Bangladesh’s new pay scale delivers relief…and a one lakh crore taka fiscal test
Bangladesh has given its civil servants their biggest pay rise in more than a decade. The harder question is whether the state can afford what comes next.
The cabinet of Prime Minister Tarique Rahman on Monday approved the National Pay Scale 2026, lifting the minimum basic salary for a government employee to 20,000 taka from 8,250 taka and the maximum to 156,000 taka from 78,000 taka.
The increase is 142% at the bottom and 100% at the top, while pensions will rise particularly sharply for poorer retirees. Some 24 lakh civilian and military employees and more than 9 lakh retirees and other beneficiaries are expected to be covered.
This is one of the largest structural changes to Bangladesh’s public finances in years.
The finance ministry estimates the eventual additional annual cost at 1.0558 lakh crore taka. The government has therefore chosen not to impose the entire increase immediately.
Basic salaries will be raised in stages between July 2026 and July 2027, with lower-paid employees receiving priority, while the revised allowances are scheduled to take effect from January 2028.
The government explicitly cites both the fiscal burden and inflation risk as reasons for staggering implementation. That caution is understandable when the numbers are placed beside the national budget.
Bangladesh's FY2026-27 budget is 9.38 lakh crore taka, equivalent to 13.7% of GDP. The revenue target is 5.64 lakh crore taka and the budget deficit 2.26 lakh crore taka, or 3.6% of GDP.
Once fully implemented, the additional annual pay-scale bill alone is therefore equivalent to about 11.3% of the entire current national budget and nearly 19% of the government's targeted annual revenue. Using the government's budget-to-GDP ratio, it amounts to roughly 1.5% of GDP.
Those comparisons reveal why the pay scale matters far beyond the bureaucracy.
Narrow option, wide spread-outs
A salary rise is unlike a bridge or power plant. A government can postpone a bridge. It cannot easily cut a civil servant's salary next year. Once incorporated into the pay structure, the expense becomes recurrent expenditure and pensions eventually convert part of today's wage increase into tomorrow's long-term liability.
Bangladesh is particularly vulnerable to this calculation because its government is small in revenue terms. Centre for Policy Dialogue noted earlier this year that the country's tax-to-GDP ratio was only 6.8% in FY2025, among the lowest internationally, while revenue collection was already falling well short of target.
The think-tank estimated the proposed pay revision would add roughly 1.06 lakh crore taka annually to government expenditure.
This creates the central paradox of the new pay scale. Bangladesh's economy is much larger than it was when salaries were last comprehensively revised in 2015. But the government's capacity to capture a share of that economy through taxation has not expanded commensurately.
GDP, by itself, therefore tells only half the story.
If government wages increase by 1.5% of GDP in a country collecting, say, 20 or 25% of GDP in taxes, the adjustment may be uncomfortable but manageable. In a country whose tax take is below 7% of GDP, the same wage increase consumes an exceptionally large portion of fiscal resources.
That is why the more revealing denominator is revenue. An additional bill approaching one-fifth of targeted government revenue is consequential even if Bangladesh succeeds in spreading it over several years.
The money must ultimately come from one of four places: higher taxes, lower spending elsewhere, additional domestic borrowing or more inflationary financing. There is no fifth option.
Higher tax collection would be the least damaging route, particularly if achieved by widening the tax base rather than raising rates on existing taxpayers. But Bangladesh has repeatedly struggled to lift its revenue-to-GDP ratio.
Cutting other expenditure carries a different cost. CPD has warned that increasing the share of salaries, allowances and pensions leaves less room for health, education, social protection, technology and other development expenditure.
There is already competition for every taka. Public administration accounts for about 15% of the FY27 budget, while interest payments absorb roughly another 14%. The Annual Development Programme has been set at 3 lakh crore taka.
If revenues disappoint while salaries are fixed, development expenditure usually becomes the adjustable component. Bangladesh has seen this pattern before and found out that capital projects can be delayed or allocations left unspent much more easily than wages, pensions or debt servicing.
Borrowing provides another route, but merely transfers the burden.
The inflation and the unaccounted factors
More government borrowing from domestic banks can push up interest costs and, depending on monetary conditions, crowd private borrowers out of the credit market. Borrowing today also means interest payments tomorrow, adding another rigid expenditure item to the same budget already carrying the higher wage bill.
The inflation question is subtler.
A public-sector wage increase does not mechanically produce inflation. If it is financed through taxation or spending cuts, its aggregate demand effect can be relatively contained. If productivity and domestic supply rise alongside consumption, the economy can also absorb some additional demand.
But handing substantially greater disposable income to more than 30 lakh employees, pensioners and beneficiaries will almost certainly boost consumption.
That is partly the point. Lower-paid employees, who receive the largest proportional increase, are also more likely to spend rather than save each additional taka. Retailers, landlords, transport operators, consumer-goods companies and service businesses should see some benefit. The multiplier could give domestic demand a short-term lift.
The problem arises when supply cannot respond.
