The IMF’s 2025 Staff Report on India has retained a B grade for the country’s official statistics and a C grade for national accounts data, stating that methodological weaknesses “somewhat hamper surveillance.” The news comes as the ministry of statistics and programme implementation prepares a major overhaul of the GDP series, with a new base year of 2022–23 expected in February 2026. The argument centres on credibility: strong data systems anchor growth measurement, guide fiscal policy, and improve investor confidence.
According to the RBI’s FY25 Annual Report, credible statistics are essential for monetary policy calibration. The evidence shows that without upgraded national accounts data, India cannot fully capture the scale or structure of its rapidly changing economy.
READ I Why India’s economic indicators are being rebased in 2026
Strengthening national accounts data
The IMF’s retention of the C grade reflects long-standing issues in India’s GDP measurement. The Fund emphasised the need for regular benchmark revisions and alignment with international norms, stating that national accounts data suffer from “coverage and granularity gaps”. India’s current base year of 2011–12 is outdated, and earlier debates around the 2015 GDP revision highlighted the importance of transparent back-series construction. The UN System of National Accounts (SNA 2008) recommends periodic rebasing to reflect economic structural changes. India’s economy today is driven by services, digital platforms, renewable energy and logistics—sectors that require continuous updating of administrative datasets.
Global experience supports this approach. The UK Office for National Statistics uses administrative tax data, business registers and digital datasets to refine GDP estimates. Eurostat and the US Bureau of Economic Analysis follow similar models. India can adopt these practices by enhancing MoSPI’s autonomy and ensuring predictable revision cycles. The policy concern is whether the upcoming 2026 GDP series will institutionalise these reforms rather than deliver one-off corrections.
Improving data collection and integration
The evidence shows that national accounts data is only as good as the underlying datasets. The IMF pointed to gaps in real-sector statistics, including production indices and firm-level information. The absence of consistent household consumption data since the government rejected the 2017–18 Consumption Expenditure Survey left a significant void. The 2023–24 Household Consumption Survey will now support CPI updates, but its late arrival weakened both inflation and poverty assessments.
A deeper structural issue is fragmentation of state-level administrative data. The World Bank Statistical Performance Indicators note that successful statistical systems rely on seamless data-sharing across levels of government. India’s GSTN, MCA-21 corporate filings and digital infrastructure under UPI offer valuable real-time datasets that remain underused for national accounts due to legal, institutional and technical barriers.
The Digital Personal Data Protection Act (2023) now provides a stronger framework for secure and anonymised data sharing within the public sector. The economic question is whether MoSPI, RBI, GSTN and tax authorities can establish structured protocols to use this data for statistical purposes while maintaining privacy safeguards.
Enhancing transparency and institutional autonomy
Transparency drives trust. The IMF observed that India should improve disclosure on sources, back-casting methodologies, sample frames and revision procedures. The removal of the 2017–18 consumption survey without adequate justification created doubts about data governance. The World Bank’s Data Governance Framework emphasises that clarity and predictability in revisions is essential for credibility.
Institutional autonomy is central. The National Statistical Commission (NSC) was created to oversee statistical integrity, yet it remains advisory. Multiple committees—including the C. Rangarajan Expert Group on GDP—have recommended a statutory, independent NSC with control over data publication schedules. Countries with stronger IMF grades, including the UK and Canada, operate statistics offices that are independent from the executive and protected by law. The constitutional question is whether India is ready to give its statistical system the autonomy required for trust.
Developing statistical capacity
India’s digital economy is expanding at double-digit rates, yet statistical measurement has not kept pace. Digital services, gig work, fintech intermediation, telemedicine, online retail and platform-based logistics remain poorly captured in national accounts. The OECD’s digital economy measurement framework shows how countries integrate e-commerce data, digital labour metrics and platform transaction flows into GDP.
India’s opportunity lies in integrating GSTN invoice data, UPI transactions, MCA-21 filings, and electricity and mobility data. The RBI’s high-frequency indicators already demonstrate the value of rapid data in monetary policymaking. Modernising MoSPI’s statistical capacity—through more data scientists, better IT systems and cross-agency collaboration—is essential to reflect the structural changes shaping India’s economy.
The IMF’s C grade for national accounts data is more than a technical rating. It is a signal that India’s statistical system must undergo deep reform. The argument centres on the need for predictable benchmark revisions, expanded data coverage, transparent methodologies and stronger institutional autonomy.
The new GDP series in February 2026 is a crucial opportunity to embed these reforms. High-quality data will improve fiscal management, enhance monetary policy, strengthen investor confidence and support evidence-based decision-making. India’s economic narrative is only as credible as the statistics that support it. Modernising national accounts data is essential to reflect the true scale and complexity of the country’s growth story.