Fiscal Federalism: Finance Commission, Devolution and Centre-State Finances

1. Fiscal federalism: rationale and India's two imbalances

Read the detailed note →

Fiscal federalism means dividing three things between levels of government: the power to tax, the duty to spend, and the transfers that flow between them. India has three levels: the Union, the states and local bodies.

Who should do what: the assignment logic

• Decentralisation theorem (Wallace Oates): a public service should be provided by the lowest level of government that covers its benefit area. Local governments know local preferences better. Subsidiarity is the same idea: do not centralise what a smaller unit can do well.
• What sits with the Centre:
• Stabilisation (managing booms and slumps). A single state cannot run counter-cyclical policy, because its spending leaks out to other states.
• Redistribution (Class 12, Government Budget and the Economy calls it the "redistribution function"). If one state taxes the rich heavily, the rich can move to another state.

• Mobile and buoyant tax bases. Income tax, corporation tax and customs grow fast with GDP ("buoyant") and are easy to shift across state lines ("mobile"). Taxing them centrally avoids tax competition.

• What sits with states: services people use daily, such as health, school education, police, agriculture, water and local services.

India's two imbalances

• Vertical fiscal imbalance: the Centre has greater revenue powers, while states carry larger spending duties.
• States account for about 60% of general government expenditure but raise a much smaller share of total revenue (verify current RBI State Finances / FC figures).

• This gap is closed by tax devolution and grants (§§3-6).

• Horizontal fiscal imbalance: states differ in how much they can raise and how much they need to spend.

• Fiscal capacity means a government's ability to raise revenue from its own tax base. It is usually proxied by per capita GSDP. It differs several-fold between high-income states (Goa, Sikkim, Telangana, Karnataka, Haryana) and low-income ones (Bihar, UP, Jharkhand).
• Cost disabilities: hills, forests and sparse population make the same service costlier to deliver, for example in the North-East and Himalayan states.

Fiscal equalisation and its limits

• Fiscal equalisation means designing transfers so that every state can provide comparable services at comparable tax rates, despite unequal fiscal capacity. Canada (equalisation payments) and Australia (the Commonwealth Grants Commission) are the classic models.
• Incentive problems:
• Penalising efficiency: a state that grows faster or taxes better gets a smaller share.
• Moral hazard of gap-filling: if the Centre covers every deficit, states have little reason to control spending.

• Southern states' grievance: Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and others contribute more to central taxes than they get back.

• Accounting link (Class 12, Government Budget and the Economy): grants to state governments are Union revenue expenditure, "even though some of the grants may be meant for creation of assets". Loans to states are Union capital expenditure.

• The pull between equity (equalisation) and efficiency (rewarding performance) runs through §§3-6.

2. Constitutional architecture of taxing and sharing: the divisible pool

Read the detailed note →

Who can levy which tax (Seventh Schedule)

Union List (entries 82-92C)	State List (entries 45-63)
Tax on income other than agricultural income	Land revenue
Corporation tax	Tax on agricultural income
Customs duties	Excise on alcohol for human consumption, opium, narcotics
Excise duties (now mostly on tobacco and petroleum)	Stamp duty on documents not in the Union List
Taxes on capital value of assets, etc.	Taxes on electricity consumption, vehicles, entertainment (by local bodies)
	Tax on professions, trades and employment (Art. 276: cap ₹2,500 a year)

• Residuary power (any tax not listed anywhere) belongs to the Union (Art. 248, List I entry 97).
• Art. 246A (101st Amendment, 2016) gives Parliament and state legislatures simultaneous power to make GST laws. Only Parliament can tax inter-state supplies (IGST).

