1. Share of States in Central Taxes
The 16th Finance Commission has recommended that states receive 41% of the divisible pool of central taxes — unchanged from the recommendation made by the 15th Finance Commission. The divisible pool is calculated by excluding the cost of collection, cesses, and surcharges from the gross tax revenue collected by the central government.
2. Criteria for Devolution
The Commission uses a weighted formula across several parameters to determine how central taxes are distributed among states. The table below compares the criteria and their respective weights under the 15th and 16th Finance Commissions:
| Criteria | 15th FC (2021–26) | 16th FC (2026–31) |
|---|---|---|
| Income Distance (Per Capita GSDP) | 45% | 42.5% |
| Population (2011 Census) | 15% | 17.5% |
| Demographic Performance | 12.5% | 10% |
| Area | 15% | 10% |
| Forest | 10% | 10% |
| Tax and Fiscal Efforts | 2.5% | — |
| Contribution to GDP (New) | — | 10% |
| Total | 100% | 100% |
Key Changes in Devolution Criteria
- Income Distance: Defined as the difference between a state’s per capita GSDP and the average per capita GSDP of the top three large states. Per capita GSDP is computed as an average over 2018–19 and 2023–24, excluding the pandemic year 2020–21. States with lower per capita GSDP receive a higher share, promoting equity.
- Population: Devolution share based on a state’s share in the population as per the 2011 Census. The weight has been increased from 15% to 17.5%.
- Demographic Performance: Previously measured by change in Total Fertility Rate (TFR), the 16th FC has redefined this parameter to account for population growth between 1971 and 2011. States with lower population growth over this period receive a higher share.
- Forest: The 16th FC now assigns weight to both a state’s share in overall forest area and its share in the increase in forest area between 2015 and 2023. Crucially, open forests are now also counted — unlike the 15th FC, which considered only dense and moderately dense forests.
- Contribution to GDP (New): This new parameter replaces the earlier “Tax and Fiscal Efforts” metric. A state’s contribution is measured as the square root of its GSDP divided by the sum of the square roots of all states’ GSDPs, using average nominal GSDP from 2018–19 to 2023–24 (excluding 2020–21).
3. Grants-in-Aid (2026–31)
The 16th FC has recommended total grants-in-aid worth ₹9,47,409 crore over the five-year period. These grants cover two broad categories: (i) local body grants and (ii) disaster management grants. Notably, the Commission has discontinued revenue deficit grants, sector-specific grants, and state-specific grants that were recommended by the 15th FC.
| Grant Type | Amount (₹ crore) |
|---|---|
| Local Governments (Total) | 7,91,493 |
| Rural Local Bodies — Basic Grant | 3,48,188 |
| Rural Local Bodies — Performance Grant | 87,048 |
| Urban Local Bodies — Basic Grant | 2,32,125 |
| Urban Local Bodies — Performance Grant | 58,032 |
| Special Infrastructure Component (ULB) | 56,100 |
| Urbanisation Premium (ULB) | 10,000 |
| Disaster Management | 1,55,916 |
| Grand Total | 9,47,409 |
Structure of Local Body Grants
All local body grants come with three mandatory entry-level criteria:
- constitution of local bodies as per the Constitution
- publication of provisional and audited accounts in the public domain
- timely constitution of the State Finance Commission.
Basic Grants: 50% of the basic grant is untied, while the remaining 50% is tied to sanitation and solid waste management, and/or water management.
Performance Grants: Divided into state performance grants (linked to minimum benchmark transfers to local bodies from own resources) and local body performance grants (linked to own source revenue growth).
Special Infrastructure Grants (₹56,100 crore): Tied to development of comprehensive wastewater management systems in cities with populations between 10–40 lakh as per the 2011 Census.
Urbanisation Premium Grants (₹10,000 crore): A one-time grant for merger of peri-urban villages into adjoining urban local body areas, and for formulating a Rural to Urban Transition Policy.
Disaster Management Grants: A corpus of ₹2,04,401 crore has been recommended for State Disaster Relief and Management Funds (SDRF and SDMF). The centre-state cost-sharing ratio is 90:10 for north-eastern and Himalayan states, and 75:25 for all other states. The centre’s share amounts to ₹1,55,916 crore.
