its financial deepening in terms of its impact on investment, productivity, jobs and firm expansion, rather than just the expansion of outstanding credit.
Equity Finance and the Missing Middle
Companies that are investing in new products, new technology, or new markets tend to have a lot of uncertainty. It is very difficult for such companies to bear the burden of fixed repayments during the early growth stages. For such businesses, a debt financing approach is not appropriate. This is a risk that equity is more able to withstand.While India's start-up ecosystem has grown, access to growth capital is still uneven, especially for smaller businesses in non-metropolitan regions and for startups that have come of age, but have not yet become big businesses. The government's planned ₹10,000-crore SME Growth Fund can thus be a useful measure. However, its success is not dependent on allocations but on its design and implementation.
Public capital can play an important role in mobilising private investment, improving professional investment management and assisting companies with credible growth prospects. Funding decisions should be commercially disciplined and must follow transparent and independent evaluation. Transparent reporting of private funds mobilised, job creation, productivity enhancement, and subsequent business performance improves accountability.
The objective should not be to provide subsidies to any small business. It should rather fill the gaps in financing for promising firms that can not obtain appropriate risk capital on reasonable terms.
Four Priorities
The first priority is to deepen the corporate bond market by simplifying proportionate disclosure, enhancing secondary market liquidity and strengthening credit information. Strategic pooled financing and credit enhancement mechanisms can improve access to market finance for viable mid-sized firms. While doing so, it is important to ensure that the interests of investors are protected and that excessive private credit risk is not transferred onto taxpayers.The second priority is to strengthen institutional investment in the long run. Pension and insurance funds can supply very long-term patient capital. However, this should be used with appropriate risk management and prudent investment rules. Increasing the number of institutional investors would diversify funding sources, as well as it will reduce the dependence on the short-term funding.
The third priority is to enhance credit allocation in banks. Records of GST payments, digital payments, audited accounts and supply-chain information can aid lenders in determining the viability of firms that cannot offer substantial collateral. Credit guarantees should be designed to address identified market failures with clearly defined fiscal costs and must avoid any indiscriminate lending.
The fourth priority is to increase the productivity of public investments. Investment in public infrastructure is helpful in complementing private investment by lowering logistics costs, enhancing connectivity and filling real bottlenecks. However, the quantum of expenditure is not evidence of the success of the infrastructure. The selection, completion rates, maintenance costs, and measurable economic returns on the investments are real indicators of success. Public capital must create productive capacities and improve market functioning rather than replacing private capital.
The GIFT International Financial Services Centre can play an important role in drawing financial activity from abroad and creating specialised financing routes. The volume of transactions taking place at the Centre should not be the measure of contribution. Rather, it should be measured through the centre’s ability to improve domestic investment, market capabilities and financial skills and expertise.
The Larger Economic Argument
Monetary policy and financial-sector reform go hand in hand. A higher interest rate may slow down demand and help contain inflation. However, a high interest rate regime cannot necessarily route savings to the most productive firms. Similarly, financial-sector reform cannot do away with the necessity for macroeconomic stability.The challenge is to create a system in which viable businesses can have access to a kind of financing which is appropriate to their risks and prospects at a reasonable cost. That means more robust markets, improved information, strong institutions, and more effective public interventions.
India has already demonstrated its capacity to mobilise savings and expand credit. The next stage of reform should focus on what those resources produce.
The next growth advantage will come not simply from attracting more capital, but from allocating it more productively.
No comments:
Post a Comment