Examine the shifting landscape of NGO funding in India — from foreign contributions to domestic philanthropy and CSR — and its implications for civil society autonomy.

India's NGO funding base is being remade at both ends: foreign contributions face progressively tighter statutory control, while mandated CSR and domestic philanthropy expand. The FCRA portal shows only 14,449 active certificates against 22,498 cancelled and 15,212 expired (15 July 2026) [1] — a shrinking foreign channel.

Tightening of the foreign funding channel

• The FCRA, 2010, administered by the MHA, replaced the 1976 Act and capped registration validity at five years, renewable [2].
• The FCRA Amendment Bill, 2026 (Lok Sabha, 25 March 2026) creates a Designated Authority in which assets built from foreign funds vest on cancellation, surrender or non-renewal; such assets may be sold, with proceeds to the Consolidated Fund of India [1].
• Notably, maximum imprisonment falls from five years to one year even as property consequences sharpen — a shift from penalising persons to appropriating assets [1].
• The Amendment Rules, 2026 define "reasonable activity" as using at least ₹10 lakh of foreign contribution over two financial years, and confine work to 105 listed purposes [3].

Rise of domestic philanthropy and CSR

• Section 135, Companies Act, 2013 obliges eligible companies to spend 2% of average net profits on Schedule VII activities, creating a predictable domestic pool [4].
• Yet scale matters: 13,520 organisations received ₹55,741 crore in foreign contribution during 2019–22 [1], a flow domestic sources only partly replace.

Implications for autonomy

• Art. 19(1)(c) protects association; a fixed purpose-list and asset-vesting on mere lapse of renewal chill lawful work [1][3].
• CSR funds are donor-directed and service-delivery oriented, nudging NGOs from rights advocacy towards implementation roles.
• The ₹10 lakh threshold disadvantages small, remote-area NGOs whose modest budgets reflect geography, not impropriety [3].

Regulation of foreign money is legitimate; its design must be proportionate. The Joint Parliamentary Committee examining the Bill [1] could usefully mandate a hearing before renewal refusal, an appellate remedy, and transfer of assets to another registered NGO in the same field — preserving both accountability and the associational freedom the Constitution guarantees.