4. Fiscal Roadmap
The Commission has recommended that the Centre bring its fiscal deficit down to 3.5% of GDP by 2030–31. For states, the annual fiscal deficit limit has been set at 3% of GSDP. Key fiscal discipline measures include:
- Strict discontinuation of off-budget borrowings by states, with all such borrowings to be brought on-budget.
- Expansion of the definition of fiscal deficit and debt to uniformly include all off-budget borrowings.
- The combined debt of the central and state governments is projected to decline from 77.3% of GDP in 2026–27 to 73.1% of GDP by 2030–31.
5. Power Sector Reforms
The Commission has recommended that states actively pursue the privatisation of electricity distribution companies (DISCOMs). To protect private investors from the debt burden upon DISCOM takeover, a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) may be created to warehouse the debt. States will be permitted to use funds from the Special Assistance Scheme for Capital Investment only after the privatisation process is complete.
6. Subsidy Expenditure Rationalisation
The Commission has called on states to review and rationalise their subsidy expenditure, noting that schemes offering unconditional cash transfers tend to have large and untargeted beneficiary bases. Key recommendations include:
- Setting clear exclusion criteria and a rigorous review process to improve targeting of subsidies.
- Discontinuing financing of subsidies through off-budget borrowings.
- Adoption of a uniform approach for accounting and disclosure of subsidies and transfers across states, addressing the current misclassification of subsidies as assistance, grants, or other expenditure.
7. Public Sector Enterprise (PSE) Reforms
The Commission recommended a review and closure of 308 inactive State Public Sector Enterprises (SPSEs). Further recommendations include:
- Formulation of a state-level PSE disinvestment policy targeting inactive and underperforming enterprises.
- Any state or union PSE incurring losses for three out of four consecutive years must be placed before the respective Cabinet, which may decide on closure, privatisation, or continuation based on strategic importance.
Top Individual State Shares (out of 100):
- Uttar Pradesh: 17.62
- Bihar: 9.95
- Madhya Pradesh: 7.35
- West Bengal: 7.22
- Maharashtra: 6.44
State-wise Data
Individual Share of States in Devolved Taxes (out of 100)
| State | 14th FC (2015–20) | 15th FC (2021–26) | 16th FC (2026–31) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Andhra Pradesh | 4.31 | 4.05 | 4.22 |
| Arunachal Pradesh | 1.37 | 1.76 | 1.35 |
| Assam | 3.31 | 3.13 | 3.26 |
| Bihar | 9.67 | 10.06 | 9.95 |
| Chhattisgarh | 3.08 | 3.41 | 3.30 |
| Goa | 0.38 | 0.39 | 0.37 |
| Gujarat | 3.08 | 3.48 | 3.76 |
| Haryana | 1.08 | 1.09 | 1.36 |
| Himachal Pradesh | 0.71 | 0.83 | 0.91 |
| Jharkhand | 3.14 | 3.31 | 3.36 |
| Karnataka | 4.71 | 3.65 | 4.13 |
| Kerala | 2.50 | 1.93 | 2.38 |
| Madhya Pradesh | 7.55 | 7.85 | 7.35 |
| Maharashtra | 5.52 | 6.32 | 6.44 |
| Manipur | 0.62 | 0.72 | 0.63 |
| Meghalaya | 0.64 | 0.77 | 0.63 |
| Mizoram | 0.46 | 0.50 | 0.56 |
| Nagaland | 0.50 | 0.57 | 0.48 |
| Odisha | 4.64 | 4.53 | 4.42 |
| Punjab | 1.58 | 1.81 | 2.00 |
| Rajasthan | 5.50 | 6.03 | 5.93 |
| Sikkim | 0.37 | 0.39 | 0.34 |
| Tamil Nadu | 4.02 | 4.08 | 4.10 |
| Telangana | 2.44 | 2.10 | 2.17 |
| Tripura | 0.64 | 0.71 | 0.64 |
| Uttar Pradesh | 17.96 | 17.94 | 17.62 |
| Uttarakhand | 1.05 | 1.12 | 1.14 |
| West Bengal | 7.32 | 7.52 | 7.22 |
Cities Eligible for Special Infrastructure Component (ULB Grants)
The following cities with populations between 10–40 lakh (2011 Census) are eligible for the Special Infrastructure Component under urban local body grants:
Pune (Maharashtra), Jaipur (Rajasthan), Lucknow (Uttar Pradesh), Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh), Nagpur (Maharashtra), Indore (Madhya Pradesh), Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh), Visakhapatnam (Andhra Pradesh), Patna (Bihar), Vadodara (Gujarat), Ludhiana (Punjab), Faridabad (Haryana), Rajkot (Gujarat), Dhanbad (Jharkhand), Amritsar (Punjab), Howrah (West Bengal), Ranchi (Jharkhand), Coimbatore (Tamil Nadu), Vijayawada (Andhra Pradesh), Jodhpur (Rajasthan), Madurai (Tamil Nadu), Raipur (Chhattisgarh).
