Budget FY-2021-22
Budget FY-2021-22
Budget FY-2021-22
An Analysis of the
National Budget for FY2021-22
www.cpd.org.bd
CPD IRBD 2021 Team
The CPD IRBD 2021 Team would like to register its profound gratitude to Professor Rehman
Sobhan, Chairman, CPD and Dr Debapriya Bhattacharya, Distinguished Fellow, CPD for their
support.
The Team gratefully acknowledges the valuable support received from the Dialogue and
Communication Division and the Administration and Finance Division in preparing this
report.
I. INTRODUCTION
II. MACROECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES
III. FISCAL FRAMEWORK
IV. ANNUAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME
V. FISCAL MEASURES
VI. SELECTED PRIORITY SECTORS
VII. OTHER SELECTED ISSUES
VIII. CONCLUDING REMARKS
❑ The budget for fiscal year (FY) 2021-22 is the 50th budget of Bangladesh.
The Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) would like to congratulate the
government of Bangladesh and the Hon’ble Finance Minister for
presenting the budget during the difficult time of COVID-19.
❑ The national budget for FY22 has been announced at a time when the
country is going through the second wave of the pandemic. Since the
outbreak of the pandemic in Bangladesh in March 2020, the economy
has been facing the most challenging period ever in the history of
Bangladesh.
❑ The budget for FY22 has been prepared in the context of a number of
emerging signs in the economy. Despite challenges the economy has
been able to maintain some stability and experienced some positive
trends in FY21. However, a number of weaknesses have also been visible
during the outgoing fiscal year.
Negatives Positives
External sector
Estimate Projection
Indicator FY20(p) BFY21 RBFY21
FY22 FY23 FY24
Export (growth in %) -17.1 15.0 12.0 15.0 13.0 12.0
Import (growth in %) -8.6 10.0 11.0 14.0 13.0 11.0
Remittance (growth in %) 11.2 15.0 35.0 15.0 12.0 10.0
Source: MTMPS
❑ Growth target for export earnings has been set at 15.0% in FY22
➢ Up to April FY21, total export growth was 8.7%, but MoF projection for FY21 is
12%
❑ Growth target for import payments has been set at 14.0% in FY22
and projected to be 11% in FY21
➢ Up to April FY21, total import growth was 13.0%. However, particularly alarming
is the slowdown in capital machineries import [(-)7.4%]
➢ Up to March FY21, total L/C opening exhibited a growth of 5.4% while that of
capital machineries recorded a decrease of 19.8%
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 14
II. MACROECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES
❑ Remittance growth target for FY22 has been set at 15.0%. Overall outlook
on outward migration was not very optimistic in the MTMPS
➢ During Jul-May FY21, remittance inflow posted an increase of 39.5% over
corresponding figure. However, overseas migration posted a decline of (-) 59.0%
during the aforementioned period
❑ Exchange rate is expected to depreciate and reach Tk. 85.3/USD on an
average in FY22 (currently Tk. 84.8/USD)
Public debt
❑ Public debt as share of GDP is at a reasonable state for Bangladesh
(36.0% in FY20, 39.0% in the revised budget of FY21)
➢ May increase to some extent in FY22 (40.3%) – driven by higher domestic and
external borrowing in view of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic
❑ At present, about 62.2% of the total public debt is attributable to domestic
debt
➢ This composition is expected to change in the coming years (domestic debt:
61.8% in FY24)
❑ Interest payments for domestic debt is already on an upward trajectory
❑ As will seen, 19.0% of total revenue expenditure will be spent on debt
servicing in FY22 (90.4% of the amount will be to service domestic debt)
The proposed targets in FY22 Budget are far from reality if most
likely actual figures at the end of ongoing fiscal year (FY21) are taken
into consideration. This has significantly weakened the fiscal
framework of that informs FY22 Budget.
Contingent Liability
❑ Government’s guarantee (contingent liability) increased by 21.7% over the
last one year – a negative development!
❑ Power and energy sector remains the leading sector in terms of receiving
guarantee from the government
List of Government Guarantees (Contingent Liability)
Amount (Crore Tk.) Growth (%) Share (%)
Sector
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY21 FY22 FY20 FY21 FY22
Agricultural Credit 3,143 3,681 4,967 17.1 34.9 5.4 6.1 6.7
Biman 4,937 10,279 10,909 108.2 6.1 8.5 16.9 14.8
Energy 3,381 1,199 1,522 -64.6 27.0 5.8 2.0 2.1
Power 33,777 33,742 41,692 -0.1 23.6 58.4 55.6 56.5
Telecom 1,315 1,169 1,109 -11.1 -5.1 2.3 1.9 1.5
Miscellaneous 11,272 10,584 13,637 -6.1 28.8 19.5 17.4 18.5
Total 57,826 60,653 73,836 4.9 21.7 100.0 100.0 100.0
❑ The total size of COVID-19 response funds currently stand at BDT 1,28,441 crore
or USD 15,111 million which is equivalent to 4.2% of the GDP for RBFY21
❑ A total of 58,115,211 individuals and 104,996 firms have received liquidity support
and fiscal stimulus as part of the government’s COVID-19 response
❑ Since about 80% of the government’s COVID-19 response funds are in the form
of liquidity support, banks have played a central role in view of recovery of the
pandemic-affected economy.
