Fintech revolution 2.0 is expected to unfold in India in the next 10 years: MobiKwik's Upasana Taku
fintech revolution 2.0
in India over the next 10 years, said
Upasana Taku
, Co-founder of fintech major
MobiKwik
. India is a very large market that offers significant growth opportunities over the next 10-20 years, Taku said. 'Less than half of the population have access to
digital payments
, and fewer than 10% have access to credit.'
#Pahalgam Terrorist Attack
Inside Operation Tupac: Pakistan's secret project to burn Kashmir
Who is Asim Munir, the Zia-style general shaping Pakistan's faith-driven military revival
'Looking for partners, not preachers': India's strong message for EU amid LoC tensions
Addressing these gaps will require more than simply reaching out to the existing banks, financial institutions, and fintech companies, she said. 'It is not just going to the current crop of banks, financial institutions and fintech companies that will address the gaps. A whole next level of companies is getting formed now as we speak,' she said while talking to
ET Digital
on the sidelines of the 14th edition of TiE Delhi-NCR's India Internet Day 2025.
Founded in 2009, MobiKwik offers a range of services, including payments, digital credit, investments, and insurance products, catering to 172 million users and more than 4.5 million merchants.
Digital payments have now reached approximately 500 million Indians. Taku, citing industry reports, expects this number to double to at least 850-900 million who will be transacting digitally using apps. 'But if you see in financial services or in fintech, payments is the least common denominator. Everything else is lesser in terms of inclusion. Credit has reached less than 100 million, and the numbers are even smaller for insurance and wealth,' she added.
Taku emphasised that more efforts are required in this space. 'It needs to be seen if, for example, a woman sitting in Jhajjar or a small town in the northeast has access to a bank account, digital payments, credit or insurance. Currently, that is not the case.'
Live Events
Many small businesses don't have access to capital necessary for growth, she said. 'Whether they are online MSMEs or physical stores, life is not so easy for them. Traditional banks can only serve them once they reach a certain scale. But until they reach that scale, it's hard for them,' she explained.
'If it is a physical store, we give them a QR code. If they want to collect payments via cards, then we also give them an EDC, which is a card machine. Firstly, we enable them to collect payments. Once we have enough insight into their collection data, whether it is a physical
MSME
or an online-based MSME, then we can also start offering them merchant loans or working capital loans,' she said, adding that working capital loans for MSMEs offer an extremely large growth opportunity. 'India is a country of more self-employed people than salaried. And the self-employed are these MSMEs.'
Shravan Shetty, MD of
Primus Partners India
, concurred, noting that fintech solutions have increased the efficiency of MSMEs, with digital payments playing a critical role in enhancing working capital. 'They provide quick access to short-term capital, helping them grow. Besides this, innovative financial products help MSMEs better manage their businesses in terms of lending, insurance, and capital management,' he highlighted.
Shetty said the fintech sector has been critical in leveraging the digital public infrastructure to come up with innovative solutions, which have helped increase digital penetration.
At the Global Fintech Fest 2024 in Mumbai, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had said that 'India's
UPI
has become a major example of fintech in the world' and that it had enabled 27X7 banking services in every village and city in all weather conditions. Noting the changes brought in by the fintech industry in the country, the Prime Minister also said that it has not only transformed the technological front of Bharat but also made a widespread social impact by closing the gap between urban and rural India together.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
Shaadi.com founder Anupam Mittal slams US over visa delays, says Indians are powering its economy; Hails India-UK trade deal
Synopsis Anupam Mittal, the founder of has criticised the United States for its sluggish progress on trade and visa matters, in contrast to the UK's more welcoming stance. He highlighted the significant contributions of Indians to the US economy, especially in the fields of technology and finance, while urging India to assert its economic influence and demand fair treatment. Anupam Mittal (Image: Linkedin) founder Anupam Mittal didn't hold back as he criticised the United States for dragging its feet on trade and visa matters. In a viral post on LinkedIn, Mittal praised India's new trade agreement with the UK, calling it a major shift in global power dynamics.'After years of colonial hangover, it's finally India calling the shots,' he wrote, taking a clear dig at the US for failing to keep the UK seems to be rolling out the red carpet, Mittal said the US is still 'playing hardball.' He pointed out the irony, Indians are no longer just exporting goods, they're actually powering the American economy.'Tech? Mostly run by Indians. Wall Street? Flooded with Indian-origin fund managers. Even the new CEO of P&G is Indian. And most VC-backed startups? You'll likely find at least one Indian founder at the table,' he said. Mittal noted that while Indians are making waves across industries, the US hasn't updated its policies to reflect this change. 'What we're seeing is more posturing than partnership,' he wrote. He even suggested that India should no longer accept such behaviour quietly. 'India needs to flex its diplomatic and economic muscle. Time for a counter ultimatum, play fair or we bring back our Kohinoors,' he said cheekily, along with an AI image of himself on a billboard in Times post struck a chord online, with many agreeing that India is no longer waiting for a seat at the table. One user wrote, 'We're redesigning the table. Talent, tech, leadership, that's where India wins.'Another added, 'The rise of Indian talent is clear as day. What's missing is policy support that respects this rise.'
News18
2 hours ago
- News18
Has India Stopped Buying Oil From Russia As Trump Claimed? What We Know So Far
Last Updated: The US has imposed 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods entering America, along with a separate penalty related to purchases of Russian oil and military hardware United States President Donald Trump on Saturday claimed in Washington that India is no longer going to be buying oil from Russia. 'I understand that India is no longer going to be buying oil from Russia. That's what I heard, I don't know if that's right or not. That is a good step. We will see what happens," he said. Days ago, the US imposed 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods entering America, along with a separate penalty related to purchases of Russian oil and military hardware. Trump also warned that countries buying Russian oil could face tariffs as high as 100 per cent if Moscow does not agree to a peace deal by mid-August. In a strongly worded post on Truth Social, Trump lashed out at India's trade practices and its reliance on Russian defence and energy sectors. 'Also, they have always bought a vast majority of their military equipment from Russia, and are Russia's largest buyer of energy, along with China, at a time when everyone wants Russia to stop the killing in Ukraine — All things not good!" How much oil does India buy from Russia? As of 2025, Russia remains India's largest supplier of crude oil, accounting for approximately 35–36% of India's total oil imports. Official figures indicate that India imported an average of 1.75–1.76 million barrels per day (mb/d) of Russian crude during the first half of 2025 and the entire fiscal year 2024–25. In May 2025, Russian oil imports peaked at around 1.96 mb/d, the highest monthly level in nearly a year. Is buying Russian oil illegal? Sources told ANI that Russian oil has never been sanctioned, instead, it was subjected to a G7/EU price-cap mechanism designed to limit revenue while ensuring global supplies continued to flow. India acted as a responsible global energy actor, ensuring markets remain liquid and prices stable. India's purchases have remained fully legitimate and within the framework of international norms. 'Had India not absorbed discounted Russian crude combined with OPEC+ production cuts of 5.86 mb/d, global oil prices could have surged well beyond the March 2022 peak of US$137/bbl, intensifying inflationary pressures worldwide," sources told ANI. It is also pertinent to note that Russian oil has never been sanctioned and it is still not sanctioned by either US or EU. Indian OMCs have not been buying Iranian or Venezuelan crude which is actually sanctioned by the US. OMCs have always complied with the price cap of $60 for Russian oil recommended by the US. Recently EU has recommended a price cap of $47.6 dollars for Russian crude which will be enforced from September. Commenting on European Union's import of Russian origin liquified natural gas (LNG) during this period, sources added, 'EU was the largest importer of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) during this period, buying 51% of Russia's LNG exports, followed by China at 21% and Japan at 18%. Similarly, for pipeline gas, the EU remained the top buyer with a 37% share, followed by China (30%) and Turkey (27%)." Is India buying oil from Russia or not? top videos View all With Reuters, ANI Inputs About the Author News Desk The News Desk is a team of passionate editors and writers who break and analyse the most important events unfolding in India and abroad. From live updates to exclusive reports to in-depth explainers, the Desk More Get Latest Updates on Movies, Breaking News On India, World, Live Cricket Scores, And Stock Market Updates. Also Download the News18 App to stay updated! view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: August 03, 2025, 18:21 IST News explainers Has India Stopped Buying Oil From Russia As Trump Claimed? What We Know So Far Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Mint
3 hours ago
- Mint
The EU needn't have yielded to the US on a trade deal
When US President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen shook hands at Trump's Scottish golf resort last week, they weren't just announcing a new trade deal—they were formalizing Europe's economic and ideological surrender. By agreeing to 15% tariffs on most exports to the US, the EU has capitulated to Trump's zero-sum world-view. In doing so, it has abandoned the principles of multilateralism that have long guided global trade. The economic consequences will likely be immediate and severe. European exporters now face tariffs nearly ten times higher than the previous trade-weighted average of 1.6%. Volkswagen alone has reported a $1.5 billion hit due to higher US tariffs. Also Read: Global shake-up: America's retreat spells a big opportunity for Europe But this is just part of the problem. The real damage is what the EU agreed to pay for the 'privilege' of maintaining access to the US market: buying $750 billion worth of US energy over three years and investing another $600 billion in the US economy. These staggering sums will inevitably divert resources from European development and innovation while legitimizing bilateral coercion over the multilateral rules-based World Trade Organization system. As critics have rightly pointed out, this massive outflow comes directly at the expense of domestic investment. What makes the EU's surrender especially troubling is how unnecessary it was. As America's largest economic partner, the EU has considerable leverage. The bloc's $270 billion services deficit with the US offered clear avenues for retaliation, from digital taxes to restrictions on American tech giants. Also Read: The IMF's 'World Economic Outlook' is too coy for a Trump-shaken world Weeks earlier, anticipating a stalemate, European policymakers had prepared counter-tariffs targeting $107 billion worth of American goods. But the EU had far more potent weapons at its disposal. Its Anti-Coercion Instrument, for example, could have barred US companies from government contracts, revoked intellectual-property rights and imposed broader trade restrictions. Yet, national leaders, fearing Trump's retaliation and under pressure from domestic industries eager to maintain access to the US market, refused to authorize Von der Leyen to use any of these tools, forcing her to negotiate from a position of weakness. The contrast with other US trading partners could not be starker. When the UK secured a 10% tariff rate from Trump in May, European leaders expressed concern about accepting similar terms. Now, they hail 15% tariffs on EU exports as a diplomatic breakthrough. Britain, acting alone, negotiated better terms than the EU as a whole. Also Read: How Trump got the upper hand over the EU on tariffs This failure exposes the fundamental weakness of European governance. Lacking a true EU-wide governance system, the bloc remains incapable of translating competing national agendas into a unified position. With Von der Leyen hamstrung by member states prioritizing narrow domestic interests over European cohesion, the result was a deal that pleases no one but Trump and locks Europe into a state of structured dependency. The EU's failure to push back against Trump is especially troubling given its stated goal of achieving strategic autonomy. Some may argue that the deal—technically not a formal trade agreement, but rather a set of statements outlining an ongoing negotiation process—buys time. By appeasing Trump, the argument goes, the Commission has maintained transatlantic ties while creating space for future carve-outs. But if this were truly a time-buying strategy, we would expect the EU to take concrete steps to advance strategic autonomy: boosting defence spending, accelerating supply-chain diversification and investing in retaliatory capabilities. Instead, after years of pledging to reduce reliance on foreign powers, EU leaders chose to replace Russian energy imports with American supplies and commit to massive purchases of US military equipment. Also Read: Mint Explainer: Why does the EU keep sanctioning Russia? Europe's subordination both reflects and reinforces the continent's dependence on US power. It has created a structural imbalance that extends across defence, trade and energy, leaving Europe in a state of permanent vassalization. Trump's ability to extract sweeping economic concessions and defence-spending commitments shows how effectively the US can weaponize Europe's security anxieties to pursue broader geopolitical objectives. The $600 billion investment pledge, much of it earmarked for military-equipment purchases, forces Europe to subsidize American defence contractors while undermining its own industrial base. By giving in to Trump's demands, the EU validated Trump's transactional approach, emboldening not only future American administrations but also other global powers eager to turn trade into an instrument of geopolitical coercion. While the immediate crisis may have passed, the long-term damage to EU credibility and autonomy will be long-lasting. The widespread perception that Europe surrenders without resistance will undoubtedly invite further challenges to European interests. Until European leaders are able to break the cycle of dependency by empowering EU institutions to act decisively against external coercion, these humiliating capitulations will only multiply, reducing the continent to a prosperous yet powerless appendage of the US empire. ©2025/Project Syndicate The author is professor of European Union Law at HEC Paris and visiting professor at the College of Europe in Bruges and Natolin.