Distribution articles

Article	What it does
268	Duties levied by the Union but collected and kept by states (stamp duties on bills of exchange, cheques, etc.)
269	Taxes levied and collected by the Union but assigned to states (taxes on inter-state sale and on consignment of goods)
269A	GST on inter-state supplies (IGST) levied by the Union and apportioned between the Union and states as Parliament provides on the GST Council's advice
270	All other Union taxes shared with states. Reshaped by the 80th Amendment (2000) on the 10th FC's "alternative scheme" (share of all central taxes instead of only income tax and excise) and by the 101st Amendment to include CGST and IGST
271	Surcharges on Art. 269/270 taxes go exclusively to the Union
272	Omitted (80th Amendment)
273	Grants in lieu of export duty on jute to Assam, Bihar, Odisha and West Bengal
285-289	Inter-governmental tax immunities (Union property exempt from state taxes and vice versa, with exceptions)

The divisible pool

• Divisible pool = the part of the Centre's gross tax revenue that is shared with states.
• Divisible pool = Gross tax revenue − cesses − surcharges − cost of collection (and taxes of Union Territories).

• The Finance Commission recommends what share of this pool goes to states (the "41%").

• Why the headline share misleads:

• Cesses (earmarked levies) and surcharges are not shared.
• Their share of gross tax revenue rose from about 10% (early 2010s) to about 18-20% at the 2020-22 peak (verify current, PRS).

• So states' effective share of gross tax revenue is only about 30-32% in recent years, well below 41% (verify current).

• The GST compensation cess (2017 onward) also sat outside the pool (§7).

• States' demand: cap cesses and surcharges (for example at a fixed share of gross tax revenue) or pull them into the divisible pool.
• Cess definitions and rates are covered in the taxation topic.

3. The Finance Commission and vertical devolution

Read the detailed note →

Constitutional basis

• Art. 280: the President constitutes a Finance Commission every five years or earlier. It has a chairman and four other members.
• Finance Commission (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1951:
• The chair must have experience in public affairs.

• The members come from four backgrounds: a High Court judge (or someone qualified to be one), special knowledge of government finance and accounts, wide experience in financial matters and administration, and special knowledge of economics.

• Mandate (Art. 280(3)):

• (a) Distribute the net proceeds of shareable taxes between the Union and states (vertical) and among states (horizontal, §4).
• (b) Lay down the principles for grants-in-aid under Art. 275 (§5).
• (bb)/(c) Suggest measures to augment state Consolidated Funds to support panchayats and municipalities. These clauses were added by the 73rd and 74th Amendments (1992) (§9).

• (d) Any other matter the President refers. Examples: the 15th FC on a defence and internal-security fund, and the 16th FC on financing disaster management.

• Art. 281: the report is laid before Parliament with an explanatory memorandum on the action taken.

• Status: advisory, not binding. By convention, its devolution recommendations are always accepted.
• The FC is called the "balancing wheel of fiscal federalism" because it corrects the vertical and horizontal imbalances every five years.

Vertical devolution: timeline

Vertical devolution is the share of the divisible pool given to all states together.

FC	Chair	Period	States' share
1st	K.C. Neogy	1952-57	Share of income tax and some excise duties only
10th	K.C. Pant	1995-2000	29% of all central taxes ("alternative scheme"; became law through the 80th Amendment, 2000)
11th	A.M. Khusro	2000-05	29.5%
12th	C. Rangarajan	2005-10	30.5%
13th	Vijay Kelkar	2010-15	32%
14th	Y.V. Reddy	2015-20	42%, a structural shift towards untied transfers
15th	N.K. Singh	2020-21 and 2021-26	41% (1% adjusted for the new UTs of J&K and Ladakh)
16th	Arvind Panagariya	2026-31	41%

• 16th FC milestones: constituted 31 December 2023; report submitted to the President 17 November 2025; tabled in Parliament 1 February 2026 with the Budget 2026-27.
• Government's response: it accepted the 41% vertical share in the action-taken memorandum (PIB, February 2026). It provided ₹1.4 lakh crore of FC grants for 2026-27 (local body and disaster management grants).
• The debate:
• Many states asked for 50%.
• The Centre cites its own needs: defence, interest payments, central schemes and fiscal space.
• Rising cesses and surcharges mean a stable 41% of the pool can still be a falling share of gross tax revenue (§2).

