By Dipesh Ghimire
Nepal’s Economy Shows Stability, but Structural Reforms Remain Urgent
A close reading of the latest macroeconomic indicators released by Nepal Rastra Bank suggests that Nepal’s economy is currently more stable than public perception often assumes. Data from the first two months of fiscal year 2081/82 show that average inflation stands at 3.8 percent, indicating that price rises remain within a manageable range. With nominal wages reportedly increasing by around 25 percent, the impact of inflation on ordinary households appears limited for now, though authorities are advised to closely monitor the supply and quality of essential daily goods.
Trade figures, however, present a mixed picture. Before the Covid-19 pandemic, Nepal’s imports hovered around Rs 20 trillion, while exports were close to Rs 3 trillion. In the post-pandemic period, imports have edged up by 1.1 percent, while exports have declined by 5.1 percent. The slowdown in large-scale infrastructure projects has reduced demand for construction materials such as cement, iron, and clinker, leading to lower imports of heavy equipment and machinery. This decline in development activity has also constrained capital expenditure, reinforcing long-standing concerns about the government’s inability to translate budgets into productive investment.
Exports, meanwhile, have weakened due to reduced domestic production. While lentils remain among Nepal’s top export items, this is not necessarily a result of surplus production. Analysts argue that Nepal should prioritize the export of high-value products such as medicinal herbs, processed domestic goods, and paper-based products. There is also growing emphasis on promoting mineral-based industries to support export growth. Encouragingly, electricity exports—though still limited—have begun to contribute marginally to foreign earnings.
Historically, Nepal had established export footholds in global markets. Ready-made garments once reached the United States, and carpets were exported to Germany and other European countries. In recent years, however, these traditional export sectors have lost momentum. Agricultural exports to India and beyond—such as broom grass, tea, coffee, and citrus fruits—have also faced recurring barriers, further undermining export performance.
One bright spot in the external sector is remittance inflows. In the review period, remittances increased by 15.2 percent in Nepali rupee terms, helping push foreign exchange reserves to Rs 21.52 trillion, equivalent to USD 16.04 billion. While some analysts caution that remittance flows may not be sustainable in the long run, others argue that Nepal’s reliance on low- to semi-skilled labor reduces the risk of sudden displacement from global labor markets. Strengthening formal banking channels and curbing informal transfer systems could further stabilize remittance inflows.
Fiscal data, however, reveal persistent imbalances. Government expenditure stands at Rs 37.55 billion, while revenue mobilization has reached Rs 166.79 billion. The pattern reflects a continued dominance of recurrent spending, with capital expenditure lagging behind. As fiscal space tightens, the government faces mounting pressure to curb administrative costs while removing obstacles that hinder development spending.
Looking back, Nepal has demonstrated that strong revenue growth is achievable. The highest growth—33.3 percent—was recorded in fiscal year 2065/66, following strict anti-corruption measures at customs points. At the time, decisive enforcement, combined with performance-based incentives for customs officials, significantly reduced leakage. Similar reforms later helped achieve 25 percent revenue growth during another reform-oriented phase. In contrast, recent years have seen revenue targets missed, largely due to loopholes in tax administration.
Experts argue that the focus should shift from raising tax rates to expanding the tax base. Nepal’s maximum income tax rate is 25 percent, though banks, insurance companies, tobacco, and alcohol businesses face a 30 percent rate. Rather than tightening incentives for the private sector, authorities are urged to prevent revenue leakage through stronger enforcement. The economy, analysts say, is not in crisis—but inefficiencies continue to erode its potential.
External risks also loom. The ongoing Russia–Ukraine conflict could disrupt global supplies of wheat, edible oil, and fuel—commodities for which both countries are major producers. Such disruptions could fuel inflation in Nepal. Expanding domestic agricultural production under the country’s 20-year agriculture strategy is widely seen as the most viable hedge against external shocks.
In the energy sector, Nepal is currently generating around 2,900 megawatts of electricity, with an additional 5,000 megawatts expected in the near term. Power export agreements with India and Bangladesh are already in place. Policymakers argue that replacing LPG with electric cooking and accelerating the adoption of electric vehicles could significantly increase domestic electricity consumption. However, misinformation surrounding EVs continues to slow adoption, even as advanced economies move rapidly toward full electrification.
Economists also emphasize the need for a digital transformation of the economy. Reducing reliance on cash and transitioning toward fully digital transactions would improve transparency, strengthen tax compliance, and make income tracking easier for oversight agencies. Studies from Tribhuvan University estimate that 41.31 percent of Nepal’s economy remains informal, underscoring the scale of untapped revenue.
The debate over asset declaration and property taxation further highlights governance challenges. Although an asset-related law was passed in 2048 BS, it has never been fully implemented due to procedural delays. Advocates argue that a one-time asset declaration, coupled with reasonable taxation and security guarantees, could bring large volumes of hidden wealth into the formal economy.
Finally, comparisons with international welfare spending reveal stark contrasts. Greece spends 16 percent of GDP on social security, Italy 14 percent, and India 4 percent, while Nepal allocates just 2 percent. Despite this, concerns persist that expanding social allowances—such as old-age benefits—could strain public finances. Economists counter that the real issue lies not in welfare spending, but in weak revenue mobilization and inefficient expenditure.
Overall, Nepal’s macroeconomic indicators point to short-term stability, but long-term resilience will depend on structural reforms—ranging from tax administration and export diversification to energy utilization and digital governance. The challenge ahead is not merely to manage the economy, but to modernize it.