❑ Bangladesh’s fiscal stimulus package is a meagre 20.41% of its total COVID-19
relief funds or only 0.91% of its GDP, and falls far short of the 11% of GDP that is
estimated to be required to mitigate the socioeconomic impacts of COVID-19.
❑ Liquidity support cannot be treated as philanthropy and so banks cannot
provide loans to anyone on humanitarian grounds.
❑ Liquidity support is inadequate for small borrowers and new
borrowers, as well as those who are the poorest and most vulnerable.
Therefore, more direct cash support should be provided by the government so
that these groups can adjust to the shocks of COVID-19.
The ADP for FY22 is earmarked under 15 sectors instead of the previously
reported 17 sectors
➢ This makes year-on-year comparison at the sectoral level impossible
❑ ADP of Tk. 225,324 crore has been proposed for FY22
➢ 6.5% of GDP in FY22 (6.5% in BFY21 and 6.4% in RBFY21)
➢ 9.8% higher than the ADP for FY21 and 14% ADP Financing Structure (% of
higher than RADP for FY21 total)
➢ The rate of implementation of original ADP in
FY21 is likely to be not more than 80% even
in best case scenario in view of COVID-19 60.9
65.6 68.1
➢ In that case, ADP needs to be more than 37%
➢ Project Aid to finance 39.1% of total ADP in
FY22 (34.4% in ADP of FY21)
➢ Rooppur Power Plant accounts for 18.2% of 34.4 31.9 39.1
total project aid in ADP for FY22
ADP FY21 RADP FY21 ADP FY22
Project Aid Taka
➢ The share of Health sector in ADP FY22 (7.7%) has increased from 6.4% in
ADP FY21 – however, given the pandemic situation the increase remains
below what is needed
➢ It includes only two continuing projects related to COVID-19 titled
“COVID-19 emergency response and pandemic preparedness” and
“COVID-19 response emergency assistance” co-financed by World Bank
and Asian Development Bank
➢ No new project has been proposed to particularly address COVID-19
➢ Also, no COVID-related project was found in the list of ‘Unapproved
projects without allocation’
❑ Share in ADP allocation has declined marginally for Agriculture sector,
from 4.1% in FY21 to 3.4% to FY22 at a time when ensuring food security
remains a high priority
❑ The ADP for FY22 contains 1,426 projects (1,584 for ADP of FY21)
Unapproved Unapproved Development
New New
3% Development 1.8% Assistance
Assistance 1% 1.7% 0.8%
2%
Carryover
18% Carryover
25.4%
Continuing
Continuing 44.2%
Concluding 50%
26% Concluding
26.1%
❑ Share of allocation for continuing projects has declined while that of carryover
projects has increased
➢ Higher share of carryover project would imply need for additional allocation due to cost escalation
➢ Share of continuing projects declined to 44.2% in FY22 from 50% in FY21
➢ 44.2% of allocation is provided to 334 continuing projects in FY22 (430 in FY21)
❑ 29 new projects are included in FY22 (46 in FY21): 0.8% of total ADP allocation (1% in
FY21)
▪ 172 new projects were included in the RADP for FY21
❑ Share of concluding projects almost stagnant at about 26%
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 31
IV. ANNUAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME
❑ Mega Projects: Allocations have risen, but not the pace of implementation
Project Progress Possible
Project Name Start Date Cost till Jun 20 Progress till End date
(Tk.cr.) (%) Jun 22 (%)
Construction of Rooppur Nuclear 01/07/2016 113,093 28.1 53.3 30/12/25
Power Plant
Padma Bridge Rail Link 01/01/2016 39,247 31.7 55.4 30/06/24
Matarbari 2x600 MW Ultra-Super 01/07/2014 35,984 35.4 64.2 30/06/23
Critical Coal-Fired Power Project
Padma multipurpose Bridge project 01/01/2009 30,193 77.6 96.1 30/06/21
Dhaka Mass Rapid Transit 01/07/2012 23,490 47.5 91.5 30/06/24
Development Project (Metro Rail)
Construction of Single Line Dual 01/07/2010 18,034 0.0 13.4 30/06/22
Gauge Track from Dohazari-Ramu-
Cox’s Bazar and Ramu to Ghundum
near Myanmar Border
Construction of Dhaka-Ashulia 01/01/2017 16,901 7.3 30.6 30/06/22
Elevated Expressway
SASEC Road Connectivity: 01/09/2016 16,662 12.6 41.4 31/12/24
Improvement of Elenga-Hatikumrul-
Rangpur-Highway into 4-Lane
Highway
Ghorasal Polash Urea Fertilizer 01/10/2018 10,461 28.5 82.0 30/06/22
Project (GPUFP)
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 35
IV. ANNUAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME
❑ Mega Projects: Allocations have risen, but not the pace of implementation
❑ Mega Projects: Allocations for these have increased, but not the
pace of implementation
❑ Tk. 51321 crore is allocated for 14 mega projects (all infrastructure
including fast-track and based on project size) which is 22.8% of total ADP
of FY22.
