News
Opposition questions lack of revenue generation proposals, action plans in budget
View(s):
By Kasun Warakapitiya
Opposition political parties reacting to the budget proposals for 2026 have questioned the practicality in implementing some of the plans, and say the proposals lack clarity.
The opposition pointed out that though the expenses were spelt out, the ways of generating revenue, action plans and mechanisms to reach economic sustainability were not explained.
They called on the people not to expect much from the 2026 budget as its practicality was doubtful since it fails to explain revenue mechanisms.
The opposition pointed out that the government had produced a budget that favours IMF resolutions, and aligned with promoting public private partnership, and privatisation. They said when state institutes are privatised, people would not get state concessions leading to a difficult time ahead. 
General Secretary of the Sri Lanka Podu Jana Peramuna, Sagara Kariyawasam, told the Sunday Times that though the speech harped on economic development, it lacked the mechanism or proper allocation of funds.
According to him, the budget also had deceivingly put more pressure on the people by crafty moves such as reducing the annual turnover threshold for value added social contribution levy from Rs 60 million to Rs 36 million.
“People would not immediately understand this; according to the reduction of turnover threshold not only the large scale shop owners who earn 60 million would be taxed, but the small scale shop owners who make 36 million,” he said.
He explained that the tax burden will ultimately fall on people, but once more the tax alone could not be an improvement. The budget speech also lacked proposals to improve production, and grow the export economy. An action plan to revive the economy too was not outlined.
Though the budget mentioned improving the digital industry, and allocated funds to improve the tourism industry, it had not explained a mechanism of how to improve both industries, and had failed to outline mechanisms and action plans on economic growth through them.
Galle District MP and Chief Opposition Whip, Gayantha Karunathilleka, told the Sunday Times the budget shows that the ruling party which was following a Marxist-Leninist ideology for 70 years had turned 180 degrees from their ideology and created a right wing budget (similar to J R Jayewardene’s budget).
Though the government heavily discussed education reforms, he said, allocations for that had not been included in the budget.
He explained that the budget also did not talk about improving productivity of export crops such as tea, rubber and coconuts.
Mr Karunathilleka also expressed concern on the practicality of state revenue generation as the budget speech only mentioned a few revenue proposals. However, it barely explained how the revenue would be made because action plans were lacking.
State revenue should not come from only heavy taxes which burden the people, he said, but the state should gain foreign remittances through export and tourism, and for that, a strategic plan should be created.
Sri Lanka Freedom Party General Secretary, Dayasiri Jayasekara told the Sunday Times that the key requirement was that the country’s economic condition be addressed.
Economic improvement and stability should be first addressed, while a steady practical plan should be outlined to reduce poverty.
Mr Jayasekara added that there was no mechanism explained in the budget on how the government would recruit degree holders into public service.
Though it was said that 75,000 people would be recruited, the criteria of recruitment, specifications or the “proper system” was not clarified.
He explained that though the proposal vaguely says people would be recruited as technical officers, law enforcement officers, and revenue officers, it does not define if the job offered would match the qualifications of the personnel.
Minority parties too were skeptical of the budget proposals as they found certain proposals impractical, while they saw discrepancies within allocations.
Leader of the Democratic People’s Front (DPF), Mano Ganesan said that though the budget speech gave a positive vibe the possibility of implementing the promises given remains uncertain.
Though the government said that the daily wage of estate workers would be increased from 1,350 to 1,550 by increasing the wages by Rs 200, the practicality of that is questionable, as the estate owners would simply refuse to pay and seek legal solutions.
Mr Ganesan pointed out that the proposals included an additional attendance fee of Rs 200 paid by the government and that Rs 5,000 million is set aside for that. But he pointed out that there are 140,000 workers. Therefore, when considering daily payment of Rs 200 by the state for 12 months, an allocation of Rs 8,000 million is required.
He said the revenue surplus reached this year was due to allowing vehicle imports. Therefore Customs earned revenue as more imports took place due to pent up demand, he pointed out, and said this trend would not repeat during the following year. This lack of a revenue earning mechanism would adversely affect the economy.
The best way to say that you found the home of your dreams is by finding it on Hitad.lk. We have listings for apartments for sale or rent in Sri Lanka, no matter what locale you're looking for! Whether you live in Colombo, Galle, Kandy, Matara, Jaffna and more - we've got them all!