Home Login Watch Videos Wars

[🇧🇩] Monitoring Bangladesh's Economy

[🇧🇩] Monitoring Bangladesh's Economy
953
25K
More threads by Saif

G Bangladesh Defense

Economic reading of BD's 2025 ordinances

Syed Abul Basher
Published :
Jan 27, 2026 22:58
Updated :
Jan 27, 2026 22:58

1769561533864.webp


In 2025, Bangladesh's interim government issued 78 ordinances covering labour rights, judicial procedures, digital security, and constitutional governance. These ordinances carry economic consequences. As economic activity is ultimately governed by law, changes in rules and institutions directly affect transaction costs, property rights, and investment incentives. In turn, these legal changes alter expected returns, risks, and bargaining positions.

Previously, to form a union, workers needed to meet a 20 per cent membership threshold. This meant that a factory with 100 workers required mobilising 20 workers, whereas a factory with 500 workers needed 100 workers to form a union. For medium to large factories, meeting this threshold was difficult, since employers could easily intimidate key organisers to prevent unionisation. The 2025 Labour (Amendment) Ordinance addressed this barrier by moving from a percentage-based rule to a fixed-number approach. Factories with 20-300 employees can now form a union with just 20 workers. This change came partly in response to criticism from the European Union (EU) and International Labor Organization (ILO), which argued that the percentage rule blocked workers from exercising freedom of association.

From an economic standpoint, this reduces the fixed cost of collective action. It shifts the Nash bargaining position of workers upward, allowing them to capture a larger share of firm surplus. The reform also raises penalties for unfair labour practices under Sections 294-295, increasing the expected cost of anti-union behaviour. The combined effect is to raise expected wages and job security, but also to increase unit labour costs faced by firms. Whether this improves stability or raises conflict is an empirical question, but incentives have clearly shifted.

Currently, Bangladesh's garment exports to the EU enjoy duty-free access under the Everything But Arms (EBA) scheme. After 2029, to continue enjoying preferential access, Bangladesh will need to qualify for GSP-plus, which requires compliance with labour rights conventions. Losing this status would impose tariffs of roughly 9-12 per cent on garments. This amounts to a negative price shock to Bangladeshi exports. Unless firms can pass costs to buyers, a 10 per cent tariff reduces exporter revenue and profitability by roughly the same margin. Since Bangladesh operates in a highly competitive global garment market, most of the burden would fall on domestic producers and workers.

The labour reforms should therefore be understood as an investment in market access. By raising compliance today, Bangladesh lowers the probability of a catastrophic trade shock tomorrow. In expected-value terms, modest increases in labour costs now can be justified if they reduce the risk of losing billions of dollars in export earnings later.

Belatedly, the Women and Children Repression Prevention Ordinance expanded the legal definition of sexual violence and strengthened penalties, while the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) amendments made it possible to prosecute organisations, not just individuals, for political violence. These changes increase the expected cost of committing or tolerating violence. When legal protection is weak, violence and fear discourage women from travelling, working, or staying in school-reducing labour force participation and human-capital investment. Stronger enforcement can raise the return to education and formal work, particularly for girls. The same logic applies to investors. When organised political violence carries a higher legal risk, long-term investment becomes safer, lowering the political-risk premium built into interest rates and foreign investment decisions.

For too long, Bangladesh's judicial system has imposed high transaction costs on economic activity. It often took many years to settle commercial disputes, or sometimes they remained unresolved. As a result, capital was tied up, raising the effective cost of doing business. Meanwhile, arbitrary enforcement created legal uncertainty that discouraged formal contracting and long-term investment. The 2025 legislative reforms attempt to address these frictions by reducing delays and discretion.

Under the amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), police are now required to identify themselves during arrests, prepare written arrest memoranda, and maintain digital records. The expansion of magistrates' fine-imposing powers will likely speed case resolution by allowing minor cases to be resolved without full trials. These changes not only reduce arbitrary enforcement risk but also increase the predictability of legal outcomes. Together, these reforms will likely lower state opportunism and the regulatory burden on firms and households.