❑ 8 out of 14 mega projects are scheduled to be completed in FY22
➢ None of these projects has received the required allocation for
completion in FY22 – not even the Padma Multipurpose Bridge
project
❑ China is co-financing 5 out of these 14 projects, and progress of
implementation of these projects are not satisfactory
Five important observations can be made for ADP FY22 in view of COVID-19
❑ No significant change in the structure of ADP allocation for FY22 can be observed in
alignment with the changes in allocative priorities in view of COVID-19 pandemic
➢ Physical infrastructure-related sectors have continued to dominate with inadequate
attention to Health, Agriculture, Social Welfare and Labour & Employment
sectors
➢ No effort to initiate new projects to address COVID-19 emergencies
❑ Utilisation of foreign aid will be critical for ADP implementation
❑ The problems of ‘carryover’ and ‘time-overrun’ projects will persist in FY22
❑ Mega projects are likely to miss their deadlines – the wait may continue with
consequent adverse impacts on public service delivery and crowding-in private sector
investment
❑ The delay in implementing mega projects will also have repercussions in the form of
cost escalation
❑ Some positive developments can be observed in the area of making ‘symbolic
allocations’ for the so-called ‘populist projects’
❑ Tax deducted at source (TDS) for suppliers’ payments has been raised by a
significant margin
Payment to suppliers Current rate Proposed rate Rise
up to 15 lakh 2% 3% 50%
<15 lakh to 50 lakh 3% 3% 0%
<50 lakh to 1 crore 4% 5% 25%
<1 crore to 2 crore 5% 5% 0%
<2 crore 5% 7% 40%
➢ About 22% of TDS income was sourced from suppliers’ payments in FY18
while TDS accounts for more than 60% of total earnings from income tax. This
would be a major source of the government to generate additional revenue
❑ TDS is exempted for workers without taxable income participating at Workers
Profit Participation Fund (WPPF) only up to Tk. 25,000. – this should be
exempted for all workers without taxable income irrespective of the amount of
funds received
ICT sector
❑ Concessionary facilities for the import of computer accessories and raw materials
of ICT industry – will protect domestic computer / laptop and ICT product
manufacturers
❑ Existing concessions on raw materials of phone industry to be made more
investment friendly and rational – will expand cellular phone manufacturing,
assembling and backward linkage industry
❑ Increased tariff on import of feature phones - will protect domestic industry
Electronics industries
❑ Expansion of the existing concessionary rate on raw materials importation of
refrigerator and compressor manufacturing industries– will protect the
Electronics industrial sector
❑ More concession on certain raw materials of TV manufacturing industry – will be
helpful for developing TV manufacturing sector
Export-oriented industries
❑ Inclusion of photosensitive rotary screen, temperature sensor and loaded PCB in
the concessionary rate – will protect the textile industry
❑ Concessionary rate for the import of two raw materials for the footwear industry
– will help export diversification and encourage the potential footwear industry
Measures to reduce dependency on foreign goods
❑ VAT has been exempted as per the followings: at local production stage in
manufacturing of blender, juicer, mixer, grinder, electric kettle, rice cooker, multi
cooker, pressure cooker; at production level in manufacturing of washing
machine, microwave oven and electric oven; on manufacturing of puffed rice; on
fresh fruit at trading stage
❑ Advance Tax (AT) at local stage has been exempted on certain raw materials of
iron products, scrap vessel and ethylene glycol, terephthalic acid,
ethylene/propylene which are used for manufacturing of PVC and PET resin
Automobile sector
❑ Tariffs reduced on microbus imports and ‘Moped’ – will discourage the use of
accident-prone vehicles such as nasimon, laguna and encourage the use of
microbuses as an alternative public transport
❑ Restructuring the tariffs on imports of hybrid vehicles – to encourage the use of
environment friendly hybrid vehicles
❑ Necessary adjustments and also inclusion of some raw materials in the existing
SRO – for the development of motorcycle manufacturing/assembling industry
Lube blending industry
❑ CD increased on recycled lube base oil and lubricating oil– will discourage import
of environmentally harmful products
❑ Rationalisation of the rate of duty of lubricating oil and liquid paraffin – to avoid
revenue risk
❑ CD decreased on additives as one of the raw materials of the lube blending
industry – will protect the lube blending industry
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 56
V. FISCAL MEASURES
❑ These measures will likely to lead to fall in revenue collection over the
medium-term will be helpful for stimulating the economy
❑ However, monitoring will need to be strengthen to discourage misuse
Reform initiatives
❑ The Finance Minister has mentioned a number of reform measures related to
direct tax, VAT and Customs development. However, these are long overdue
❑ The draft of the Income Tax Act 2021 has been prepared by modifying the
Income Tax Ordinance, 1984
➢ Speedy passing of the draft Income Tax Bill is important to modernise the tax
collection system
❑ NBR has already taken some initiatives, such as the upgradation of ASYCUDA
World, Consolidation and integration of iBAS++, piloting of electronic return
filing (e-return) implementation of NSW project, introduction of E-TDS System,
introduction of automated customs risk management, automation of bond
management, introduction of authorized economic operator system etc.
➢ However, these projects were to be fully implemented by now. There should
have been deadlines set for their full operationalisation
❑ As of now, about 3,000 EFD/SDC have been installed
➢ NBR plans to install another 7,000 machines by June 2022.
