Latest news with #NilanjanBanik
Time of India
29-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
India's golden paradox: High demand, low supply, and the path to self-sufficiency
Nilanjan Banik is a professor at Bennett University's School of Business. His work focuses on the application of time series econometrics in issues relating to international trade, market structure and development economics. He is also interested in the "rules" part of WTO; especially examining non-tariff barriers aspects of GATT/WTO agreements. He has project experience with Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australia; Laffer Associates, USA; KPMG, India; Ministry of Commerce, Government of India; Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS), New Delhi; Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), New Delhi; Center for Economic Policy Research, UK; Asian Development Bank Institute, Tokyo; Asian Development Bank, Manila; South Asia Network of Economic Research Institutes (SANEI); UNESCAP-ARTNeT, Thailand, Australia India Institute, University of Melbourne; and World Trade Organization, Geneva. LESS ... MORE For Indians the allure of the yellow metal both for its ornamental value and as an asset class, is as old as the country's civilisation dating back to the times of Indus Valley Civilisation or perhaps, even earlier. While that attraction for gold has not diminished over centuries, its supply side has failed to keep pace, resulting in the country's overwhelming dependence on imports. This mismatch of growing demand and reducing supply has become a major burden on the economy with its adverse impact on the balance of trade and a worsening current account deficit. To put things in perspective, India's gold import in 2024 surged to 802.8 tonnes—a 5% increase over the761 tonnes in 2023—with the import bill ballooning to $48.5 billion. In contrast, India's production was only around 1.6 tonnes of gold, meeting only 0.2% of its total demand. This great divide cuts into the country's precious foreign exchange reserves, makes the economy vulnerable to global price shocks and puts pressure on its exchange rate. Moreover, levying higher import duties has only fuelled greater smuggling thereby undermining formal trade and tax revenues losses. No lack of reserves The recent gold reserves data makes the paradox even more evident. In December 2024, the country's gold reserves increased to 876.20 tonnes, valued at $66.2 billion. This significant increase of 72.6 tonnes, the highest since 2021, is only the second highest since 2017, has put India's gold reserves among the top 10 countries globally, says Trading Economics, a mobile app that provides economic data of 196 countries. Similarly, the World Gold Council estimates that India has 2,191.53 metric tons of gold ore resources, but only a fraction of these resources have been explored and exploited. Hence, there is a huge potential that remains to be tapped. While the Hutti Gold Mine, located in the Raichur district of Karnataka, producing about 1.8 tonnes of gold per year, is the only current producer, there have been significant new discoveries in recent years. Some of these include the Sonakhan prospect in Chhattisgarh held by Vedanta, the Gurahar Pahar prospect of the Mahakoshal greenstone belt or the giant in Rajashtan – Bhukia-Jagpura gold mine with reserves estimated in excess of 100 tonnes. Then in the South, there is the newly- discovered Ganajur gold mine in Karnataka which Deccan Gold Mines Ltd has completed an international feasibility study and the Jonnagiri Gold Mine in Andhra Pradesh developed by Geomysore Services (India) Private Limited which is slated for production by the end of 2025 and will be India's first private gold mine since Independence. Despite significant geological potential and availability of sizable discoveries, India's gold mining industry has not reached its true potential due to various factors, including lack of exploration, frequent changes in the policy and absence of private exploration/mining companies who have the expertise and risk capital to develop these projects. Though the government brought in the Composite License (CL), not many international companies with the required experience have availed this opportunity. As a result, only a handful of companies eg., Vedanta, Deccan Gold Mines Limited, Geomysore Services (India) Private Limited etc are actively carrying out exploration in India. This is a far cry from Australia, Canada and many African countries where 100s of exploration companies spend millions of dollars developing this industry. The way ahead The Indian Gold Mining Policy requires regulatory reforms to enhance self-sufficiency by creating a more viable and attractive environment for exploration and mining operations. To overcome impediments, the government should prioritize ease of doing business through single-window clearances, offering attractive incentives and tax concessions to draw experienced private companies into the sector. Policy reforms must support the security of tenure and appropriately reward the high-risk capital expenditure associated with exploration activities. Streamlining the regulatory landscape, reducing bureaucratic delays, and ensuring transparent and predictable processes will encourage investment, boost domestic gold production, and ultimately decrease India's reliance on gold imports. For India, it is a time to take some robust measures because the cost of runaway gold imports is extremely high, impacting India's overall economy A slew of market-oriented reforms, mining reforms and global recognition of the refining sector can go a long way is pushing greater Atmanirbhartha, job creation, and overall development of the economy. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
