‘Missing’ GDP Figures Are a Fiction, SBI Research Says, Defends New GDP Series

The debate over the alleged “missing” crores in India’s nominal GDP estimates is based on a flawed comparison of different GDP series and has no sound economic basis, SBI Research said in a report on Tuesday.

The report strongly rejected claims that Rs 6 lakh crore was “missing” from nominal GDP in Q1 FY26 or that around Rs 42 lakh crore had disappeared between Q1 FY23 and Q2 FY26.

SBI Research described the narrative as a “badly scripted piece of fiction” and argued that the controversy stems largely from comparing GDP estimates prepared under different base-year methodologies.

The report said it had highlighted the issue in its September 2, 2026 report, pointing out that comparing two different base-year series was misleading and could lead to incorrect conclusions.

Dr Soumya Kanti Ghosh, Group Chief Economic Adviser at the State Bank of India, said the release of the Q1 GDP growth figure of 7.8 per cent had raised four important economic and policy questions.

These include the sizeable revisions in nominal GDP, the sectors responsible for the downward revisions, the unusually low GDP deflator compared with WPI and CPI inflation, and the apparent disconnect between the strong GDP growth rate and other economic indicators.

“Fourth, one does not feel the 7.8 per cent GDP growth and the leading indicators are not even tracking a buoyant GDP over a longer period with private investment still a laggard,” Ghosh said.

On revisions to GDP estimates, SBI Research noted that revisions are a normal feature of national accounts, particularly when the reference year is changed. The World Bank has also noted that significant revisions can occur when a new reference year is introduced for constant-price estimates.

India has revised its GDP base year several times, including in FY05, FY12 and most recently FY23. According to the SBI report, there have been 239 revisions across 70 quarters beginning FY09, with 134 revisions being upward and 105 downward.

The report said this pattern does not indicate any consistent relationship with the political regime in power, contrary to some claims being made in the public debate.

However, SBI Research acknowledged that the scale of revisions in nominal GDP has been considerably larger in the period following the introduction of the FY23 base year. Across the 14 quarters from Q1 FY23 to Q2 FY26, the cumulative revision was around Rs 41.8 lakh crore, compared with about Rs 10.1 lakh crore over the preceding 56 quarters.

The report argued that the difference is primarily linked to changes in the methodology used under the new GDP series.

A closer look at the sector-wise figures, it said, provides a clearer explanation. Under the new series, the downward revision in Gross Value Added (GVA) amounted to around Rs 41.1 lakh crore between Q1 FY23 and Q2 FY26.

However, about 95 per cent of this revision was concentrated in the Trade, Hotels, Transport and Communication segment, where the revision stood at around minus Rs 39 lakh crore.

At the same time, Finance, Insurance, Real Estate and Business Services recorded a positive revision of around Rs 13.6 lakh crore.

According to SBI Research, the contrasting movements reflect a more detailed measurement of economic activity, particularly in the informal and unincorporated sectors.

The new methodology makes greater use of data from the Annual Survey of Unincorporated Sector Enterprises (ASUSE) and the Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS), allowing economic activity in these sectors to be mapped more accurately instead of relying heavily on proxy indicators used under the earlier methodology.

The report noted that trade and related services have a significant presence of unincorporated businesses. Direct information from ASUSE and PLFS therefore provides a more detailed picture of activity in these areas.

Similarly, improved corporate and administrative data allow economic activity in finance and other formal-sector services to be captured and allocated more accurately.

SBI Research argued that these methodological changes explain much of the apparently large revision. Without the specific sub-sector adjustments, the overall change would fall to around Rs 2.1 lakh crore, according to the report.

The report's central argument is that the large revisions should be understood in the context of the revised methodology and improved data sources rather than interpreted as evidence of GDP figures having simply “gone missing”.