Similarly, under the new Civil Procedure Code (CPC), courts now accept electronic service of summons through SMS, voice calls, and messaging apps, allowing judges to hear more cases per day. Moreover, to discourage frivolous litigation, compensation for false claims has increased to Tk 50,000. Importantly, the separation of civil and criminal courts at the district level allows judges to specialise rather than handling both types of cases. Together, these amendments make contract enforcement faster and more reliable, freeing up capital and improving its allocation across the economy.

The economic payoff from these judicial reforms, however, depends on enforcement capacity. As of December 2024, Bangladesh faced a backlog of over 45 lakh cases. Unless the government recruits more judges, builds more courtrooms, and implements functioning digital systems, procedural reforms alone will not be enough. In economic terms, unless these rules are credibly enforced, the underlying transaction costs of doing business will remain high, and private investment and productivity will not respond.

A longstanding problem in Bangladesh is weak credible commitment. Independent institutions such as the judiciary, election bodies, and anti-corruption agencies have long been seen as politically captured, raising doubts about property rights and policy stability. The proposed constitutional reforms aim to disperse power more widely. A bicameral legislature with a proportional upper house would ensure continued opposition influence. Key oversight committees would be assigned to opposition members. A ten-year limit on the prime minister would reduce power concentration. Making the Anti-Corruption Commission a constitutional body would increase its independence.

Economically, these reforms function as commitment devices. Bangladesh's sovereign bonds have historically traded at spreads of 200-400 basis points above comparable economies, reflecting political risk. More credible institutions can reduce these spreads and borrowing costs.

Finally, the previous Digital Security Act (DSA) had created a climate of legal unpredictability. The new ordinance makes most offenses bailable while retaining protections against cybercrime. This is welcome for digital entrepreneurs as it lowers the downside risk. With reduced legal risk, the expected return to innovation rises. As software and IT exports depend more on human capital than physical infrastructure, legal predictability is a binding input into sectoral growth.

Bangladesh already has many good laws. But enforcement is the binding constraint. In economic terms, laws without enforcement are meaningless contracts. Unless labour inspectors, courts, regulators, and the ACC are adequately staffed and insulated from political pressure, the ordinances will not change incentives. Trade partners and financial markets respond to outcomes, not statutes.

The 2025 ordinances are economically coherent responses to Bangladesh's vulnerabilities as a trade-dependent, investment-constrained economy-attempting to improve labour credibility, reduce transaction costs, lower political risk, and stimulate innovation. If implemented credibly, these reforms can raise the expected return to investment and human capital, moving Bangladesh onto a higher growth path. If not, they will remain symbolic, and the economic risks facing the country will persist.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Fact Check Respond

Tradable savings certificate on bond market

Published :
Jan 28, 2026 23:16
Updated :
Jan 28, 2026 23:16

1769646802583.webp


The liquidity crisis in banks stemming mainly from non-performing loans (NPLs) has long stoked the compulsion of exploring alternative sources of sustainable fund. Since foreign investment is hard to come by, the search for such alternative sources has become even more compelling. Now the Bangladesh Bank (BB) and business circle have hit upon the idea of making savings certificate tradable on the bond market so that corporate bodies can turn to the bond market for their financing needs. As reported from a seminar on 'Bond Market Development in Bangladesh: Challenges and Recommendations' held on Monday last, Bangladesh has a savings certificate market worth Tk6.0 trillion but, according to the BB governor, its size can be doubled if such certificates are made tradable on the market like the shares on the stock market. The capital market scams---not once but twice--- have left investors' confidence low and therefore the corporate credit needs can be met by pooling funds from tradable savings certificate.

There is nothing wrong with the rerouting of savings to productive sector provided that the task is done efficiently, guaranteeing security of the savings. Money does not grow automatically but only when it is made to roll for productive purposes. Bond market is as good as the robustness of the corporate world. In case of business slump, it also turns bearing like the stock market. People who invest money in savings certificates, unlike in the stock market, do so in good faith that the declared profit return is failsafe. A new dimension is added to the savings certificate with allowing it to be tradable on bond market. Infusion of savings certificates into this particular financing sector is expected to bring about quite a shift in the mobilisation of funds by private enterprises. The pressure on banks for funds will ease to some extent.