Arabian Post
17-05-2025
- Business
- Arabian Post
From Fire To Fizzle – President Trump Has To Take A U-Turn In His Global Tariff War
By Dr. Nilanjan Banik Renowned Nobel laureate economist Robert Solow was once asked if having a trade deficit is bad for any economy. He answered by saying he would always have a trade deficit with his barber and would always run a trade surplus with his students. Such is the nature of the game in the realm of economic transactions. Some countries are always better at producing certain goods and services, which they export, and they gain by importing those they are not as good at producing. Arguing that the US should impose equal reciprocal tariffs is fundamentally flawed. It contradicts the principle of comparative advantage – the very foundation of international trade since the beginning of modern civilization. If the US were to implement reciprocity in tariffs, it risked a short-term recession and, potentially, a trajectory resembling that of Argentina – a once economic miracle at the beginning of the 20th century that that ultimately declined as a result of protectionist measures. Beginning in the 1930s, Argentina imposed restrictions on labor immigration and sharply increased tariffs, resulting in long-term consequences that have contributed to its current status as a struggling and underperforming economy. If history and economic policies are any indication, then Trump had to back down. It is not surprising that on May 12, 2025, the US and China agreed to a significant 90-day suspension of tariffs, with both nations committing to reduce duties on each other's goods. The US tariffs on Chinese imports will decrease from 145% to 30%, while China's tariffs on US products will drop from 125% to 10%. China on their part has also agreed to remove all trade restrictions, including the ones they imposed on rare earth materials, so important for the US electronic, defense, and green energy sectors. If China, according to the US, is successfully addresses the fentanyl crisis by strengthening domestic regulations on synthetic opioids, then this existing 30% tariff will be reduced further to 10% at the end of the 90-day period. Fentanyl, a powerful and often lethal drug, has fueled a public health crisis in the US, contributing to tens of thousands of overdose deaths annually. Trump, being an astute businessman, always believed in the principle of testing the waters first, negotiating aggressively, and ultimately settling somewhere in between. But in this case, China seems to have the upper hand. China was always defiant, as it had little to lose. A post by a Chinese social media influencer saying, 'Our ancestors didn't cave in – why should we give up what we have?' is gaining millions of views. Last March, a Chinese spokesperson publicly stated, 'If war is what the U.S. wants, be it a tariff war, a trade war, or any other kind, we are ready to fight until the end'. The US tariffs were never been effective containing the Chinese imports. The average annual trade deficit between the US and China went up from $311 billion during the tenure of Barack Obama (2009–2016) to $361 billion under Trump 1.0 (2017–2020), despite his aggressive stance toward China. There are ways to evade tariffs. Since tariffs target a country's exports, the simplest workaround is to shift the production base and export from a third country – something the Chinese have mastered. The loss in exports from China to the US is increasingly being offset by exports from countries in Southeast Asia, with US imports from the region rising by 14 percentage points between 2018 and 2023. Vietnam, Malaysia, and Thailand have emerged as primary beneficiaries. Vietnam's exports to the US surged by 40% between 2018 and 2023, reflecting the broader trend of Chinese manufacturers shifting final assembly to third-party countries in order to bypass tariffs. Similarly, to benefit from the US-Mexico-Canada trade alliance, Chinese firms are relocating their production base closer to the US. Take for instance, Mexico. In April 2024, the US Trade Representative Katherine Tai accused China of disguising its steel products as Mexican steel to enter the US market. In 2023, US imports of Mexican goods totalled $475 billion, approximately, $20 billion more than in 2022. During the same time the US imports of Chinese goods amounted to $427 billion, around $10 billion less. An estimated $3.7 billion of Chinese FDI came to Mexico in 2023, significantly higher with an average flow of $1.3 billion during the past decade. At least 30 Chinese firms now operate out of Mexico including Chinese automobile giants such as BYD and Cherry International. The flow of Chinese FDI to Mexico has also increased by 30% during the last two years. See also Selective Political Witch-Hunting In India Nearing Its Climax On the contrary, trade interdependence