Recent Posts
- Anonymity: Darknet allows users to communicate and transact with each other anonymously. Users can maintain their privacy and avoid being tracked by law enforcement agencies or other entities.
- Access to Information: The darknet provides access to information and resources that may be otherwise unavailable or censored on the regular internet. This can include political or sensitive information that is not allowed to be disseminated through other channels.
- Freedom of Speech: The darknet can be a platform for free speech, as users are able to express their opinions and ideas without fear of censorship or retribution.
- Secure Communication: Darknet sites are encrypted, which means that communication between users is secure and cannot be intercepted by third parties.
- Illegal Activities: Many darknet sites are associated with illegal activities, such as drug trafficking, weapon sales, and hacking services. Such activities can attract criminals and expose users to serious legal risks.
- Scams: The darknet is a hotbed for scams, with many fake vendors and websites that aim to steal users’ personal information and cryptocurrency. The lack of regulation and oversight on the darknet means that users must be cautious when conducting transactions.
- Security Risks: The use of the darknet can expose users to malware and other security risks, as many sites are not properly secured or monitored. Users may also be vulnerable to hacking or phishing attacks.
- Stigma: The association of the darknet with illegal activities has created a stigma that may deter some users from using it for legitimate purposes.
- Virtual assistants: Siri, Alexa, and Google Assistant are examples of virtual assistants that use natural language processing to understand and respond to users’ queries.
- Recommendation systems: Companies like Netflix and Amazon use AI to recommend movies and products to their users based on their browsing and purchase history.
- Efficiency: AI systems can work continuously without getting tired or making errors, which can save time and resources.
- Personalization: AI can help provide personalized recommendations and experiences for users.
- Automation: AI can automate repetitive and tedious tasks, freeing up time for humans to focus on more complex tasks.
- Job loss: AI has the potential to automate jobs previously performed by humans, leading to job loss and economic disruption.
- Bias: AI systems can be biased due to the data they are trained on, leading to unfair or discriminatory outcomes.
- Safety and privacy concerns: AI systems can pose safety risks if they malfunction or are used maliciously, and can also raise privacy concerns if they collect and use personal data without consent.
Darknet
Definition:
Darknet, also known as dark web or darknet market, refers to the part of the internet that is not indexed or accessible through traditional search engines. It is a network of private and encrypted websites that cannot be accessed through regular web browsers and requires special software and configuration to access.
The darknet is often associated with illegal activities such as drug trafficking, weapon sales, and hacking services, although not all sites on the darknet are illegal.
Examples:
Examples of darknet markets include Silk Road, AlphaBay, and Dream Market, which were all shut down by law enforcement agencies in recent years.
These marketplaces operate similarly to e-commerce websites, with vendors selling various illegal goods and services, such as drugs, counterfeit documents, and hacking tools, and buyers paying with cryptocurrency for their purchases.
Pros :
Cons:
Artificial Intelligence
Definition:
AI, or artificial intelligence, refers to the development of computer systems that can perform tasks that would normally require human intelligence, such as recognizing speech, making decisions, and understanding natural language.
Examples:
Pros :
Cons: