Tamil Nadu sees drop in microfinance gross loan portfolio in fiscal 2025
According to data from CRIF, the GLP in Tamil Nadu declined by 19.6% to ₹46,800 crore in fiscal 2025, from ₹58,200 crore in fiscal 2024. On a quarter-on-quarter basis, the GLP fell 7.7%, from ₹50,700 crore.
Tamil Nadu (-7.7%, quarter-on-quarter basis), followed by Karnataka (-7.0% quarter-on-quarter basis), recorded steep GLP decline. State-level data revealed notable contractions in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka portfolios, influenced by anticipated ordinances and increased regulatory intervention on collection practices, the credit bureau said.
Overall, the microfinance industry's GLP stood at ₹381.2K crore as of March 2025, marking a 2.6% decline quarter-on-quarter and a 13.9% drop year-on-year. The Tamil Nadu government has proposed to come out with a legislation aimed at fair collection and recovery practices, signalling further regulatory shifts in the sector, the further impact of which is yet to be seen, CRIF said.
In April 2025, the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly passed the Tamil Nadu Money Lending (Prevention of Coercive Actions) Act, 2025. The Bill aims to protect and relieve the economically weaker and vulnerable groups and individuals from the undue hardship of coercive means of recovery of any loans by money-lending lending entities, such as microfinance institutions, money-lending agencies, and money-lending organisations.
'The fall in the gross loan portfolio was in line with the national trend. There were numerous factors involved, including the elections, impact of heatwaves and cyclones in some parts, and also over-leverage by borrowers in certain pockets affecting recoveries,' according to Jiji Mammen, executive director and CEO of Sa-Dhan, a self-regulatory organisation for the microfinance industry. The proposed Tamil Nadu legislation clearly excludes regulated entities.
He claimed that with the passing of the Bill, some people in certain pockets have tried to take advantage of it by refusing to pay; however, overall, business has remained normal.
Sa-Dhan has made a representation to the State government regarding the inclusion of all types of lenders under the 'coercive' clause in the Bill, which can get misrepresented. 'We have sought suitable amendments when the rules are framed to exclude regulated entities from the coercive clause,' he added.
Aditi Singh, chief strategy officer, Satin Credit Network Ltd, which has a portfolio of ₹227 crore in Tamil Nadu, said during the initial discussions around the Bill, 'we took a cautious approach by slowing down disbursements in Tamil Nadu to evaluate the on-ground situation. However, after assessing the situation and seeing there is normalcy at the ground level, we gradually resumed business operations.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Deccan Herald
3 hours ago
- Deccan Herald
Violated the building plan? Engineer, architect to incur penalty as per provisions of new Bill
The Karnataka Decriminalisation (Amendment of Provisions) Bill is being piloted by Industries Minister MB Patil.
Mint
9 hours ago
- Mint
Resist American pressure but reform Indian agriculture
The partnership between the world's two largest democracies has repeatedly stumbled on one issue: agricultural market access. Trump wants India to open its doors to American farm products—from dairy, poultry and maize to apples, almonds and genetically modified crops. India resisted, wary of destabilizing its rural economy. This defiance is economically prudent and socially necessary. But shielding farmers from unfair competition is only half the battle. Without structural reform, Indian agriculture will remain inefficient and fiscally draining, slowing and even strangling our economic transformation. The US spends billions annually to prop up its agricultural sector through direct payments, crop insurance subsidies and price supports. Its 2018 Farm Bill alone authorized $867 billion over 10 years. These subsidies allow American producers to sell abroad at artificially low prices without fear of market volatility, the same practice that the US accuses China of. Also Read: Indian agriculture and dairy sectors are strong enough to withstand US tariff vagaries If India allowed unrestricted imports of such products, domestic prices for staples like dairy, poultry and maize might collapse. A 10-15% drop in farm-gate prices could wipe out the livelihood overnight of millions of small farmers—most with less than two hectares of farmland. The ripple effects would hit rural incomes, weaken demand, disrupt rural credit and threaten jobs in sectors that range from logistics and cold storage to food processing and retail. Our strategic autonomy is also at stake. A nation dependent on imported staples will be vulnerable to price shocks, export bans and geopolitical pressure. The covid pandemic and the Ukraine war showed how volatile global commodity markets can become. Maintaining the domestic production of essential foods is not just economic prudence—it is national security. Yet, barring unfair imports must not mean defending the status quo. Agriculture employs 42% of India's workforce but contributes only 18% of GDP. The average agricultural worker produces less than one-sixth the output