➢ However, this will cover only 3.9% of business entities that have received
online VAT registration. CPD had drawn attention to the need for a faster
installation of these for expansion of the VAT-net
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 58
VI. SELECTED PRIORITY
SECTORS
BDT in crore
40
Percentage
20000
increase in total budget allocation for 15000
30
FY16
FY17
FY19
FY22
FY20
FY21
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY18
nothing out of the ordinary, despite the
fact that the healthcare sector is reeling from Non-development Development
Percentage
20000 30
total budget allocation has increased from 25
43% in FY21 to 48% in FY22 15000 20
10000 15
➢ Share of revised development budget 10
allocation in total budget allocation has 5000
5
increased from 39% in FY20 to 44% in FY21 0 0
FY20
FY21
FY18
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY19
Non-development Development
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 Total Development as % of total 61
Health
BDT in crore
Percentage
❑ Budget utilisation (actual 12000
10000 30
expenditure as a percentage of revised 8000
20
budget allocation) has worsened 6000
4000
significantly over the past decade 2000
10
0 0
➢ Non-development budget utilization FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20
decreased from 95% in FY10 to 78% in Non-development Development
FY20 Total Development as % of total
Budget utilisation
➢ Development budget utilization 97 96 99 94 95 97 97
95
100 92 93 9294 9094
decreased from 87% in FY10 to 67% in 90
87 86
90 93
85
90
84 87 84
FY20 80
80
71
77
80 78
74
70
67
➢ Total budget utilization decreased 70
Percentage
60
from 92% in FY10 to 74% in FY20 50 45
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 Non-development Development Total 62
Health
❑ Allocation for health as a share of the total Health allocation as % of total budget and GDP
7
budget has increased from 5.15% in FY21 to 6.18
5.86
6 5.60 5.42
5.39
5.42% in FY22 5.06
4.82 4.81
5.05
4.72
5.15
5 4.60 4.68
➢ However, this is lower than the allocation
Percentage
4
of 6.18% of budget in FY10 when there was
3
no pandemic
2
❑ Allocation for health as a share of 0.86 0.83 0.77 0.76 0.74 0.76 0.85 0.75 0.89 0.88 0.85 0.95 0.95
1
GDP remained the same between
FY21 and FY22 0
FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22
%
South Asia, but also 40
30
increasing over time 20
10
❑ CPI of medical care and 0
Bangladesh Bhutan India Nepal Pakistan Sri Lanka
health expenses increased 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
from 156.1 in July 2012 to 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
CPI of Medical care and health expenses)
251.13 in March 2021 270
Jan-15
Aug-19
Aug-14
Sep-16
May-13
Jun-15
May-18
Jun-20
Nov-20
Nov-15
Apr-16
Jul-17
Dec-12
Oct-13
Oct-18
Jan-20
Mar-14
Feb-17
Dec-17
Mar-19
cases
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 64
Social Safety Net Programmes
❑ Allocation for social safety nets has increased from BDT 95,683 crore in
revised budget for FY2020-21 to BDT 107,614 crore in budget for FY2021-22
➢ This represents an increase of only 12% which is lower than the average rate
of increase of 17% between FY10 and FY22
❑ Allocation for pension has increased from BDT 23,000 crore in revised budget
for FY2020-21 to BDT 26,690 crore in budget for FY2021-22
➢ This represents an increase of 16% which is higher than the rate of increase
of overall social protection
Social protection allocation and pension allocation (in crore BDT)
107614
95683
120000
81865
100000
64404
Crore BDT
80000
48524
40857
35975
30636
60000
26690
26654
23000
23098
22449
23010
20894
21975
16706
13845
12667
40000
10018
11144
8607
6816
4003
5533
5041
3761
3617
20000
0
RBFY2009-10
RBFY2015-16
RBFY2016-17
RBFY2018-19
RBFY2012-13
RBFY2017-18
BFY2021-22
RBFY2010-11
RBFY2011-12
RBFY2019-20
RBFY2008-09
RBFY2013-14
RBFY2014-15
RBFY2020-21
Social protection allocation (in crore BDT) Pension allocation (in crore BDT)
❑ Overall social safety net budget as a percentage of budget and GDP increased
slightly from RBFY21 to BFY22
❑ Social safety net budget excluding pension as a percentage of
budget decreased 13.49% from RBFY21 to 13.41% in BFY22
❑ Social safety net budget excluding pension as a percentage of GDP
decreased 2.35% from RBFY21 to 2.34% in BFY22
Social protection allocation as a % of budget Social protection allocation as a % of GDP
20 18 18 4 3 3
16 16 3
18 15 15 15 3 3 3
16 14 14 13 2 2 2
12 12 13 13 2 2 2 2
14 3 2 2
12 2
10 13 13 13 2 2
%
%
12 12 2 2 2
8 11 11 10 2 2
9 9 9 9 9 9 2 2 2 2 2
6 1 1 1 1
4
2 1
0 0
RBFY2011-12
RBFY2017-18
RBFY2018-19
RBFY2010-11
RBFY2012-13
RBFY2016-17
RBFY2008-09
RBFY2014-15
RBFY2013-14
RBFY2009-10
RBFY2019-20
RBFY2020-21
RBFY2015-16
BFY2021-22
RBFY2011-12
RBFY2017-18
RBFY2018-19
RBFY2008-09
RBFY2010-11
RBFY2012-13
RBFY2016-17
RBFY2014-15
RBFY2009-10
RBFY2013-14
RBFY2020-21
RBFY2019-20
RBFY2015-16
BFY2021-22
Social protection allocation (as percentage of budget) Social protection allocation (as percentage of GDP)
Social protection allocation excluding pension (as percentage of total budget) Social protection allocation excluding pension (as percentage of GDP)
Percentage
60
➢ Results from a pilot project showed that girls’ 50
secondary enrolments increased from 40
an average of 7.9% to 14%
30
❑ In 1994, the highly successful programme 20
was launched nationwide.