Corporate bodies with lower bond-market exposure will be encouraged to make their presence felt significantly in the bond market. The BB governor made it clear that the central bank will apply both push and pull factors to develop the bond market. In this connection, the BB will invite corporate bodies less exposed to bond market to a meeting to know about the latter's requirements for their active participation in the bond market. He adds that single borrower exposure limit must be respected. In that case, the corporate entities either have to 'go for overseas borrowing or look for bond and capital market'.

If the push factor does not achieve the target, a pull factor will be applied to encourage them for exploring the untapped potential of the bond market. Under the system, incentives like cutting the bond-issuing timeline and costs; and revisiting tax treatment may be considered. Clearly, things are yet to be streamlined enough but the initiatives will gradually make clear how the landscape of mobilisation of fund from such alternative sources can be achieved. In that case, the need for regular and competent oversight by the central bank will be of utmost importance. Given the deplorable experiences of the capital market, the trading of savings certificates on the bond market will have to go by the prescribed rules for ensuring its compatibility with the local business environment.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Fact Check Respond

Why Phillips Curve fails in Bangladesh

Abdullah A Dewan
Published :
Jan 28, 2026 23:08
Updated :
Jan 28, 2026 23:08

1769646962701.webp


In simple terms, the Phillips Curve proposes a trade-off: when an economy grows rapidly and jobs become plentiful, prices tend to rise faster; when unemployment is high, inflation tends to slow. In other words, a country may tolerate some inflation to achieve more employment or accept higher unemployment to stabilize prices. Developed in the context of relatively well-functioning market economies, this idea once shaped how governments thought about growth, inflation, and stabilization policy.

The Phillips Curve was never conceived as a mathematical law. It began as an empirical observation-a mid-20th-century British pattern linking unemployment to wage growth under specific institutional conditions. Only later was this relationship incorporated into formal macroeconomic models. As an empirical regularity rather than a universal rule, the Phillips relationship is inherently context dependent. Where labour markets are informal, price formation is distorted by non-market forces, and inflation is driven by external shocks or organized rent extraction-as in Bangladesh-the pattern has no reason to appear.

Time and technology have further weakened the relationship. Identified in the late 1950s, the curve emerged in an era of nationally bounded economies, strong trade unions, limited capital mobility, and stable industrial employment. Globalisation, automation, financialisation, and fragmented labour markets have since altered how wages, prices, and employment interact. Even in advanced economies, inflation has become less responsive to labour-market tightness as global supply chains, imported inflation, productivity shocks, and market concentration dilute wage-price transmission. In Bangladesh-marked by informality, external price pass-through, and non-market power-the structural distance from the original Phillips context is even greater.

Crucially, the Phillips Curve applies to economies where market forces dominate wage and price formation and non-market frictions remain limited. It is best treated here as a theoretical benchmark, not an empirical description of Bangladesh's inflation-employment dynamics.

In modern macroeconomics, this benchmark is formalized through the inflation-expectations-augmented Phillips Curve. In this framework, the short-run relationship between inflation and unemployment depends critically on expected inflation. Temporary demand expansion may reduce unemployment only so long as inflation expectations remain unchanged. Once workers and firms revise their expectations upward, inflation rises without delivering lasting employment gains, and unemployment returns to its natural rate. The long-run Phillips Curve is therefore vertical, reflecting the reality that inflation cannot permanently buy jobs. This expectations channel-central to policy credibility in advanced economies-already presumes functioning labour markets, coherent price signals, and institutional trust. Where these conditions fail, the Phillips mechanism does not merely weaken; it loses its operational meaning.

The logic behind the Phillips Curve is straightforward. When jobs are abundant, workers gain bargaining power, wages rise, firms face higher costs, and prices increase. When unemployment is high, wage pressure eases and inflation slows. For this mechanism to function, wages and prices must be set primarily through decentralized market interactions rather than administrative controls, cartel power, political interference, or coercive extraction. Once non-market forces dominate price formation, the inflation-unemployment trade-off collapses.

In Bangladesh, the Phillips Curve has never matured into a durable macroeconomic reality. It has appeared briefly and conditionally. Over the past twelve months, even under an interim government ostensibly freed from partisan compulsions, the curve has remained conspicuously absent. The reasons are not technical; they are structural, political, and institutional.

