The Union Budget 2026 has sparked significant debate. Opposition leaders are sharply criticizing its provisions. They claim the budget primarily benefits a small segment of the population. Many argue it caters to only about 5% of the people. This sentiment highlights a growing divide in political discourse. The current happenings indicate a trend of intense scrutiny for fiscal policies. Exclusive details reveal widespread discontent among various opposition figures.
Key Criticisms Emerge
Chief Minister M.K. Stalin of Tamil Nadu led the charge. He called the budget a “huge disappointment”. Stalin stated it “totally defeated Tamil Nadu’s expectations”. He further alleged the Union government ignored the state’s interests. Many saw this as a “step-motherly attitude” towards Tamil Nadu. Stalin also pointed out a reduction in the state’s share of Union taxes. This amounted to about ₹1,200 crore.
Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav echoed these sentiments. He called the budget “made for five per cent of the people”. Yadav questioned if the government met its manifesto promises. West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee labeled the budget “directionless, visionless, action-less and anti-people”. She added it was also anti-women, anti-farmer, and anti-education. Abhishek Banerjee of TMC noted West Bengal was not mentioned even once in the speech.
Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi termed the budget “totally lacklustre”. He stated it ignored pressing issues like unemployment and agricultural stress. The Congress party broadly criticized the budget as underwhelming. They felt it lacked substance.
State vs. Central Allocations
Opposition ruled states expressed disappointment over tax devolution. They felt federal concerns were ignored. The demand to increase states’ share from 41% to 50% was again ignored. The continuation of 41% devolution was deemed disappointing.
Tamil Nadu’s Chief Minister highlighted reduced allocations to key schemes. This included cuts to the Jal Jeevan Mission and Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (Rural). He also noted pending releases for other schemes were not addressed.
Focus on Specific Sectors
Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman highlighted several key areas. These included public capital expenditure and infrastructure development. The budget proposed new rare earth corridors in Odisha, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and Kerala. These corridors aim to boost mining, processing, and manufacturing of critical minerals. Increased support for electronics component manufacturing was also announced.
Sitharaman also emphasized medical tourism and health initiatives. Tax exemptions were introduced for certain raw materials and medicines. The budget proposed support for states to establish regional medical hubs. The sports goods manufacturing sector also saw new allocations.
Economic and Political Undercurrents
The budget’s focus on infrastructure and manufacturing was welcomed by the BJP and its allies. They view it as a roadmap for growth. However, critics argue these benefits are concentrated. The claim that the budget serves only 5% of the population suggests a perception of wealth concentration.
This fiscal announcement comes amidst ongoing political maneuvering. With elections approaching in some states, the budget’s allocations and priorities are under intense political scrutiny. The differing reactions highlight the trending political landscape. Exclusive statements from opposition leaders point towards a narrative of neglect for the common citizen. The overall happenings suggest a challenging period for fiscal policy acceptance.
Expert and Public Reaction
Entrepreneur Ashneer Grover famously called the budget “bilkul time waste”. Many users on social media agreed with him. Conversely, industrialists and CEOs appreciated the focus on healthcare and technology. The market saw a dip after the announcement of an increase in Securities Transaction Tax (STT) on derivatives. This indicates potential concerns from the financial sector as well.