between the US and China has decreased during the past decade. Between 2018 and 2024, China's share of trade with the US has fallen from 15.7% to 10.9%. Since China has already diversified its export routes by channelling products to the US through third countries, US non-tariff measures have also become less effective. The Global Trade Alert database, reveals US has initiated more than 4525 protectionist measures against Chinese exports. However, the US trade deficit with China continued to rise. China has enhanced the competitiveness of its manufacturing exports by continuing to shift production to locations with lower input costs. Much of the Chinese investment in the Greater Mekong Sub-region is driven by lower land and labor costs in countries such as Cambodia, Lao PDR, and Vietnam. China has invested around $1 trillion to countries in Africa, Latin America and Asia. This has helped reduce China's energy requirements, allowing Beijing to secure cheaper foreign energy sources (oil and power) and minerals. Chinese companies have built six hydropower plants and one thermal power station in Myanmar and invested in power transmission and copper processing units in Vietnam. In countries like Sri Lanka (Hambantota port), Pakistan (Gwadar port), and throughout the Middle East, Africa, and Southeast Asia, Chinese investments are being used to develop port infrastructure, so that the cost of shipping Chinese products falls. The concept of reciprocal tariffs will never succeed, as it assumes that a tariff on China will not impact US imports from any other third-country. Retaliation by trading partners can also impact US exports, and value of dollars which can again impact trade balance. Real world does not operate with ceteris paribus (holding other factors constant) assumption, and sooner Trump understands this the better it is for the US economy. (IPA Service) (The author is Professor, School of Management, Mahindra University).
Time of India
11-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Judging the Game: Supreme Court's Role in Online Gaming Debates
Nilanjan Banik is a professor at Bennett University's School of Business. His work focuses on the application of time series econometrics in issues relating to international trade, market structure and development economics. He is also interested in the "rules" part of WTO; especially examining non-tariff barriers aspects of GATT/WTO agreements. He has project experience with Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australia; Laffer Associates, USA; KPMG, India; Ministry of Commerce, Government of India; Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS), New Delhi; Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), New Delhi; Center for Economic Policy Research, UK; Asian Development Bank Institute, Tokyo; Asian Development Bank, Manila; South Asia Network of Economic Research Institutes (SANEI); UNESCAP-ARTNeT, Thailand, Australia India Institute, University of Melbourne; and World Trade Organization, Geneva. LESS ... MORE The skill-based online gaming industry will be watching with bated breath on the Supreme Court's judgement on a host of contentious issues, contested in various High Courts and other fora of the country, which has put the industry's very survival at stake. It's verdict on of Karnataka High Court's decision of 2020 will end decades-old issues plaguing the industry. These include the decision of the goods and service tax (GST) authorities to hike the tax rate from 18% to 28% on the services provided by the online gaming companies, providing clarity on whether online gaming with monetary stakes qualify as a game of skill or a game of chance, and such other issues. The Karnataka High Court in the Skill Lotto Solutions (P) Ltd versus Union of India 2020, had categorically held that 'there is a distinct difference between 'games of skill' and 'games of chance' and various online games as such were games of skill and thus not the subject of GST. This judgement of the Karnataka High Court is now sought to be challenged by the GST authorities coming up for hearing from May 5 – 9, 2025. Amendments to the Act Coupled with that the apex court will also investigate the validity of several amendments made in Central Goods and Services Tax Act (CGST) 2017, which came into effect from October 1, 2023. These include the introduction of new concepts like 'online money gaming', 'specified actionable claims' and the introduction of a new valuation mechanism –-Rule 31 B- which have all adversely impacted the fortunes of this sunrise industry. It would be patently wrong to associate traditional competitions and tournaments, which offer monetary rewards to the winners such as Wimbledon, or different Chess tournaments, and bracketed with gambling, or other games of chance. Today, different methodologies like skill-chance statistical framework, exist that can used to regulate online gaming and differentiate it from game of chance. These statistical frameworks could be used for regulation either by an independent regulator like the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) or through a self-regulatory body comprising members of online gaming platforms. There is an urgent need for clarity on whether the 28% tax rate on these companies should be applied retrospectively or prospectively. Thus, the