It is relaxing to see that even during the coronavirus pandemic, the statistics related to GDP growth and per capita income has shown higher growth. Remittance and foreign currency reserves are ballooning. Under the circumstances, the budget for the next fiscal year has been proposed.

However, budget formulation, direction, and budget implementation decisions are overwhelmingly confined in the usual routine exercise, giving an ever negative vibe. Presently, an absence of efficiency to execute the budget, myopic vision and rampant corruption are the main hurdles. On top of that, diversified challenges are emerging, which are dreadful in the context of confronting the pandemic. In this backdrop, macroeconomic management becomes cumbersome, and the temperament of transparency and accountability is dubious.

Usually, the size of budgets, especially on the expenditure side, is proposed higher than the preceding year, and accordingly, the growth of revenue is fixed. However, with the bigger size of the budget, paying inadequate attention to implementation does not make any sense.

Revisiting the proposed budget size is inevitable because of the likelihood of lower implementation, improper visualisation of the reality, poor projection of demand, failure to predict the actual revenue collection, and not fixing the threshold of development expenditures. Therefore, scores of corrective action need to be taken to develop and overhaul the methodology of the budgetary system.

Another factor should be taken into consideration here. Because of the ambition to achieve the higher-middle-income country status, the size of the budget needs to be enlarged. Apparently, the economy is growing.

Therefore, a chunk of investment from private and public sectors may pave the way for economic progress.

The middle-class group is considered the prime mover in the economy. They play a pivotal role in the economy. Service-holders, farmers, and owners of small enterprises belong to this class. Numerous troubles are emerging in their life. They are suffocating because of the skyrocketing price of commodities and surging expenses of education and healthcare.

Amidst their jobs being snatched away in the last 15 months, the incomes for many of them have plummeted. Albeit the words lives and livelihood have appeared in the budget, few ways and means are devised.

The disparity is on the rise in the economy. This overall picture, somehow, has not echoed in the budget. The ordinary people are out of the purview of the budget. The words lives and livelihoods have been stated in the budget title, but the actual assessment of lives and livelihoods seems to be apparently missing.

A proposal has been placed to enhance the operating expenditure of the budget. It aims to expand the social safety net, but there is nothing to lift the new poor and the urban poor created by the pandemic.

There is a big gap between the desirable budget and the attainable budget.

A tax rebate was proposed in the field of agriculture and hospital establishment. This sounds positive, but the question remains whether the low-income class will have any chance to avail themselves of the facility. The budget has been termed as business-friendly but it did not promise much for the small and medium enterprises, which are the bedrock of the economy.

Augmented allocation for alleviating poverty, job creation and social infrastructure should have a robust roadmap. The proposed threshold of revenue collection is tantamount to the target achievement of the actual budget in the current fiscal year. The revenue collection target looks ambitious.

Setting up an ambitious revenue target is dubious as corporate tax rates and other taxes have been cut, and tax exemption has been offered in many cases. Due to the pandemic, squeezing business opportunities will squeeze the tax yield.

The economy is growing slowly. So, without a paradigm shift, bringing back the momentum of the pre-pandemic economy is elusive.

The author is a former secretary. He can be reached at mazid.muhammad@gmail.com