4. Horizontal devolution: the formula and the equity vs efficiency debate

Read the detailed note →

Horizontal devolution is how the states' combined share is split among individual states, using weighted criteria such as population, area, income distance and forest cover.

Criteria and weights (%)

Criterion	14th FC (2015-20)	15th FC (2021-26)	16th FC (2026-31)
Income distance	50	45	42.5
Population 1971	17.5	—	—
Population 2011	10	15	17.5
Area	15	15 (floor for small states)	10
Forest cover / forest and ecology	7.5	10	10
Demographic performance	—	12.5	10
Tax and fiscal effort	—	2.5	dropped
Contribution to GDP	—	—	10 (new)
Total	100	100	100

What each criterion means

• Income distance criterion: a state whose per capita income is further below a benchmark gets a larger share. It is the equalising core of the formula.
• 15th FC benchmark: the highest per capita GSDP state.

• 16th FC benchmark: the average per capita GSDP of the top three large states, using 2018-19 to 2023-24 (excluding 2020-21).

• Demographic performance criterion: rewards states that controlled population growth. It offsets the switch to recent (2011) population data.

• 15th FC: based on total fertility rate (TFR).

• 16th FC: redefined as lower population growth between 1971 and 2011.

• Forest criterion (16th FC): combines the share of forest area with the increase in forest area (2015-23), and now counts open forest too.

• Tax effort criterion: rewards states that collect more of their own tax relative to their tax base or income. The 15th FC gave it 2.5%. The 16th FC dropped it.
• Contribution to GDP (16th FC, new): measured as the square root of a state's share of GSDP. The square root softens the advantage of the largest economies.

Equity vs efficiency

• Equity criteria: income distance, area, forest (need and cost disability).
• Efficiency criteria: demographic performance, tax effort (15th), contribution to GDP (16th).
• Why the 1971 → 2011 switch mattered: southern states controlled population earlier, so using 2011 population cuts their share. Demographic performance is the compensation.

Resulting shifts (15th → 16th FC, % of the states' pool)

State	15th FC	16th FC
Uttar Pradesh	17.94	17.62
Bihar	10.06	9.95
Madhya Pradesh	7.85	7.35
Maharashtra	6.32	6.44
Karnataka	3.65	4.13
Gujarat	3.48	3.76
Kerala	1.93	2.38

• Political context:
• The "north-south" transfer debate.
• Karnataka and Kerala's protests in Delhi (February 2024) over falling devolution shares.
• The pending Census and delimitation, which will reopen the question of which population year to use.

5. Grants-in-aid: statutory, discretionary, tied and untied

Read the detailed note →

Grants-in-aid are Centre-to-state transfers beyond tax devolution. They are either statutory (on FC advice) or discretionary (for specific purposes).

Two constitutional routes

• Art. 275(1): statutory grants.
• Charged on the Consolidated Fund of India, so they are not voted by Parliament.
• Given to states "in need of assistance", on FC advice.

• Provisos cover grants for Scheduled Tribe welfare and for raising the administration of Scheduled Areas.

• Art. 282: discretionary grants.

• The Union (or a state) can make grants for any public purpose, even outside its legislative field.

• It is the constitutional basis of centrally sponsored schemes (§6).

• Art. 273: jute export duty grants (§2).

Tied and untied grants

• Tied grants must be spent on a named purpose or after meeting conditions. Examples: local-body grants for water and sanitation, health grants, disaster funds.
• Untied grants can be spent as the recipient chooses.
• Classification (Class 12, Government Budget and the Economy): all grants to states are Union revenue expenditure, even when they build assets. This is why the Union Budget separates "grants for creation of capital assets". Effective revenue deficit = revenue deficit − such grants.