Supreme Court will be deliberating on two sets of issues, pre-and post- October 2023 laws and amendments– The provisions of the CGST Act 2017, and the amendments to the Act in 2023. The introduction of the concept 'online money gaming' industry as a subset of online gaming has meant the inclusion of all online games that are played in the 'expectation of winning money or money's worth'. It puts all online gaming into one bucket thereby removing the earlier distinction between the game of skill and game of chance in one stroke. Similarly, by enlisting all online money gaming as a 'specified actionable claim', the October 2023 amendments have positioned these games alongside lottery, betting and gambling, and hence liable for payments of GST. It does not consider the talent, expertise and years of experience that is required to succeed in such games of skill. The earlier distinction between 'actionable claims' not subjected to GST and lottery, gambling and betting, which came under the GST ambit, too, has been done away with. The 2023 amendments to the CGST Act of 2017, also changes the classification of online games from services to goods with all its ramifications. The New Valuation Provision Furthermore, the new valuation provision -–Rule 31 B—steeply undercuts the very business model of the online gaming industry by imposing GST on the amount placed on the gaming platform and not on the platform fee. The fair value would have been to levy GST on the money collected by such platforms towards facilitating the gamers. Thus, online gaming platform owners must pay tax on amounts that does not even accrue to them. Moreover, it goes against Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees 'equality before the law' and 'equal protection of the law' to all persons within the territory of India. Arbitrarily fixed rate of law has consistently been held to be contrary to the constitutionally guaranteed fundamental law, which has also been extended to fiscal laws. Thus. the issue for the online gaming industry is not just about the fairness of the valuation scheme but that it has been applied retrospectively. Such an amendment goes against the statutory interpretation of fiscal legislation that new tax liability cannot be created on a retrospective basis in the absence of specific legislative intent. The law and its subsequent amendments have created anxieties and uncertainties among the skill-based online gaming platforms and cast ominous cloud on the survival of the industry, forget the broader national goals of innovation, entrepreneurship and employment generation. What is required is either an independent regulator like the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) or a self-regulatory body of online gaming platforms. The decision of the Supreme Court will not only make or break a fledgling industry but will also be a defining moment for the future of GST. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
Time of India
03-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Haryana's new gambling law: An analysis of why there's a need for a calibrated policy on fantasy sports faming
Nilanjan Banik is a professor at Bennett University's School of Business. His work focuses on the application of time series econometrics in issues relating to international trade, market structure and development economics. He is also interested in the "rules" part of WTO; especially examining non-tariff barriers aspects of GATT/WTO agreements. He has project experience with Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australia; Laffer Associates, USA; KPMG, India; Ministry of Commerce, Government of India; Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS), New Delhi; Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), New Delhi; Center for Economic Policy Research, UK; Asian Development Bank Institute, Tokyo; Asian Development Bank, Manila; South Asia Network of Economic Research Institutes (SANEI); UNESCAP-ARTNeT, Thailand, Australia India Institute, University of Melbourne; and World Trade Organization, Geneva. LESS ... MORE The Haryana Prevention of Public Gambling Act (HPPGA), 2025 marks a pivotal shift in the state's legal approach to betting and gaming. In step with the growing momentum around regulating digital activities, the Act aims to criminalise gambling and betting formats where chance predominates. Crucially, it also carves out an exemption for games of skill, a legal distinction that has been reinforced through multiple rulings by High Courts and the Supreme Court of India. This exemption is more than a legal footnote, it is a linchpin for India's fast-evolving digital economy, particularly for sectors like fantasy sports and its innovative formats. By recognising skill-based games as distinct from gambling, the Act acknowledges the growing complexity of online gaming and the need to regulate it with nuance. However, the law stops short of providing detailed guidance on how this distinction will be operationalised especially for new-age innovative gaming formats that blend analytics, real-world sporting data, and gamification. Fantasy sports platforms operate on the foundational legal recognition that they are games of skill, not chance. While gambling results in a uniform distribution, with an equal probability of winning or