Bangladesh's macroeconomic history shows that the Phillips mechanism requires conditions the country rarely enjoys simultaneously. Inflation must be predominantly demand-pull rather than imported or supply driven. Labour markets must transmit tightness into wages. Monetary policy must credibly anchor expectations. Historically, none has held consistently. The only episode faintly resembling a Phillips-type relationship occurred in the mid-1990s, when growth accelerated, exchange-rate stability limited imported inflation, and food prices were subdued. Even then, the relationship was fragile. Floods, external shocks, and structural bottlenecks quickly overwhelmed it. Inflation resumed its familiar pattern-driven not by overheating labor markets but by food, fuel, logistics, and currency pressures.

The deeper reason lies in the nature of employment itself. Bangladesh's unemployment rate has always been a statistical mirage. With more than four-fifths of the workforce informal, open unemployment is neither a meaningful measure of slack nor a reliable transmitter of macroeconomic pressure. Underemployment absorbs shocks silently. Workers adjust hours, intensity, and survival strategies rather than bargain for higher wages. The Phillips Curve presumes a wage-price spiral; Bangladesh experiences a price-shock spiral instead.

Against this background, the failure of the interim government over the last year to engineer even a weak Phillips-type outcome should not surprise. Inflation remained elevated while employment conditions failed to improve meaningfully. Crucially, this inflation was not the kind policy stimulus could trade off against unemployment. It was driven by exchange-rate depreciation, global commodity pass-through, energy pricing adjustments, and-most corrosively-domestic market distortions rooted in corruption and extortion.

Here political economy matters more than textbook macroeconomics. Bangladesh's price formation mechanism is not competitive in the classical sense. Key commodity markets-rice, edible oil, onions, construction materials, transport services-are dominated by entrenched syndicates. These syndicates do not merely exploit shortages; they manufacture them. Hoarding, coordinated supply withholding, and price leadership ensure that even when global prices soften or domestic production improves, retail prices remain sticky upward. Inflation is therefore not a signal of excess demand; it is a tax imposed by organised rent-seeking.

The interim government inherited this architecture but lacked the coercive, institutional, and political capital to dismantle it. Administrative orders, moral suasion, and sporadic enforcement cannot break syndicates embedded in party financing, local power structures, and bureaucratic collusion. As long as extortion networks extract rents at wholesale markets, transport nodes, ports, and distribution chains, inflation remains structurally decoupled from employment conditions.

Monetary policy is equally constrained. Tightening credit in such an environment does not primarily suppress excess demand; it raises costs for small firms, traders, and consumers while leaving syndicate pricing power intact. Higher interest rates are passed on to consumers. Employment weakens, inflation persists, and the trade-off collapses. This is not a Phillips Curve failure of calibration; it is a failure of transmission. Fiscal policy offers no better lever. Spending restraint does little to cool food- and fuel-driven inflation, while expansion risks widening deficits without improving employment quality.

Corruption compounds the problem by distorting expectations. In a credible Phillips framework, workers, firms, and policymakers share beliefs about future inflation. In Bangladesh, expectations are unanchored because economic outcomes are routinely overridden by non-economic forces: toll extortion, selective impunity, and political interference. When prices rise, households do not interpret it as overheating; they interpret it as organized extraction. Such expectations harden inflation rather than soften it, rendering demand management ineffective.

What governs Bangladesh's inflation-employment dynamics is not a trade-off but a hierarchy. Prices respond less to labor-market conditions than to control over economic chokepoints-ports, transport corridors, wholesale markets, energy pricing, and regulatory discretion. Inflation rises not when workers gain bargaining power, but when syndicates exercise it. Employment expands not by tightening labour markets, but by dispersing risk across informality. In such a system, inflation is detached from prosperity and employment from productivity.

The past year reinforces a sobering conclusion. Bangladesh does not fail to achieve the Phillips Curve because policymakers misunderstand macroeconomics. It fails because the economy's institutional wiring does not allow the curve to exist. Inflation is not the price of prosperity; it is the symptom of governance failure. The Phillips Curve in Bangladesh is not merely weak; it is structurally displaced. It flickers briefly under benign conditions, then disappears under corruption, informality, and political capture. The interim government did not fail to bend the curve; it confronted an economy where the curve was never designed to function.