10
❑ In 2018, girls comprised of 54% 0
secondary school pupils in
19 8 8
19 9 1
19 8 2
1985
19 9 4
19 9 7
19 70
2 000
2012
19 73
2018
19 76
19 79
2003
2015
2006
2009
Bangladesh were female, compared to
only 44% in Pakistan Stipend introduced Bangladesh Pakistan
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 70
Agriculture
❑ Overall allocation for Agriculture and Allied Sectors (AAS) is Tk. 31912 crore in BFY22 which is 7.4%
higher than RFY21 (Tk. 29,725 crore in RBFY21)
➢ However, the share of AAS in total budget has decreased (3.6 percentage point) compared to that in
RBFY21
❑ MoA received the highest share of allocation within the AAS (50.8% which has significantly increased-
44.5% from RBFY21).
➢ The share of MoEF has also increased (3.8% in FY22 and 3.2% in RFY21)
❑ MoL has received a significantly higher budget allocation (22.2% in BFY22 than 19.4% in BFY21 due to
increased allocation in development budget
➢ This is perhaps because of the ongoing ADP projects to digitally record land areas and others
❑ Within the agriculture sector, MoA and MoWR generally tend to perform well in terms of ADP
implementation
➢ Poor ADP implementation performance is observed for MoFL, MoEF and MoL
❑ Given the importance of agriculture production and food security, subsidy in the agriculture sector has been
increased by 17.4% vis-a-visRFY21
➢ Despite the improvement in subsidy utilization in recent years, a considerable share (9.5%) tend to remain
unutilized
➢ Efficient and full utilization of subsidy will help reducing production costs and contribute to enhance
production
Stimulus Package
❑ Till Apr’21, 78.7% and 59.0% credit to farmers have been disbursed from Tk. 5,000 crore and Tk. 3,000 crore
refinance scheme, respectively
➢ About 2 lakh borrowers have received credit from the Tk 5,000 crore fund
➢ It is important to ensure full utilization of fund as early as possible
➢ Considering the difficulty of farmers, the Central bank should extend loan repayment period up to 3 years
Subsidy in Agriculture (BDT crore) AAS’s ADP implementation as % of RFY
Allocation Revised Utilised Unustisiled 120.0
97.7
105.2
96.7
100.0 90.4 90.6 85.0
FY17 9,000 6,000 3,493 2,507 79.1 99.7
80.0 89.2
FY18 9,000 6,000 5,268 732 76.8
58.85 59.3
51.3 56.96 79.0
60.0 73.3 43.19
42.25
FY19 9,000 8,070 7,763 307 40.0
60.5 37.4 36.3
49.0
FY20 9,001 8,001 7175 826 20.0 35.9 30.0 37.1
FY21 9501 8599 0.0
FY22 10099 MoA MoFL MoEF MoL MoWR
Concluding Projects
❑ Fiscal Measures Completion rate
Project Name
❑ Tax exemption has been given for ten by FY22
Increase crop production through expansion of solar and water efficient
years to agriculture and fisheries modern technology (Pilot) 01/07/2017—30/06/2022
82%
institutions that provide diploma and Increasing irrigation capacity and development of micro-irrigation thorugh
46%
reserving surface water in Rangpur area 1/1/2018—30/6/2022
vocational education
Strengthening programme of the activities of agricultural training institutes
93%
➢ This will help develop high quality (1st Revised) 1/6/2018—30/6/2022
diploma institutes which will train Increasing fish production through reservoir reform (2nd revised)
44%
01/10/2015—30/06/2022
agriculture graduates Expansion of fish farming technology services at the union level (Phase II)
30%
❑ Tax exemption for ten years for (2nd revised) 01/03/2015—30/06/22
Dingapota Haor sub-project canal re-excavation and quality of life
industries engaged in processing improvement project in Mohanganj upazila of Netrokona district 85%
locally grown fruits and vegetables, 01/07/2020—30/06/2022
Irrigation Management Improvement Project (for Muhuri Irrigation) (2nd
producing milk and dairy products, 80%
Revision) 01/07/2014—30/06/2022
and manufacturing of agricultural Afforestation in coastal areas including new chars in the Bay of Bengal
94%
01/01/2018—31/12/2021
machineries Cow fattening project with modern technology 01/01/2019—31/12/2021 88%
➢ Will help promote new Completed Projects
entrepreneurs in the agriculture Improving horticultural crop supply and nutrition security through capacity
building of BADC's horticulture development department 01/01/2018— 98%
sector 30/06/2022
❑ Zero tariff on imports of major Production, storage and distribution of high quality pulses, oil and spice
99%
seeds at farmer level (Phase 3) (1st Revised) 01/07/2017—30/06/2022
agricultural inputs, especially Repair of old food warehouses and ancillary facilities and construction of new
100%