losing, skill-based activities typically have a higher probability of winning, leading to a left-skewed distribution. In simple terms, the mathematical way to distinguish skill-based activities from gambling is that a skilled player is more likely to achieve a higher payoff than a gambler. The reason gambling is banned in many countries, including India, is due to its association with issues such as addiction, financial losses, fraud, and the loss of life and livelihood. By similar logic, online gaming and trading are allowed in many countries because they facilitate price discovery based on skills of market participants. Markets are created with opportunities to do business. This status has been affirmed through repeated judicial scrutiny, with the Supreme Court categorically distinguishing fantasy sports from gambling. The legality of such platforms has become a cornerstone of their success, unlocking major domestic and global investments and contributing to a burgeoning digital ecosystem. Yet, despite this judicial clarity, Haryana's new law introduces fresh uncertainty. The Act, while theoretically aligned with national jurisprudence, does not explicitly clarify whether fantasy sports fall under its exemption for skill-based games. In a state like Haryana, home to Gurugram's thriving tech and gaming startups, this omission has created confusion and concern within the industry. Operators are left reading between the lines of legal language, unsure whether their business models are protected or exposed under the new regime. The issue is compounded by the lack of a formal co-regulatory or licensing mechanism for fantasy sports and its innovative formats. Haryana's new law appears isolated from broader digital policy developments be it compliant, responsible gaming and taxes. This gap has exposed platforms, investors, and gig workers to policy volatility, despite their activities aligning with judicial norms. The stakes of this ambiguity are far from theoretical. Similar regulatory grey zones in states like Tamil Nadu triggered temporary bans, litigation, and operational paralysis. Even though courts ultimately overturned these restrictions, the damage had already been done where several companies halted regional operations, paused hiring, and rerouted capital expenditure to more policy-stable environments. Haryana now risks a similar fallout. Gurugram has emerged as a key node in India's digital economy, hosting not only platform operators but also a vast ecosystem of professionals like engineers, designers, analysts, marketing experts, legal advisors, content creators, and customer support personnel. Unclear regulation threatens not just corporate strategy but the livelihoods of thousands of skilled and gig workers embedded in this sector. The ripple effects extend to investor sentiment. Early-stage and global investors interpret such legal gaps as red flags. A single restrictive notification, or even delayed clarification, could redirect millions in funding and push innovation pipelines to cities or countries with more predictable policy environments, be it Bengaluru, Noida, Dubai, or Singapore. The absence of regulatory foresight can also undermine India's larger digital ambition. The central government has set a target of building a $1 trillion digital economy by 2027. Reaching that milestone will require policy coherence not only at the Centre but also across states. Haryana's indecision on fantasy sports regulation, if left unaddressed, may erode its ability to contribute meaningfully to this national goal. Fantasy sports and its innovative formats are not just another entertainment vertical, they represent the convergence of mobile-first consumer behaviour, real-time data analytics, competitive gamification, and digital finance. With over 220 million users in India, the format has grown from a casual pastime to a mainstream digital economy driver by generating significant amount of taxes and thousands of jobs. Moreover, fantasy sports and its innovative formats have proven resilient and compliant. Operators already function under a de facto code of self-regulation, deploying KYC norms, age verification, deposit caps, and responsible gaming features. Courts have validated this structure as evidence of the industry's good faith. The sector's economic contributions are equally significant. Fantasy platforms and its innovative formats collectively contribute hundreds of crores in taxes, and their tech-centric operations have catalysed growth in adjacent sectors like analytics, payments, cybersecurity, and content production. Notably, these are high-skilling, future-proof domains where India has global competitive potential. What's more, the industry also supports a growing gig economy. Freelancers, streamers, influencers, and analysts, many of them young Indians, derive a substantial part of their livelihood from fantasy-related content and engagement. Any policy disruption affects them disproportionately, especially those lacking formal contracts or long-term employment protections. Haryana's challenge, and opportunity, lies in transforming ambiguity into leadership. The state can begin by issuing an official notification explicitly recognising major fantasy sports and its innovative formats as games of skill, in line with constitutional and judicial precedents. This