Revenue deficit grants

• Revenue deficit grants go to states whose revenue expenditure exceeds revenue receipts even after tax devolution. They fill the post-devolution gap.
• 15th FC: about ₹2.94 lakh crore to 17 states over 2021-26, tapering each year.
• 16th FC (2026-31):
• Discontinued revenue deficit, sector-specific and state-specific grants.
• Recommended ₹9.47 lakh crore in total:
  • Local bodies: ₹7.91 lakh crore (§9).
  • Disaster management: ₹1.56 lakh crore. This is the Centre's share of the SDRF/SDMF (State Disaster Response Fund and State Disaster Mitigation Fund). The Centre pays 90:10 in north-eastern and Himalayan states and 75:25 elsewhere.
• The Government provided ₹1.4 lakh crore of FC grants in Budget 2026-27.

The debate

• Against gap-filling: it creates moral hazard, because states that overspend get rewarded.
• Against abrupt withdrawal: it strains fiscally weak states that relied on these grants, such as Punjab, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, West Bengal and the NE states (verify current).

6. Beyond the Finance Commission: CSS, discretionary transfers and special category status

Read the detailed note →

Statutory vs discretionary transfers

Statutory transfers	Discretionary transfers
Flow on Finance Commission advice	Flow through ministries and schemes at the Centre's choice (Art. 282)
Tax devolution + Art. 275 grants	Centrally sponsored schemes (CSS), central sector schemes, special assistance, NDRF releases
Formula-based; untied or lightly tied	Conditional; Centre sets the design

• Special Assistance to States for Capital Investment (SASCI): 50-year interest-free loans for state capital expenditure, since 2020-21. Part of it is tied to reforms.
• Planning-era channel: Normal Central Assistance for state plans was shared by the Gadgil formula (1969) and later the Gadgil-Mukherjee formula (1991). It ended when the Planning Commission was abolished (2015) and the plan/non-plan distinction was merged (2017-18). (Class 12, Government Budget and the Economy still describes plan and non-plan expenditure; this classification is now outdated.)

Centrally sponsored schemes

• Centrally sponsored schemes (CSS) are implemented by states with shared Centre-state funding. Central sector schemes are fully funded and run by the Centre.
• NITI Aayog Sub-Group of Chief Ministers (2015) grouped CSS into three kinds:
• Core of the core: social-protection umbrella schemes and MGNREGA, on existing funding patterns.
• Core schemes: 60:40 (Centre:state).

• Optional schemes: states choose whether to join.

• Special patterns: 90:10 for NE and Himalayan states. 100% central for UTs without a legislature.

• Critiques:
• Conditions and one-size-fits-all design reduce state autonomy.
• States' matching shares crowd out their own priorities.
• New fund-flow controls: the Single Nodal Agency system (2021) and "just-in-time" release through SNA-SPARSH (verify current).

Special category status

• Special category status was created by the National Development Council in 1969 (with the Gadgil formula). Hill, border and backward states got more favourable central assistance.
• Criteria:
• Hilly or difficult terrain.
• Low population density or a large tribal share.
• Strategic location on international borders.
• Economic and infrastructure backwardness.

• Non-viable state finances.

• 11 states held it: the 8 NE states (including Sikkim), Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and the erstwhile state of J&K. Benefits included 90:10 CSS funding and tax concessions.

• The 14th FC made no special/general category distinction in devolution. It absorbed their needs through the higher 42% share and revenue deficit grants.
• Continuing demands: Andhra Pradesh (a promise made at the 2014 bifurcation), Bihar and Odisha.
• Raghuram Rajan Committee (2013): proposed a composite development index to rank states by underdevelopment, as an alternative to the special category label.

7. The GST Council and cooperative fiscal federalism

Read the detailed note →

Structure (Art. 279A, 101st Amendment 2016)

• Members: the Union Finance Minister (chair), the Union Minister of State for Finance, and the finance minister (or a nominated minister) of each state.
• Quorum: one-half of the total members.
• Voting:
• A decision needs at least three-fourths of the weighted votes of members present and voting.
• The Centre has one-third of the votes. All states together have two-thirds.

• So neither side can pass a proposal alone. The Centre needs states' support, and states need the Centre's.