fertilizers, seeds, pesticides etc., infrastructure across the country 01/07/2018—30/06/2022
Char development and settlement programme-bridging (CDSPB) (Land
➢ Will reduce cost of inputs 98%
ministry's part) 01/07/2019—30/06/2022
➢ Will help set up new start ups Household silos for safe food storage for poor, backward minorities and
disaster prone people living in different parts of the country 01/07/2020— 100%
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget31/12/21
for FY2021-22 75
Employment Generation
❑ The FY 2022’s budget was expected to put emphasis on Overview of Total Allocation
employment generation as the pandemic continues to 2500
affect the economy through job losses and low wages 2000
Dev
Dev
Dev
Non Dev
Non Dev
Non Dev
Non Dev
Total
Total
Total
Total
it remains the same (0%) for MoLE
MoOE MoLE MoYS MoI
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 77
Employment Generation
❑ The overall implementation rate of ADP in FY21 (for four employment-related ministries) is less than half
(44.7%) till April, 2021
➢ The individual implementation rate: MoI:42.7%, MoEOE: 74.5%, MoLE: 48.7%, MoYS: 29.2%
➢ MoYS is in weak state in terms of ADP implementation compared to other ministries
➢ The ADP allocation for these four ministries in FY 22 are not in line with the 8th FYP (overall 16.7 %
lower)
❑ Delayed project implementation means delayed employment generation by crowding-in private
investment
❑ Table presents a list of carry-over, concluding and continuing projects with evidence of delayed
implementation
❑ Estimations indicate that current level of allocation will not ensure completion of a number of crucial
carryover ADP projects even in FY 22
➢ These projects, including “BSCIC industrial park in Raujan, Bhairab, Tangail”, “E-banijyo korbo, nijer
byabsha gorbo” “BEPAZA economic zone in Mirsharai”, etc. would have created employment
opportunities if were timely implemented
❑ In case of concluding projects, most of the employment-generating projects targeted for completion in
FY 22 are not likely to be completed
➢ Some of these projects are “BSCIC Printing Industrial Park”, “Expansion and development of silk
cultivation”, “Establishment of 40 technical training centres” etc.
➢ A similar trend could be observed for continuing projects as well
➢ Adequate allocation and timely implementation need to be ensured
1200 0.40
70% 0.37
0.40 0.34 0.33
60% 1000
0.28 0.27 0.27
0.30 0.25 0.25 0.26
50% 800 %
0.20 0.19
40% 600 0.20 0.15
30%
400 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06
20% 0.10
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03
10% 200
0% 0 0.00
RBFY21
AFY12
AFY10
AFY15
AFY16
AFY18
AFY19
AFY13
AFY9
AFY11
AFY20
AFY14
BFY22
AFY17
AFY13
AFY14
AFY10
AFY11
AFY12
AFY15
AFY16
AFY17
AFY18
AFY19
RBFY21
BFY22
AFY20
AFY9
Non-development Development Total allocation Total allocation as % of total budget Total allocation as % of GDP
105
104
102
102
102
100
100
101
101
crore).
99
99
99
98
98
98
96
96
96
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
94
93
93
90
100
88
84
❑ As a share of total budget, education budget
76
80
Percentage
decreased from 14% in FY10 to 11.92% in
60
FY22.
❑ Education budget as a share of GDP remained 40
❑ This is also significantly lower than the Non-development Expenditure Development Expenditure Total Expenditure
respective 8th FYP targets of 3.5% in 2025 and
UNESCO targets (of 4-6%). Sectoral Allocation as % of Total Budget & GDP
❑ 8th FYP targets to increase education budget as a 16
1.95 2.01 2.18 2.19 2.14 2.08 2.5
share of GDP to 4% in 2031 and 5% in 2041. 14
1.78 1.73 1.87 1.85
1.92 1.95 1.87
2
12
However, at the current rate education budget as Percentage
Percentage
10
a share of GDP may reach up to 2.15% in 2025, 1.5
8
14.29
14.07
14.14
13.64
2.26% in 2031 and 2.43% in 2041.
12.28
11.92
11.68
11.65
11.62
1
10.96
11.21
11.6
10.44
6
❑ Budget utilisation has been decreasing over the 4
0.5
years, specially for the development expenditure, 2
except for FY19 (actual) which was 95%. 0 0
AFY10
AFY11
AFY15
RBFY21
AFY12
AFY13
AFY14
AFY16
AFY17
AFY18
AFY19
FY22
AFY20
Operating budget accounted for major portion of
allocation each year.
Total Expenditure as a % of Budget Total Expenditure as a % of GDP
BDT in crore
50000 26 26 25 26
during recent fiscal years. This trend is similar both for 24
Percentage
23 23 30
40000
revised and proposed budget allocation. 30000 20
20000
❑ However, we observe that the utilization rate of budget 10
10000
decreased drastically to 88.17% in FY20 from 95.12% in 0 0
FY19.