Dr. Abdullah A. Dewan, Professor Emeritus of Economics, Eastern Michigan University (USA); former physicist and nuclear engineer, Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission (BAEC).​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Fact Check Respond

The EU-India trade deal: What implications for Bangladesh
The deal that changes the competitive landscape
29 January 2026, 11:46 AM
UPDATED 29 January 2026, 13:30 PM

By Abdur Razzaque

1769737032538.webp


Dubbed the “mother of all trade deals,” the EU–India free trade agreement, concluded after more than two decades of negotiation, appears to be the most consequential for Bangladesh among recent trade deals involving other countries. The agreement delivers market access gains for India in those sectors that have long underpinned Bangladesh’s export success in Europe, notably textiles, apparel, leather, and footwear.


With Bangladesh set to graduate from LDC status in November 2026, and its preferential access to the EU market expected to erode after a three-year transition period, the timing of this deal could not be more unsettling. While trade agreements of other countries lie beyond Bangladesh’s control, this one demands utmost seriousness in assessing how competitive conditions would reshape in its most important export destination, and what that implies for preparedness, policy priorities, and the sustainability of an export model built largely on preferential margins rather than enduring competitiveness.

A twist of irony: from advantage to disadvantage


For decades, Indian exports of garments, textiles, leather, and footwear entered the EU facing substantial tariffs. The EU–India FTA dismantles this constraint almost entirely. For instance, it would slash duties on footwear from 17 percent to zero, and apparel and textiles from 9–12 percent to zero, substantially strengthening India’s competitiveness.

By leveraging LDC duty-free access while competitors such as India and Vietnam continued to face tariffs, Bangladesh was able to expand its share of the EU apparel market at a remarkable pace. As China’s share of EU apparel imports declined from 45 percent in 2010 to 28 percent in 2025, Bangladesh’s share rose sharply from about 7 percent to 21 percent.

This shift is particularly striking given that, in 2005, Bangladesh and India held almost identical market shares in the EU, but over the next two decades Bangladesh would be able to increase its share by three-fold as against India’s declining to 5 percent. During the same period, Vietnam’s share rose from 1 percent to converge with India’s before being further buoyed by the EU–Vietnam FTA that entered into force in 2020. Bangladesh’s rise was driven not only by tariff advantages but also by favourable EU rules of origin for LDCs, notably the single transformation rule.

Therefore, in a twist of irony, the very advantages of preferential margins that once propelled Bangladesh’s rapid ascent in the EU market are now eroding, just as key competitors secure permanent duty-free access through free trade agreements. Moreover, given the safeguard provisions embedded in the EU’s Generalised System of Preferences, there is a genuine risk that even if Bangladesh qualifies for GSP+ after graduation, its garment exports could still face full MFN tariffs, fundamentally altering the competitive balance in the EU market.

EU FTAs typically require double transformation for garments, a challenge for countries with weak backward linkages. While such requirements seem to have constrained Vietnam, they pose little difficulty for India, which has a deep and integrated textile base. This structural advantage is reinforced by India’s explicit export strategy. The Indian government has set an ambitious target of $100 billion in textile and apparel exports by 2030, from currently around $40 billion, and backed it with a layered policy framework that combines output-linked subsidies, export rebate schemes that refund embedded taxes, input-side support, and extensive infrastructure and logistics investments. These measures reflect a sustained commitment to building competitiveness, scale, and upgrading capacity.

External developments further intensify the challenge. With US reciprocal tariffs constraining India’s export prospects, Indian exporters are likely to redirect efforts toward alternative markets. The EU–India FTA facilitates this shift, intensifying competition in Europe, with Bangladesh among those most exposed.

What the numbers tell us?

The structure of exports to the EU differs sharply between India and Bangladesh. In 2024, India exported about $80 billion worth of goods to the EU from a diversified basket dominated by engineering goods, chemicals, minerals, pharmaceuticals, and agricultural products, with textiles and apparel accounting for less than 10 percent. Bangladesh’s exports, by contrast, amounted to about $21.4 billion in FY25, more than 90 percent of which came from garments. Such concentration leaves Bangladesh particularly vulnerable to shocks in a single sector, with limited scope to offset losses through diversification.

Quantitative modelling exercises undertaken by Research and Policy Integration for Development (RAPID) reinforce these concerns. Partial equilibrium estimates, when the impact is assessed separately for individual products at the HS 6-digit level, suggest that, with Bangladesh’s continuing LDC preferences, its garment exports would decline by $190 million due to EU-India FTA, with marginal losses in textiles and footwear. The picture changes dramatically once LDC graduation is factored in. When erosion of LDC preferences is combined with India’s duty-free access, Bangladesh’s garment exports are estimated to fall by more than $5.7 billion.

General equilibrium simulations using the GTAP model point in the same direction. In the scenario where Bangladesh faces post-LDC MFN tariffs, while competitors such as India and Vietnam enjoy duty-free access, Bangladesh’s exports are found to decline by 36.5 percent.
Even under a less severe scenario, where post-LDC Bangladesh retains duty-free access but faces stricter rules of origin such as double-stage transformation, exports are still projected to fall by around 16 percent.

It must be noted that these model-based estimates inevitably rely on simplifying assumptions and abstract from important real-world constraints such as adjustment frictions and buyer–supplier relationships. Even so, they provide valuable insight into the direction and relative magnitude of competitiveness pressures Bangladesh is likely to face.
Beyond tariffs: the new sources of advantage for India

It is so easy to overlook the competitive implications of the EU–India agreement that extend well beyond the headline issue of tariffs and rules of origin. Provisions on customs facilitation, regulatory cooperation, and standards alignment are expected to reduce transaction costs, improve predictability, and shorten lead times. For Indian exporters, these measures reinforce existing strengths, including stronger backward linkages and a growing ecosystem of logistics and compliance services, deepening integration into European value chains. The agreement also needs to be viewed alongside the EU’s tightening regulatory regime under instruments such as CBAM and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. While formally non-discriminatory, compliance capacity matters. India’s institutional readiness and regulatory cooperation with the EU may ease adaptation, whereas for Bangladesh rising compliance costs and weaker preparedness risk translating into higher effective trade barriers.

What options does Bangladesh really have?

The first foremost priority is to address the uncertainty surrounding post-graduation market access to the EU. Securing duty-free access for garments under GSP+, alongside workable rules of origin, should be treated as an urgent trade priority. Despite being identified in the Smooth Transition Strategy, progress on engagement with the EU remains limited. The UK’s recent relaxation of rules of origin for garments under its Developing Countries Trading Scheme offers a precedent Bangladesh should actively leverage.

Beyond market access, export competitiveness must be elevated to a national economic priority. This requires coordinated reforms across trade policy, energy pricing and reliability, logistics and ports, access to finance, skills development, and regulatory capacity.

At present, the most visible policy action has been the withdrawal of export subsidies, driven largely by fiscal constraints and packaged as a move toward WTO compliance. While compliance with international rules is necessary, it should not lead to a passive retreat from export support. Expanding WTO-compliant mechanisms for export financing, technology upgrading, and compliance support is essential.

Persistent governance failures also continue to impose avoidable costs. Unresolved issues such as the Savar CETP, unreliable energy supplies, congested ports, and inefficient customs procedures directly undermine competitiveness. At the same time, non-price competitiveness related to sustainability and due diligence is receiving limited policy attention, despite its growing importance. Addressing these challenges will require state investment alongside private sector initiatives.

Finally, sustaining export growth without significantly higher foreign direct investment will be difficult. Targeted incentives for FDI into man-made fibres, leather, footwear, and other export-oriented sectors, supported by predictable policies and serviced industrial land, are critical for export competitiveness.

What is most troubling, however, is the persistence of inertia. As competition intensifies and preferential margins erode with the approach of LDC graduation, the reform agenda remains largely confined to paperwork. Even from the time of the previous regime there has been no shortage of reports and recommendations on building export competitiveness, however, the key results have yet to materialise. In a dynamic world, such inaction can yield anything but competitive strength.

The author is an economist who also serves as Chairman of Research and Policy Integration for Development (RAPID), a think tank, based in Dhaka.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Fact Check Respond

Members Online

Latest Posts

Back
PKDefense
G
O
 
H
O
M
E