Rs 1,09,019 crore to states: how tax devolution works and what the 31 October instalment changes

What the Centre released on 31 October

On 31 October 2026, the Union government released an additional instalment of tax devolution of Rs 1,09,019 crore to state governments, the Finance Ministry said. The release was over and above the regular monthly devolution, and it was the second additional instalment of the financial year 2026-27.

The first additional instalment, of the same amount, was released on 1 August 2026. The ministry's stated purpose for the October release was the upcoming festive season: to enable states to accelerate capital spending and to finance development and welfare-related expenditure.

The release was published through the Press Information Bureau with a full state-wise table covering 28 states. It gives the total, the purpose and the state figures, and, notably, no conditions on how states must spend the money and no date for the next instalment. That absence is itself informative: devolution is not a scheme with guidelines, it is a transfer of the states' share.

The headline figure needs one immediate clarification. Rs 1,09,019 crore is about Rs 1.09 lakh crore, a very large single-day transfer, but it should be read against the year's scale: the Union Budget for 2026-27 estimated total tax devolution to states at Rs 15.26 lakh crore, against Rs 13.93 lakh crore in the revised estimates for 2025-26. One instalment is roughly 7 per cent of the year's estimated total.

Who got what: the state-wise picture

Uttar Pradesh received the largest amount, Rs 19,208 crore, followed by Bihar at Rs 10,845 crore, Madhya Pradesh at Rs 8,010 crore, West Bengal at Rs 7,866 crore and Maharashtra at Rs 7,022 crore. Together those five states account for Rs 52,951 crore, or about 48.6 per cent of the instalment, calculated from the ministry's table.

The next tier, Rajasthan (Rs 6,460 crore), Odisha (Rs 4,819 crore), Andhra Pradesh (Rs 4,597 crore), Karnataka (Rs 4,504 crore), Tamil Nadu (Rs 4,466 crore) and Gujarat (Rs 4,094 crore), shows how the formula spreads money beyond the biggest states. Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Assam each received between Rs 3,500 crore and Rs 3,700 crore, while Kerala received Rs 2,597 crore and Telangana Rs 2,370 crore.

At the other end, the smallest states received the smallest sums: Sikkim Rs 365 crore and Goa Rs 398 crore. That is not a judgement on those states; it is arithmetic. The formula weights population and income heavily, so a small, richer state gets a small share of any single instalment even though the money may matter more relative to its budget.

Two cautions about reading the table. First, these are instalment amounts, not annual budgets: a state's total devolution for the year is many times its share of this one release. Second, the ranking in one instalment is not a ranking of need or of total support, since states also receive grants, centrally sponsored scheme funds and their own revenues, which this table does not show.

From your tax rupee to a state's treasury: how devolution works

Devolution starts with the taxes the Centre collects, including income tax, corporation tax, customs, excise and the Centre's share of GST, among others. After setting aside items that are not shared, such as cesses and surcharges levied for specific purposes, what remains is called the divisible pool: the pot that is actually divided between the Centre and the states.

The division happens in two steps, and the vocabulary matters. Vertical devolution is the split between the Centre and all states taken together: currently 41 per cent of the divisible pool goes to the states. Horizontal devolution is the split of that 41 per cent among individual states, decided by a formula. The first step answers how much for states as a whole; the second answers how much for Uttar Pradesh versus Sikkim.

The 41 per cent figure has a history. The 15th Finance Commission, chaired by N. K. Singh, recommended 41 per cent for 2021-26, down from the 14th Commission's 42 per cent, with the one percentage point held back to provide for the newly formed Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh from central resources. Reporting on the current release says the 41 per cent share continues under the framework accepted following the 16th Finance Commission's recommendations, which govern 2026-27 onwards.

The Finance Commission itself is a constitutional body under Article 280, constituted by the President roughly every five years to recommend how tax revenues should be shared. Its recommendations are not self-executing, since the government accepts them and the sharing follows, but in practice the vertical share it recommends becomes the operating rule for the award period.

The formula: why Uttar Pradesh gets more than Sikkim

The horizontal formula is where the politics lives, because it decides winners and losers. The most recently published full formula, from the 15th Finance Commission, weighted six criteria: income distance at 45 per cent, population (2011 Census) at 15 per cent, area at 15 per cent, forest and ecology at 10 per cent, demographic performance at 12.5 per cent, and tax effort at 2.5 per cent.