❑ There was a jump in growth in terms of the allocation of
education budget in FY17 (8.18% in FY16 to 55% in FY17), Non-development expenditure
which then observed a sharp decline in the following FY. Development expenditure
BDT 402.2 in FY25 from BDT 159.4 billion in FY21. Development expenditure as % of total expenditure
BDT in crore
24 30
Percentage
80000 98 101 102 98 101 120 50000
95 97 97 92 95 25
70000 88 100 40000
20
60000 30000 15
BDT in Crore
80
Percentage
50000 20000 10
60 10000 5
40000
40 0 0
30000
20000 20
10000 0
Non-development expenditure
0 -20
FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 Development expenditure
❑ Primary Education: There is an insignificant rise in the budget of FY22 for the Ministry of
Primary & Mass Education given the COVID-19 crises.
❑ Moreover, there is a decrease in development expenditure as a share of total expenditure to
30% in FY22 from 38% in FY21.
❑ Secondary & Higher Education: The secondary & higher education division experienced a
gradual increase in allocation from BDT 8,712 crore in AFY10 to BDT 36,486 crore in FY 22.
❑ However, the secondary & higher education division experienced a declining rate of budget
utilisation from 95% in FY19 to 91% in FY20 indicating the scope for more development in
higher education sector.
❑ This reduced expenditure further raises the concern of addressing the issues such as low
quality teachers, poor infrastructural management, chances of dropouts etc.
Development and Non-development Expenditure
FY22
FY20
FY18
FY16
FY14
FY12
FY10
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000
❑ In the FY 2022 Budget, the Energy and Power sector has allocation of Energy and Power Sector
Tk. 27,484 crore which is mostly earmarked for ADP (Tk 27,367 crore) 30000
26049 26,154 26,758 27,484
27367
23,777
25000 26640
➢ Allocation for Energy and Mineral Division: Tk 2086 Crore (Op: 23684
15000
➢ Allocation for Power Division: Tk 25398 Crore (Op: Tk.49 Cr., Dev:
Tk.25349 Cr.) 10000
5000
➢ Allocation has increased by 15.6% in BFY2022 compared to that in 105 118 93 117
RFY2021 (Tk 23,777 crore) – almost at the same rate in Power 0
RFY 2020 BFY 2021 RFY 2021 BFY 2022
Division and Energy and Mineral Division
Operating Development Total
➢ The sectoral allocation for the Energy and Power has reduced to
some extent in FY 2022 ( from 4.71% in FY 2021 to 4.55% in
% change in FY 21 and FY 22
FY2022)
➢ The sector has a good track record in ADP implementation –
average rate of implementation in FY2021 is 59.4% (July-April
2021) - higher than the overall average
Non Development
Non Development
Total
Total
Development
Development
❑ Against the reduction in development and non-development budgets
in FY2021 both for the Power and Energy Divisions, all the segments
received higher amount of budget allocation in FY2022
❑ The power sector is struggling with over-capacity: 48.4% of Distribution of ADP allocation
generation capacity remained unutilized on 2 June, 2021 of FY 22 in Power Sector
(BPDB) Sub-sector Allocated % of total
❑ As a result, the BPDB needs significant amount of subsidy ADP (Lakh) ADP
to meet its cost. Generation Tk 28325.4 62.03%
❑ In FY22 the subsidy provided for energy and power sector Transmission Tk 8779.3 19.23%
will remain same at Tk 9,ooo crore like FY21. The subsidy
Distribution Tk 8,558.6 18.74%
will likely mean that BPDB will not need to seek
Total Tk 45663.3 100%
permission from BERC to raise the power tariff which is
not desirable during the crisis period
➢ Despite of being burdened with overcapacity, power sector is continuing to give priority to generation
related projects under ADP
▪ 62% of the total ADP allocation of power sector is provided for generation
▪ Power sector should shift its allocation from generation towards more on transmission and distribution
❑ FY 2022 budget did not give due importance towards generation of renewable energy
❑ At present only 722 MW of electricity is being generated from renewable energy which is only 2.86% of
the total generation capacity whereas PSMP 2016 had aimed to generate 10% of the total capacity from
RE within 2025
❑ Despite the political commitment for phasing out from fossil-fuel based power generation towards clean-
energy based power generation
➢ FY 22 budget has failed to rise to the commitment
❑ CPD will separately present its reaction on the budget for the power sector in detail later
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 94
VII. OTHER SELECTED
ISSUES
❑ CPD appreciate the role of local government institutions for addressing the challenges at grass roots level
in view of addressing rising poverty and employment
➢ The poverty rate increased from 21.8% in 2019 to 30% amid the pandemic. Almost 16.38 million
people became new poor. (CPD, BILS, 2021)
❑ The proposed allocation for LGRD in BFY’22 is Tk 42,193 crore, which is 0.55% less than that of RBFY’21
➢ LGRD accounts for 7.0% of the total budget, similar to that of BFY’21
➢ Given the demand for rising engagement of the public sector at the local level in view of the COVID
pandemic, reduction of budget allocation will undermine COVID related effects and measures
❑ About 93% of LGRD’s total allocation will be utilized by the LGD
➢ This is a rise of 0.58% in BFY’22 as compared to RFY’21
❑ The other two divisions, RGCD and MCHTA, will see a decline by their budgets by 19.9% and 0.25%,
respectively