More money chasing relatively constrained housing, food, transport and services can push prices higher. That would partly erode the very purchasing-power restoration the pay rise is intended to deliver and spread the cost to households that receive no government salary.
There is an important precedent.
The eighth national pay scale in 2015 also almost doubled salaries. The minimum basic salary rose 101% to 8,250 taka and the highest regular basic salary 95% to 78,000 taka. The World Bank estimated an additional cost of 15,904 crore taka in FY2015-16 and 23,828 crore taka in the following fiscal year.
Headline inflation actually declined from 6.4% in FY2015 to 5.9% in FY2016, helped by falling food and global commodity prices. That might appear to suggest that fears about public-sector pay rises were misplaced.
Look underneath the headline number, however, and the picture was less comforting.
The World Bank found that non-food inflation jumped from 6% to 7.5% in FY2016, attributing the increase partly to the new government pay scale, alongside higher electricity and gas tariffs and stronger private credit. Urban inflation also increased.
In other words, favourable food and international commodity prices masked some of the domestic demand pressure.
The 2009 experience carried similar warnings. Bangladesh's seventh national pay scale raised basic salaries by an average of about 52%t, establishing a minimum of 4,100 taka and maximum of 40,000 taka. It required roughly 6,222 crore taka in additional annual expenditure, and implementation of allowances was delayed partly to spread the burden.
Economists were already warning then that the injection of purchasing power could add to inflation at a time of rising commodity prices and abundant liquidity.
Go back another four years and the same fiscal dilemma appears.
The 2005 pay scale raised salaries by an average of 53%, taking the minimum basic salary from 1,500 taka to 2,400 taka and the maximum to 23,000 taka. The additional expenditure was estimated at about 4,000 crore taka.
The government did not simply absorb the increase overnight. Under an agreement described by the IMF, the higher wage and pension bill was capped at 4,000 crore taka and phased over three years, accompanied by plans for selective hiring restraint and civil-service reform.
Inflation subsequently rose, but it would be misleading to attribute that primarily to salaries. The IMF identified higher petroleum and imported food prices and a depreciation of the taka as major causes. Real GDP growth nevertheless accelerated to about 6.5% in FY2006.
The historical lesson is therefore not that pay rises inevitably cause an inflation crisis. It is that their consequences depend heavily on what else is happening in the economy… commodity prices, exchange rates, credit growth, taxation and the government's method of financing them.
A long gap and lost numbers
The 2026 increase differs from its predecessors in one especially important respect: its size relative to the state's revenue capacity.
It also arrives after 11 years without a comprehensive revision. That matters. Inflation accumulated over such a long period means comparing 20,000 taka today with 8,250 taka in 2015 exaggerates the improvement in real living standards. Much of the nominal increase merely restores purchasing power that employees have already lost.
This is the strongest economic argument for the reform.
A state cannot indefinitely pay skilled administrators, engineers, doctors, teachers and technical specialists salaries increasingly detached from private-sector wages and living costs. Poor compensation can make recruitment harder, encourage moonlighting and weaken morale.
The new structure also deliberately gives proportionately more to people at the bottom and raises pensions most aggressively for retirees receiving the smallest amounts. But higher pay does not automatically buy a better state.
Bangladesh has increased government remuneration repeatedly, yet there is little evidence that salary revisions alone improve public-sector productivity or eradicate corruption. CPD makes the same point that corruption is institutional instead of being a consequence of inadequate wages.
That creates an implicit bargain behind the 1 lakh crore taka decision.
If taxpayers are being asked to finance substantially better compensation, they can reasonably expect better services, stronger performance evaluation, digitisation, fewer redundant posts and greater accountability. Without productivity reform, the pay scale risks becoming a large transfer from taxpayers to an already protected segment of the labour force.
There is also a distributional issue. Government workers make up only a fraction of Bangladesh's labour force. A Grade 20 employee will see basic pay climb 142%. A garment worker, day labourer, small trader or private-sector office employee receives no corresponding statutory increase.
If the resulting demand contributes to inflation, those workers effectively experience the other side of the transaction which involves higher prices without higher government salaries.
The narrowing of the public-sector wage hierarchy is nevertheless notable. By disproportionately raising lower grades, the government has chosen a more progressive structure than a uniform percentage increase. The pension slabs do the same for retirees.
Economically, that means a larger immediate consumption effect because poorer households generally spend a higher proportion of additional income. Socially, it means the benefits are less concentrated at the senior end of the civil service.
The decision to phase implementation is consequently more than administrative convenience. It is the macroeconomic safety valve.
It gives the government time to raise revenue before the entire liability appears in the accounts, reduces the size of the immediate demand shock and allows monetary authorities to observe whether consumption is spilling into prices.
But phasing changes the timing of the bill, not its ultimate size.
By 2028, Bangladesh will have permanently shifted its expenditure baseline upwards. Future budgets will start with higher salaries, higher allowances and higher pension obligations before a single taka is allocated to a new school, hospital, road or climate project.
That is the real significance of the National Pay Scale 2026.
—