The word 'reforms' has become so overused in Indian policy discussions that it risks losing all meaning, according to senior journalist Rajrishi Singhal. In a thought-provoking analysis, he argues that the term is now reflexively applied to every policy announcement, regardless of its actual transformative potential.
The Historical Context of Economic Reforms
Singhal traces the origins of the term 'reforms' to the early 1990s, when significant economic policy overhauls swept across Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa and South America following the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the Soviet Union. These genuine reforms shared common characteristics: reducing government's role in business, relaxing cross-border investment rules, and transferring state-run enterprises to private ownership.
However, the journalist notes that the term has since evolved into a placeholder for any and all policy changes, with widespread misapplication becoming increasingly common in India's economic discourse.
GST Changes: Rationalization vs Reform
The recent goods and services tax modifications provide a compelling case study. Prime Minister Narendra Modi first announced these changes in his Independence Day speech, with formal policy adoption occurring on September 4 during the 56th GST Council meeting.
While these adjustments were universally hailed as 'reforms,' Singhal argues they essentially represent rate rationalization that industry experts had been demanding for over seven years. The new structure collapses the multi-tiered tax system into a two-layered framework, with a special 40% demerit rate for selected items.
The International Monetary Fund's 2024 Article IV consultations report had previously noted that India's four main non-zero GST rates made it an outlier among countries with similar tax systems. The IMF recommended moving toward a single rate and rationalizing exempt or zero-rated items to improve compliance and reduce evasion risks.
Despite this being largely technical adjustments, government communications heavily emphasized the 'reform' narrative. The September 4 press release mentioned 'reform' five times, while the Reserve Bank of India's October 2025 Monetary Policy Report used the term eleven times, and the governor's statement included it twice.
Labour Codes: Genuine Reform or Political Gamble?
The analysis turns to the government's November 21 announcement implementing four contentious labour codes that seek to rationalize 29 existing labour laws. While these codes could potentially transform India's industrial relations landscape, Singhal questions whether they qualify as genuine reforms at this stage.
The implementation faces significant hurdles, as labour relations fall under the concurrent list, requiring state cooperation. Eight major states—Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, West Bengal, Jharkhand, Telangana, Punjab and Himachal Pradesh—are ruled by opposition parties, creating potential resistance to the central government's framework.
Furthermore, the policy's execution depends on finalizing rules, with draft versions expected to be released for 45 days of public consultation before finalization. Until then, the status quo remains unchanged, raising questions about the timing of the announcement.
A Test for True Reform
Singhal proposes a straightforward test for categorizing policy changes as genuine reforms: changes that lack improvement elements cannot be termed reforms. The consolidated labour codes can only rightfully earn the 'reform' label if they deliver all-round improvement for all stakeholders—labour, industry, and consumers.
The author, who wrote 'Slip, Stitch and Stumble: The Untold Story of India's Financial Sector Reforms,' concludes that everyone should pause and reconsider before casually using the term 'reforms.' The glib and frequent application of this powerful word, particularly in inappropriate contexts, threatens to strip it of its substantive meaning and impact.
As India continues its economic development journey, maintaining precise terminology becomes crucial for honest policy evaluation and public discourse. The overuse of 'reforms' risks creating confusion between routine administrative adjustments and genuinely transformative policy changes that reshape economic landscapes.