Income distance, the heaviest weight, measures how far a state's per-capita income sits below the richest state's; the poorer the state, the larger its share. That single criterion explains much of the table: Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh combine large populations with lower per-capita incomes, so they score on both the two biggest weights at once.

The other criteria pull in different directions. Population rewards the sheer number of people to serve; area recognises that covering a large state costs more; forest and ecology rewards states that preserve dense forest; demographic performance rewards states that have brought fertility down; tax effort rewards states that raise more of their own revenue relative to their economies. A state can therefore gain on one criterion while losing on another.

One honest limit: the detailed horizontal weights of the 16th Finance Commission, which now governs, could not be verified from an opened source for this article, so the weights above are labelled as the 15th Commission's. Readers should treat them as the best published guide to how the shares are broadly built, not as a confirmed statement of the current formula's every weight. What is confirmed is the 41 per cent vertical share and the state figures themselves.

Why additional instalments happen: fourteen instalments, and the timing trick

In an ordinary year, devolution arrives monthly, but the system is designed for fourteen instalments in a fiscal year rather than twelve. That means some months carry two instalments: the regular monthly transfer plus an additional one, chosen at the Centre's discretion. The 31 October release is one such double month, and the second of the year after August.

The ministry calls the release both an additional instalment and an advance instalment, and both words are doing work. Additional means over and above the month's regular transfer; advance means the money arrives earlier than it otherwise would. The distinction matters for interpretation: this is best understood as timing, part of the year's devolution reaching states sooner, rather than a new entitlement created on the day.

Whether the full-year total ends up higher than estimated depends on actual tax collections, since the 41 per cent share applies to what is actually collected in the divisible pool. If collections run strong, the year's devolution can exceed the Budget estimate; if they weaken, later instalments adjust. The release itself does not promise a higher annual total.

Timing is not trivial, though. Capital spending, roads, schools, hospitals and water systems, needs lead time: tenders, contracts and construction cannot be compressed into the last weeks of March. Money that arrives in October and November can be put to work in the same financial year; money that arrives in March often cannot. That is the practical case for advancing instalments before the festive season and the final quarter.

What it means for state finances

Devolution is the single largest untied transfer most states receive. Untied is the key word: unlike centrally sponsored schemes, which come with guidelines and matching conditions, devolved taxes can be spent on whatever the state prioritises, its own roads, its own welfare programmes, its own salary and pension bills. That freedom is why states watch the devolution calendar so closely.

The scale of the October release relative to the year's estimate shows its role: at about 7 per cent of the Rs 15.26 lakh crore Budget estimate, a single additional instalment is large enough to move a state's spending plans but not large enough to transform its finances. Two such instalments this year, totalling Rs 2,18,038 crore by simple addition, amount to roughly a seventh of the estimated annual devolution arriving ahead of the monthly rhythm.

For states with tight cash positions, early money eases borrowing needs and lets welfare payments and contractor bills be met on time. For states with large capital programmes, it lets projects proceed without waiting for the next monthly cycle. But it does not, by itself, change a state's long-run revenue capacity, which depends on its own tax base, its economy's growth and the Finance Commission formula at the next award.

The festive-season framing is also worth noting for what it is not. The release does not announce a household payment, a tax cut or a completed project. It is a transfer between governments. Its effects on ordinary people arrive indirectly, through the roads built, the schemes funded and the bills paid on time, or not, if the money is absorbed into routine expenditure instead of capital works. That follow-through is where the story will actually be decided.

What to watch after this release

First, collections: do central tax receipts track the Budget estimate, or do they run ahead or behind? The answer determines whether the year's devolution ends near Rs 15.26 lakh crore or somewhere else, and whether more additional instalments follow.

Second, utilisation: how much of the advanced money shows up as capital spending rather than routine expenditure? State budget and expenditure data in the coming months will show whether the festive-season advance did the job the ministry described.

Third, the 16th Finance Commission's full framework: its horizontal formula and any changes to grants will shape state shares for the rest of the award period, and states that feel short-changed by the formula can be expected to argue their case publicly, as they have in past rounds.

Finally, the calendar: the release gives no date for the next instalment, and the monthly rhythm resumes on its usual schedule. The October advance will look like good timing if projects move; it will look like mere cash management if it does not. Either way, the number to remember is not just Rs 1,09,019 crore, but what it becomes in concrete form by March.

Editorial disclosure

This article was researched with AI assistance and reviewed by the publisher before publication. Report factual errors through our contact page.