would eliminate legal doubt while reinforcing investor confidence. The next step is to build a co-regulatory framework. Such a model, already recommended by national think tanks and adopted in nascent form by other Indian states, would blend public oversight with private sector expertise. It would institutionalise safeguards, enable consumer protection, and provide operators with clear compliance pathways. Most importantly, it would signal to the world that Haryana is serious about supporting responsible digital innovation. Consultations with stakeholders like industry leaders, legal experts, consumer groups, and technologists must be central to this process. Regulation need not be a barrier to innovation. On the contrary, smart policy design can become a competitive advantage, attracting entrepreneurs, capital, and talent to the state. Ultimately, the regulatory debate around fantasy sports and its innovative formats in Haryana is about more than just compliance, it is a litmus test for how India's states will govern the industries of the future. With the digital economy becoming a key engine of national growth, states must choose whether to lead, follow, or fall behind. Fantasy sports may be a game of skill, but crafting progressive, innovation-friendly regulation is the real test of strategy. Haryana has the board, the pieces, and the opportunity. Now it must make the right move. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
Time of India
02-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Haryana's new gambling law: An analysis of why there's a need for a calibrated policy on Fantasy Sports Gaming
Nilanjan Banik is a professor at Bennett University's School of Business. His work focuses on the application of time series econometrics in issues relating to international trade, market structure and development economics. He is also interested in the "rules" part of WTO; especially examining non-tariff barriers aspects of GATT/WTO agreements. He has project experience with Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australia; Laffer Associates, USA; KPMG, India; Ministry of Commerce, Government of India; Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS), New Delhi; Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), New Delhi; Center for Economic Policy Research, UK; Asian Development Bank Institute, Tokyo; Asian Development Bank, Manila; South Asia Network of Economic Research Institutes (SANEI); UNESCAP-ARTNeT, Thailand, Australia India Institute, University of Melbourne; and World Trade Organization, Geneva. LESS ... MORE The Haryana Prevention of Public Gambling Act (HPPGA), 2025 marks a pivotal shift in the state's legal approach to betting and gaming. In step with the growing momentum around regulating digital activities, the Act aims to criminalise gambling and betting formats where chance predominates. Crucially, it also carves out an exemption for games of skill, a legal distinction that has been reinforced through multiple rulings by High Courts and the Supreme Court of India. This exemption is more than a legal footnote, it is a linchpin for India's fast-evolving digital economy, particularly for sectors like fantasy sports and its innovative formats. By recognising skill-based games as distinct from gambling, the Act acknowledges the growing complexity of online gaming and the need to regulate it with nuance. However, the law stops short of providing detailed guidance on how this distinction will be operationalised especially for new-age innovative gaming formats that blend analytics, real-world sporting data, and gamification. Fantasy sports platforms such as Probo, Dream11, MPL, SportsBaazi, and My11Circle operate on the foundational legal recognition that they are games of skill, not chance. While gambling results in a uniform distribution, with an equal probability of winning or losing, skill-based activities typically have a higher probability of winning, leading to a left-skewed distribution. In simple terms, the mathematical way to distinguish skill-based activities from gambling is that a skilled player is more likely to achieve a higher payoff than a gambler. The reason gambling is banned in many countries, including India, is due to its association with issues such as addiction, financial losses, fraud, and the loss of life and livelihood. By similar logic, online gaming and trading are allowed in many countries because they facilitate price discovery based on skills of market participants. Markets are created with opportunities to do business. This status has been affirmed through repeated judicial scrutiny, with the Supreme Court categorically distinguishing fantasy sports from gambling. The legality of such platforms has become a cornerstone of their success, unlocking major domestic and global investments and contributing to a burgeoning digital ecosystem. Yet, despite this judicial clarity, Haryana's new law introduces fresh uncertainty. The Act, while theoretically aligned with national jurisprudence, does not explicitly clarify whether fantasy sports fall under its exemption for skill-based games. In a state like Haryana, home to Gurugram's thriving tech and gaming startups, this omission has created confusion and concern within the industry. Operators are left reading between the lines of legal language, unsure