➢ This will likely have an adverse impact on people living outside the urban areas such as those living in
rural areas marginal and lagging regions
% CHANGES IN ALLOCATION
LGRD ALLOCATION (TK IN CRORE)
11.61
10.46
7.77
42426
6.74
42193
5.25
4.80
4.41
2.20
0.58
0.36
40474
39573
-0.08361204
-0.25
-0.31
-0.81
-2.14
-3.40
37886
Change (%) in FY 21
-19.94
Change (%) in FY 22
BFY'20 RFY'20 BFY'21 RFY'21 BFY'22 DEV NON- TOTAL DEV -30.21 NON- TOTAL DEV NON- TOTAL
DEV DEV DEV
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 97
MCHTA RCCD LGD
Local Government
➢ The status of the continuing projects is not satisfactory. Funds need to be increased to
complete the projects within the stipulated timeline
❑ Some employment generating and infrastructure development projects did not get ADP allocation
in FY22
➢ Rural infrastructure development project in haor areas and Countrywide bridge construction
in rural areas
➢ Allocation should be made for these projects
❑ RGCD is implementing project titled “Poverty reduction of marginalized population and ensuring
employment of the extreme poor in northern areas/production and marketing of nutritious high
value cereals” with a budget of Tk.156.3 crore
➢ The project will benefit 0.89 lakh people
❑ LGD should undertake a project in FY2022 similar to the one which is going to be completed by
June, 2021
➢ For distributing free masks, hand sanitizers and soaps to distribute among the common people
and students in hats, bazaars, bus stations, schools and colleges in the municipal areas
❑ GoB initiated a new rural development project, “My Village-My Town”, for 15 pilot villages all
over the country. However, this covers only 0.01% (Total 87,310 villages, BBS 2011) of the villages
in the country
➢ The GoB should complete the pilot project and go for expanded coverage and scaling up, with
more allocation, as early as possible
➢ CPD proposed initiating such project in order to enhance employment in rural areas through
infrastructure development
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 100
Gender
Percentage
Tk. 106,874 crore in FY22 which is 150 40%
highest in the past 12 years. 30%
100
▪ Actual expenditure for the 20%
previous year is unavailable; lack 50
10%
of transparency.
0 0%
➢ Gender budget for FY22 accounts
for nearly 5.71% of total GDP.
▪ It is slightly higher than RBFY21 Non-development expenditure
(5.64%) Development expenditure
Total expenditure
Development expenditure as % of total expenditure
➢ The gender budget allocated for the Ministry of Women and Children Affairs is Tk.
3,396 crore for FY22 which is around 81% of the total budget for the ministry.
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22
102
Gender
Impact of COVID-19 on
Gender Projects and Programs in FY 2020-21
women
• 67 One-Stop Crisis Centers for women and children
victims of violence in divisional districts and medical
college hospitals in 6 districts have been set up - 47 in
district sadar hospitals and 20 in upazila health
complexes.
Increase in rape, domestic violence
• Instant support is being provided through the mobile
by partners and violence against
app 'Joy’.
women and girls in general
• Prevention of Violence against Women and Children
(Amendment) Act 2020 has been enacted.
• Allocation for “Multi-sectoral Program to prevent
Violence Against Women” decreased from BDT 27.40
crore in RBFY21 to BDT 17.56 crore in BFY22.
Increase in burden of unpaid care • The Child Daycare Act 2021 has been drafted and awaits
and domestic work enactment.
Operational and Development Expenditure as % of Climate Relevant Allocation as Share of Total Budget
Total Expenditure and GDP (%)
56
60 64 11.00
53
52
52
50
50
51
49
48
63
48
47
50
44
43
62
10.50
40 61
Percentage
60
budget
30 59 10.00
GDP
58
20 57
9.50
10 56
55
0 54 9.00
RBFY16 RBFY17 RBFY18 RBFY19 RBFY20 RBFY21 BFY22 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22
The world community is working towards Green Recovery from the pandemic. How
Bangladesh will implement Green Recovery is not clear.
total allocation for the sector in FY22 Ministry of Home Affairs 26890
➢ From 91.5% in FY17 to 92.3% in FY22
Supreme Court 225
➢ Budget of MoHA is largely dominated by
operating expenditure Law and Justice Division 1813
➢ The macroeconomic framework of the budget is far from reality. It takes the
revised budget targets, which are unlikely to be achieved, as reference
points and assumes that most of the macroeconomic correlates would
perform better than the targets set in 8FYP
➢ Though there is a section on reforms in the budget document, it only refers
to what have been done so far. It does not spell out what concrete reforms
would be undertaken to improve the efficiency in the economy. The
unfinished reform agenda in many areas such as tax, customs duty,
banking sector, health sector and social sector has constrained the
achievement of budgetary targets and its ability to cope with adverse
impacts of the pandemic
➢ Given the magnitude of negative impact on various sectors due to COVID-
19, CPD had emphasised on the need for medium term strategy for
economic recovery. The budget for FY22 has no indication on this. This
puts under risk the fulfillment of the promise made in the 50th budget to
move towards a resilient future by giving priority to lives and livelihoods
CPD (2021): An Analysis of the National Budget for FY2021-22 115
Stay Well, Stay Safe