of a worker in industry or services. We must shift a significant share of our workforce to other sectors. Also Read: Sow wisely: India can reap a lot more from its agricultural sector Politically-driven subsidies sustain this inefficiency. India spends over ₹4.5 trillion annually on farm-related subsidies—on fertilizers, power, irrigation and procurement under the Minimum Support Price (MSP) system. The rural employment guarantee scheme adds to the bill. While often justified as poverty relief, these subsidies distort cropping patterns, harm the environment and crowd out investment in infrastructure and research. The MSP system entrenches overproduction of wheat and rice, depleting groundwater and making India reliant on costly imports of pulses and edible oils. Fertilizer subsidies encourage overuse, harming soil health and straining India's finances. Power subsidies promote inefficient irrigation and groundwater depletion. Subsidies rarely reach the poorest farmers in full, yet take a large share of agricultural budgets. Farm fragmentation compounds the problem. With farms shrinking below two hectares, mechanization and productivity gains are difficult. Land-leasing restrictions in many states block consolidation and efficient land use. Also Read: In charts: Why agriculture and dairy are sticking points in the India-US trade deal A competitive agricultural sector would thrive in an open market system by opting to compete, not hide behind tariff barriers or subsidies. To safeguard farmers, India must embrace reforms. These include: Adjusting MSP procurement to promote high-value commodities, easing water stress and improving nutrition; introducing enabling policies to encourage consolidation, mechanization and economies of scale; shifting from input subsidies to targeted investment in irrigation, cold storage and rural roads; building farm-to-market linkages and export-oriented clusters to raise incomes and create rural jobs; and expanding water-efficient irrigation, drought-resistant crops and regenerative agriculture practices. These reforms would enable Indian agriculture to compete on quality, cost and reliability, thus making market opening less contentious. India should not reject all agricultural imports, but what we import must be on our terms—under a calibrated tariff and quota system that protects vulnerable sectors while allowing targeted liberalization. Also Read: US puts hard terms on table, presents a take-it-or-leave-it offer; demands access to agriculture, dairy, pharma Any farm sector negotiations with the US should rest on three principles: A level-playing field: Imports from countries with high subsidies must face countervailing duties or quotas. Phased liberalization: Market opening should be gradual to allow farmers to adapt. Mutual benefit: Agricultural concessions must be balanced with gains in services or other competitive sectors. It's a reasonable stance. The US maintains tariff and non-tariff barriers while pressing others to open markets. Free trade can't mean a free rein for subsidized dumping. In trade policy, demands are often treated as bargaining chips. But in agriculture, the stakes go beyond trade balances—they involve the livelihoods of hundreds of millions, rural stability and food security. India must protect farmers from subsidized US competition, but it must not protect inefficiency. We need a defensive trade policy paired with aggressive reforms. India must recognize that perpetual state subsidies are as harmful as US tariffs. Both need to go. The author is a strategy and public policy professional. His X handle is @prasannakarthik
New Indian Express
9 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Shell out over 21% tax on luxury vehicles as Telangana raises life tax on all types
HYDERABAD: The state government on Wednesday issued a GO raising life tax rates on all types of vehicles (transport and non-transport). From August 14 onward, the new rates at the time of registration range from 9% for two-wheelers costing below Rs 50,000 to 18% for those above Rs 2 lakh. Tax rates on older two-wheelers will reduce progressively with age, starting from 8% for those less than two years old to 1% for vehicles more than 11 years old in the lowest cost bracket. For non-transport cars, jeeps, omnibuses with up to 10 seats, and certain motor cabs, the tax at the time of registration will be 13% for vehicles costing below Rs 5 lakh and 21% for those above Rs 50 lakh. Rates for already registered vehicles decline with age but remain higher for more expensive vehicles. A separate slab has been introduced for non-transport vehicles owned by companies, institutions, and societies, as well as for second or subsequent personal vehicles. Here, registration-time taxes start at 15% for vehicles below Rs 5 lakh and go up to 25% for those above Rs 50 lakh, with an additional 2% applied to rates in the Third and Sixth Schedules. The GO claims that this was being done under the Telangana Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963, with the aim of improving road infrastructure, enhance road safety and strengthen enforcement. 'The amendment replaces the existing Third, Sixth and Seventh Schedules of the Act, increasing tax rates for various categories based on the cost and age of the vehicle,' the GO says.
