Fiscal Responsibility & Budget Management (FRBM) Act, Objectives

The Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Bill was introduced in 2000 by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government to give legal shape to the idea of fiscal discipline in India. It aimed to bring accountability and transparency to government finances. The bill became law in 2003, marking a major shift in how public funds were to be managed. The FRBM Act 2003 set specific targets for reducing fiscal deficits, improving financial management, and promoting long-term fiscal stability.

Fiscal Responsibility & Budget Management (FRBM) Act

The Fiscal Responsibility & Budget Management Act, 2003 (FRBMA), is a law enacted by the Indian Parliament to enforce principles of sound financial management and keep fiscal deficits under control. Its core aim is to ensure a balanced budget and promote fiscal discipline.

The Act initially targeted eliminating the revenue deficit and capping the fiscal deficit at 3% of GDP by March 2008. However, the 2007 global financial crisis forced the government to delay and eventually suspend these targets in 2009. In 2011, as the economy began recovering, the Economic Advisory Council recommended revisiting the FRBM framework. A review committee, chaired by N. K. Singh, set up under the Ministry of Finance, was later tasked with evaluating and updating the Act’s provisions.

Fiscal Responsibility & Budget Management (FRBM) Act Needs

In May 2016, the government appointed N. K. Singh to head a committee to review the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Act. The committee recommended a phased reduction in the fiscal deficit starting with a target of 3% of GDP by March 2020, then lowering it to 2.8% in 2020-21, and further to 2.5% by 2022-23.

During COVID-19 pandemic, the economic slowdown and increased spending on welfare and healthcare led to a major revenue shortfall. As a result, the government recorded a fiscal deficit of 9.2% of GDP in FY21, slightly better than the revised estimate of 9.5%. For FY22, the deficit target was scaled down to 6.8%, with a longer-term goal of bringing it down to 4.5% by FY26.

The FRBM Act, 2003 is designed not just to limit deficits but also to improve transparency in fiscal management of India. Over the long term, it aims to achieve budgetary stability while giving the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) the space it needs to manage inflation effectively.

‹ ›

Fiscal Responsibility & Budget Management (FRBM) Act Objectives

The Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Act, passed by the Indian Parliament in 2003, was a significant step toward institutionalizing financial discipline in the country. Its core objective is to ensure responsible fiscal management by reducing the fiscal deficit and improving the quality of macroeconomic governance. The key goals of the Act can be understood across four broad themes:

• The FRBM Act mandates specific targets to bring down the fiscal deficit, revenue deficit, and total government debt as a percentage of GDP. 
• To promote openness in fiscal operations, the FRBM Act requires the government to present documents such as the Medium-Term Fiscal Policy Statement, Fiscal Policy Strategy Statement, and Outcome Budget to Parliament. 
• The FRBM Act aims to reduce inflationary pressures and maintain a stable macroeconomic environment. 
• One of the Act’s long-term aims is to prevent the economy from falling into a debt trap by ensuring that debt levels remain within sustainable limits.

Fiscal Responsibility & Budget Management (FRBM) Act Features

To achieve the objectives, Fiscal Responsibility & Budget Management (FRBM) Act Features were incorporated which are mentioned below:

• The FRBM Act sets limits on fiscal deficit and revenue deficit, expressed as a percentage of GDP. Initially, the Act aimed to reduce the fiscal deficit to 3% of GDP by 2008. These targets are periodically updated based on economic needs and government priorities. 
• Under the FRBM Act, the central government is mandated to present three critical fiscal documents every financial year: the Medium-Term Fiscal Policy Statement, the Fiscal Policy Strategy Statement, and the Macroeconomic Framework Statement. 
• Each year, the government outlines specific fiscal goals and performance determiners in line with FRBM principles.
• The FRBM Act is not static, it includes a built-in review mechanism. This means fiscal targets can be reassessed and modified based on changing economic conditions.

FRBM Act Escape

The FRBM Act Escape allows the government to exceed the fiscal deficit target in case of extraordinary circumstances which includes war, natural calamity, severe economic downturn or other significant events beyond control. While this provides flexibility and the government is expected to return to the fiscal path once the crisis passes. Even when invoked, the government must justify the deviation and lay out a path to correction.

Fiscal Responsibility & Budget Management (FRBM) Act Advantages

• FRBM Act sets legal limits on fiscal and revenue deficits, discouraging excessive borrowing and forcing the government to prioritize essential spending. 
• Mandates regular reports like the Medium-Term Fiscal Policy and Fiscal Strategy Statements. These documents provide reliable insights into government finances, helping stakeholders plan based on data rather than guesswork.
• By keeping deficits under control, the Act helps reduce inflationary pressure, stabilizes interest rates, and avoids crowding out private investment which creates a more stable environment for long-term economic growth.
• Transparent and rule-based fiscal policy enhances the government’s credibility. It attracts both domestic and foreign investors, strengthens market confidence, and supports better sovereign credit ratings.

Fiscal Responsibility & Budget Management (FRBM) Act Issues

• Though the FRBM Act Escape clause allows deviation from targets during unforeseen circumstances, frequent use undermines the Act’s credibility. It raises doubts about the government’s commitment to long-term fiscal discipline.
• Strict fiscal targets may limit necessary investments in critical sectors like health, education, and infrastructure. This can hurt long-term growth and weaken efforts to improve social outcomes.
• The success of the Act relies on strong institutions and political commitment. Inconsistent implementation across different governments and regimes hampers its effectiveness and enforcement.