• What it recommends: taxes to be subsumed, exemptions, rates, thresholds, model laws, special provisions for NE and hill states, and the date for bringing petroleum into GST.

• Art. 279A(11) provides for a dispute-settlement mechanism. It has never been set up.

Legal status: Union of India v. Mohit Minerals (SC, May 2022)

• The Council's recommendations are persuasive, not binding.
• Why: Art. 246A gives Parliament and state legislatures simultaneous power, so neither is bound to follow the Council.
• The Court described the Council as a forum of cooperative (and contestational) federalism.

Pooled sovereignty

• States gave up VAT/sales tax, entry tax, entertainment tax, luxury tax and the freedom to set their own rates.
• In return they got a share of a single national base. Class 12, Government Budget and the Economy (Box 5.3) calls this "One Nation, One Tax, One Market". The box notes that GST replaced central and state taxes including VAT, entry tax, luxury tax, octroi and entertainment tax, and that it "created a common market".
• State GST (SGST) is now states' largest own tax.

Compensation: the federal bargain

• GST (Compensation to States) Act 2017: states were guaranteed 14% annual growth in GST revenue (base year 2015-16) for five years (July 2017 to June 2022). It was paid from the compensation cess.
• The 2020 shortfall (COVID): cess collections could not cover compensation. After a dispute, the Centre borrowed and passed the money to states as back-to-back loans totalling ₹2.69 lakh crore (2020-21 and 2021-22). These loans are repaid from future cess collections.
• Compensation ended in June 2022. The cess was extended to March 2026 to repay the loans.
• 56th GST Council (3 September 2025):
• Rationalised rates into 5% and 18%, plus a 40% demerit rate for sin and luxury goods.
• Ended the compensation cess, merging it into the GST rates for most goods (verify current treatment of tobacco products).
• States raised revenue-loss concerns (PRS flags adverse SGST impact) (verify current).

Friction points and the lens

• Friction points: IGST settlement delays, keeping petroleum and alcohol outside GST, states' heavy dependence on GST, and the loss of rate-setting freedom.
• Cooperative vs competitive federalism:
• Cooperative: Centre and states decide together (GST Council, NITI Aayog Governing Council, the "Team India" framing).

• Competitive: states compete through NITI Aayog rankings and indices.

• GST rates and mechanics are covered in the taxation topic.

8. State borrowing, fiscal responsibility laws and off-budget liabilities

Read the detailed note →

Constitutional rules

• Art. 292: the Union borrows on the security of the Consolidated Fund of India.
• Art. 293:
• 293(1): a state may borrow only within India, on the security of its Consolidated Fund.
• 293(3): a state needs the Union's consent to borrow while any loan from the Union is still outstanding. Every state has such loans.

• 293(4): the Union may attach conditions to that consent.

• State borrowing limits are the Centre's annual caps on state borrowing, usually a share of GSDP. The Net Borrowing Ceiling (NBC) is set each year under Art. 293(3).

The borrowing path and its tightening

• 15th FC path for states' fiscal deficit: 4% of GSDP (2021-22) → 3.5% (2022-23) → 3% (2023-26), plus 0.5% extra tied to power-sector reforms (verify current).
• Off-budget borrowing: since 2022-23, borrowing by state companies, corporations and SPVs is counted within the NBC when it is repaid from the state budget.
• SASCI (§6) gives states extra capex room outside the ceiling.
• Kerala's suit: Kerala challenged the borrowing curbs under Art. 131, the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction over Centre-state disputes. In April 2024 the Court referred the Art. 293 questions to a Constitution Bench (verify current).

Fiscal responsibility laws (FRLs)

• Class 12, Government Budget and the Economy (Box 5.2): the FRBM Act 2003 binds only the Centre, but states' fiscal responsibility legislation made rule-based fiscal reform "more broad based".
• (NCERT: "26 states have already enacted"; now: every state had an FRL by 2010-11.) Karnataka was first (2002). The 12th FC (debt relief linked to enacting FRLs) and the 13th FC pushed the rest.

Pressures on state finances

• Off-budget borrowing through SPVs: for example Kerala's KIIFB and Telangana's irrigation corporations.
• Guarantees and contingent liabilities: debts that fall on the state if its entities default.
• DISCOM losses: state power distribution companies.
• Reversion to the Old Pension Scheme (2022-23): Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Punjab and Himachal Pradesh.
• Freebies and unconditional cash transfers.

16th FC fiscal roadmap (2026-31)

• States' fiscal deficit limit: 3% of GSDP.
• End off-budget borrowing and bring it on budget. Expand the definitions of fiscal deficit and debt to include it.
• Rationalise subsidies, with clear exclusion criteria.
• Privatise DISCOMs. Set up a debt-warehousing SPV for DISCOM debt, funded through SASCI.
• Close 308 inactive state PSEs.
• Combined Centre + states debt projected to fall from 77.3% to 73.1% of GDP (2026-27 to 2030-31).
• States' own debt is about 28% of GDP (verify current, RBI State Finances).
• The Union's own FRBM targets and budget aggregates are covered in the government-budget-fiscal-policy topic.

9. Local-body finances: the third tier

Read the detailed note →

Constitutional scheme (73rd and 74th Amendments, 1992)

Subject	Panchayats (Part IX)	Municipalities (Part IXA)
Powers and functions	Art. 243G, 11th Schedule (29 subjects)	Art. 243W, 12th Schedule (18 subjects)
Taxation	Art. 243H: only what the state legislature authorises	Art. 243X: same
State Finance Commission	Art. 243I: every five years	Art. 243Y: uses the SFC under 243I

• Art. 280(3)(bb) and (c): the Union FC recommends measures to augment state Consolidated Funds to supplement panchayat and municipal resources, based on SFC recommendations.

The reality

• Weak own-source revenue: municipal revenues are about 0.6% of GDP, and property tax is only a fraction of that (RBI Report on Municipal Finances, 2024; verify current).
• State Finance Commissions are often set up late, or their reports are ignored.
• Heavy dependence on transfers from the Centre and states.
• Municipal bonds are an emerging alternative. Pune (2017) revived the market, and others followed.

Local body grants from Finance Commissions

Local body grants are FC grants to panchayats and municipalities, partly tied to sanitation and water, to strengthen third-tier finances.

FC	Total local-body grants
14th (2015-20)	₹2.87 lakh crore
15th (2021-26)	₹4.36 lakh crore (rural basic grants: 40% untied, 60% tied to sanitation and drinking water)
16th (2026-31)	₹7.91 lakh crore (rural ₹4.35 lakh crore, urban ₹3.56 lakh crore)

• 16th FC design:
• Basic grants 80%, performance grants 20%.

• Basic grants are 50% untied and 50% tied to sanitation and solid waste management and/or water.

• Entry conditions for any grant:

• Local bodies must be duly constituted as per the Constitution.
• Provisional and audited accounts must be published.

• The state must constitute its SFC on time.

• Performance grants are linked to growth in own-source revenue and to the state's own transfers to local bodies.

• Urban extras:
• A special infrastructure component of ₹56,100 crore for wastewater systems in 22 cities with 10-40 lakh population.
• An urbanisation premium of ₹10,000 crore for states that merge peri-urban villages into cities and adopt a rural-urban transition policy.

---

Exam angles

Prelims — high-yield facts and traps

• Article matches: 246A GST power · 248 residuary power · 268 levied by Union, collected and kept by states · 269 assigned to states · 269A IGST · 270 shared taxes · 271 surcharges only for the Union · 273 jute grants · 275 statutory grants · 276 profession tax cap ₹2,500 · 279A GST Council · 280/281 FC and its report · 282 discretionary grants · 292/293 borrowing · 243I/243Y SFCs.
• Amendments: 80th (2000) put the "alternative scheme" into Art. 270 (share of all central taxes). 101st (2016) brought in GST (246A, 269A, 279A).
• Divisible pool = gross tax revenue − cesses − surcharges − cost of collection. "Cesses are part of the divisible pool": FALSE.
• Vertical share: 29% (10th) → 29.5% (11th) → 30.5% (12th) → 32% (13th) → 42% (14th) → 41% (15th) → 41% (16th, accepted by Government in February 2026).
• FC chairs: K.C. Neogy (1st), K.C. Pant (10th), Vijay Kelkar (13th), Y.V. Reddy (14th), N.K. Singh (15th), Arvind Panagariya (16th).
• 16th FC weights: income distance 42.5, population 2011 17.5, demographic performance 10, area 10, forest 10, contribution to GDP 10. Tax effort was dropped.
• Criteria types: equity = income distance, area, forest. Efficiency = demographic performance, tax effort (15th), GDP contribution (16th).
• Traps:
• "FC recommendations are binding": FALSE (advisory; devolution is accepted by convention).

• "The 16th FC gave revenue deficit grants": FALSE (it discontinued them, along with sector-specific and state-specific grants).

• Disaster funds: Centre:state 90:10 for NE and Himalayan states, 75:25 for others.

• GST Council: Centre one-third of votes, states two-thirds, three-fourths weighted majority, quorum one-half, chaired by the Union FM.
• "GST Council decisions are binding on legislatures": FALSE (Mohit Minerals, 2022).

• The Art. 279A(11) dispute mechanism has never been set up.

• Compensation: 14% growth guarantee for five years (2017-22) · back-to-back loans ₹2.69 lakh crore · cess ended by the 56th Council (September 2025).

• CSS patterns: 60:40 core · 90:10 NE/Himalayan · 100% UTs without a legislature. Special category status came from the NDC (1969), not the Constitution. The 14th FC removed the special/general distinction in devolution.
• Borrowing: Art. 293(3) consent is needed while a Union loan is outstanding. Off-budget borrowing has counted in the NBC since 2022-23.

• "States can borrow abroad directly": FALSE.

• NCERT vs now: "26 states have FRLs" is outdated; all states have them. Plan/non-plan classification ended in 2017-18.

Mains — GS-III themes

1. Vertical fiscal imbalance in India: its causes, and whether FC devolution corrects it or the shrinking divisible pool (cesses and surcharges) undoes it.
2. Untied devolution vs tied CSS transfers: state autonomy, matching-share burden, the NITI Sub-Group rationalisation and just-in-time fund release.
3. Equity vs efficiency in horizontal devolution: the southern states' grievance, 1971 vs 2011 population, the 16th FC's new GDP-contribution criterion and the delimitation link.
4. The GST Council as cooperative federalism or erosion of state fiscal autonomy: pooled sovereignty, Mohit Minerals, the end of compensation, and the revenue effect of the 2025 rationalisation.
5. Centre's control over state borrowing: Art. 293(3), NBC including off-budget borrowing, Kerala's suit, and state fiscal risks (freebies, Old Pension Scheme, DISCOMs, guarantees). Assess the 16th FC roadmap.
6. Empowering the third tier: SFC failures, weak property tax, conditional FC grants, municipal bonds.
7. Special category status demands vs formula-based transfers. The role of NITI Aayog after the Planning Commission.
8. Grants design: the moral hazard of revenue deficit grants vs the transition risk for fiscally weak states after their discontinuation.

Current-affairs hooks

• The 16th FC report (tabled 1 February 2026) and the action-taken memorandum; Budget 2026-27 FC grants (₹1.4 lakh crore); monthly tax-devolution instalments and advance releases.
• GST Council meetings: rate changes after the 5/18/40% rationalisation, the end of the compensation cess, the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), and petroleum's inclusion.
• RBI's annual State Finances: A Study of Budgets; CAG state finance audit reports; MoF net borrowing ceiling notices and SASCI allocations.
• Supreme Court on Centre-state fiscal disputes: the Kerala borrowing reference, Mohit Minerals follow-ups.
• State protests over devolution shares and cesses; special category status demands (Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Odisha).
• Census and delimitation debates, which will shape future FC population weights.