whether their business models are protected or exposed under the new regime. The issue is compounded by the lack of a formal co-regulatory or licensing mechanism for fantasy sports and its innovative formats. Haryana's new law appears isolated from broader digital policy developments be it compliant, responsible gaming and taxes. This gap has exposed platforms, investors, and gig workers to policy volatility, despite their activities aligning with judicial norms. The stakes of this ambiguity are far from theoretical. Similar regulatory grey zones in states like Tamil Nadu triggered temporary bans, litigation, and operational paralysis. Even though courts ultimately overturned these restrictions, the damage had already been done where several companies halted regional operations, paused hiring, and rerouted capital expenditure to more policy-stable environments. Haryana now risks a similar fallout. Gurugram has emerged as a key node in India's digital economy, hosting not only platform operators but also a vast ecosystem of professionals like engineers, designers, analysts, marketing experts, legal advisors, content creators, and customer support personnel. Unclear regulation threatens not just corporate strategy but the livelihoods of thousands of skilled and gig workers embedded in this sector. The ripple effects extend to investor sentiment. Early-stage and global investors interpret such legal gaps as red flags. A single restrictive notification, or even delayed clarification, could redirect millions in funding and push innovation pipelines to cities or countries with more predictable policy environments, be it Bengaluru, Noida, Dubai, or Singapore. The absence of regulatory foresight can also undermine India's larger digital ambition. The central government has set a target of building a $1 trillion digital economy by 2027. Reaching that milestone will require policy coherence not only at the Centre but also across states. Haryana's indecision on fantasy sports regulation, if left unaddressed, may erode its ability to contribute meaningfully to this national goal. Fantasy sports and its innovative formats are not just another entertainment vertical, they represent the convergence of mobile-first consumer behaviour, real-time data analytics, competitive gamification, and digital finance. With over 220 million users in India, the format has grown from a casual pastime to a mainstream digital economy driver by generating significant amount of taxes and thousands of jobs. Moreover, fantasy sports and its innovative formats have proven resilient and compliant. Operators already function under a de facto code of self-regulation, deploying KYC norms, age verification, deposit caps, and responsible gaming features. Courts have validated this structure as evidence of the industry's good faith. The sector's economic contributions are equally significant. Fantasy platforms and its innovative formats collectively contribute hundreds of crores in taxes, and their tech-centric operations have catalysed growth in adjacent sectors like analytics, payments, cybersecurity, and content production. Notably, these are high-skilling, future-proof domains where India has global competitive potential. What's more, the industry also supports a growing gig economy. Freelancers, streamers, influencers, and analysts, many of them young Indians, derive a substantial part of their livelihood from fantasy-related content and engagement. Any policy disruption affects them disproportionately, especially those lacking formal contracts or long-term employment protections. Haryana's challenge, and opportunity, lies in transforming ambiguity into leadership. The state can begin by issuing an official notification explicitly recognising major fantasy sports and its innovative formats as games of skill, in line with constitutional and judicial precedents. This would eliminate legal doubt while reinforcing investor confidence. The next step is to build a co-regulatory framework. Such a model, already recommended by national think tanks and adopted in nascent form by other Indian states, would blend public oversight with private sector expertise. It would institutionalise safeguards, enable consumer protection, and provide operators with clear compliance pathways. Most importantly, it would signal to the world that Haryana is serious about supporting responsible digital innovation. Consultations with stakeholders like industry leaders, legal experts, consumer groups, and technologists must be central to this process. Regulation need not be a barrier to innovation. On the contrary, smart policy design can become a competitive advantage, attracting entrepreneurs, capital, and talent to the state. Ultimately, the regulatory debate around fantasy sports and its innovative formats in Haryana is about more than just compliance, it is a litmus test for how India's states will govern the industries of the future. With the digital economy becoming a key engine of national growth, states must choose whether to lead, follow, or fall behind. Fantasy sports may be a game of skill, but crafting progressive, innovation-friendly regulation is the real test of strategy. Haryana has the board, the pieces, and the opportunity. Now it must make the right move. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
