Skip to main content

India's 75% artisans don't know if GST is applicable to their handmade products

 A recent high-profile report on the imposition of Goods and Services Tax (GST) on handmade products has complained that the Government of India (GoI) has not shown any consideration for 90 million agricultural households, "who necessarily are connected to the artisan sector and sometimes overlap in activities."
Pointing out that the GoI has looked at GST landscape "from the point of view of formal status", the report wonders, "Will a basket maker sell his bamboo baskets made from raw material from the local forest to his neighbouring farmer with tax? Will a tribal terracotta tile maker in Madhya Pradesh make a roof for his neighbouring farmer who gives him grain and charge tax?"
Prepared by Jaya Jaitly of the Dastkari Haat Samiti and the National Association of Craftspeople, and Ritu Sethi of the Craft Revival Trust, known to be elite NGOs seeking to promote handicrafts across India for the last several decades, the report states, on the basis of a "rapid survey", that 82% of the craftspeople would be covered by GST, as their "annual income" would be more than Rs 20 lakh.
However, shockingly, to the question, "Do you know even if annual income under Rs 20 lakh you have to register if you are taking your products outside the state?", 76% said no. A major reason cited for this is, only 19% of them are able to understand "the procedure for GST in their craft."
When asked whether they knew about the fact that the tax is applicable for their craft, only 25% answered in the positive. When asked if they have understood procedure for GST in their craft, only 19% answer in the positive. On being asked whether they knew of the tax applicable on their craft, 25% answered in the positive.
To the query, "Do you know that even if selling price is more with new tax, you will get reverse input refund on tax paid for raw material?", only 11% said they knew. On being asked if they have a computer in their home or nearby, 60% said "Yes", and when asked "Are you dependent on an educated person, accountant or CA to help you with procedures required by GST?", 57% said "Yes".
The report states, "The points and queries raised in this representation show that there is vast confusion at every level of the crafts sector which has been unrepresented in the preparation of GST. Is has happened because there has been no preparatory meetings with experienced representatives working in the field in this sector."
Pointing out that "crafts and handlooms have been treated as formal industries and material rather than skill based", the report says, the GST virtually "makes the word ‘skill' meaningless", evn as using the word 'hand' callously, wiping the relationship between the two "out of existence."
"Crafts and Handlooms have not been coherently slotted and come under tax slabs ranging from 0%, 0.25%, 3%, 5%,12%,18% and 28%", the report states, adding, all it is "impossible to tackle".
In fact, the report underlines, "No sympathy or consideration has been given to the ecological aspects of natural fibres, natural dyes, organically produced cotton, ahimsa silk, recycling of waste materials, which are all historically, culturally and traditionally valued in India".
According to the report, " Customers benefit only at the cost of the Indian artisan as the competitive and comparative advantage of cheap mechanized imports and the Indian mechanized industry are completely to the disadvantage of artisans with hand skills who use little or no machine assistance in their work."
This predicament has taken shape because, says the report, "Till now the crafts sector has largely remained untaxed because of which products were cheaper and price competitive, e.g., handmade shoes, handloom fabric, handmade apparel etc. GST on these products is in the range of 5% to 28% making these products expensive and highly uncompetitive."

Comments

TRENDING

A Hindu alternative to Valentine's Day? 'Shiv-Parvati was first love marriage in Universe'

The other day, I was searching on Google a quote on Maha Shivratri which I wanted to send to someone, a confirmed Shiv Bhakt, quite close to me -- with an underlying message to act positively instead of being negative. On top of the search, I chanced upon an article in, imagine!, a Nashik Corporation site which offered me something very unusual.  I don't know who owns this site, for there is nothing on it in the About Us link. It merely says, the Nashik Corporation  site   "is an educational and news website of the municipal corporation. Today, education and payment of tax are completely online." It goes on to add, "So we provide some of the latest information about Property Tax, Water Tax, Marriage Certificate, Caste Certificate, etc. So all taxpayer can get all information of their municipal in a single place.some facts about legal and financial issues that different city corporations face, but I was least interested in them."  Surely, this didn't interest...

Beyond the 'plum' posting: Why the caste lens still defines bureaucratic success

Following my recent blog on former IAS bureaucrat Atanu Chakraborty’s sudden exit as non-executive chairman of HDFC Bank, a few colleagues from the Gujarat cadre — mostly those I interacted with during my Gandhinagar stint (1997–2012) as the Times of India representative — reacted rather sharply. Most of them sent their responses directly on WhatsApp, touching upon on the merits and demerits of Chakraborty’s controversial move. One former IAS officer, a Dalit, however, went further, raising a broader question: why do some officials like Chakraborty secure plum post-retirement assignments, while others are overlooked?

Blaming RTE, not underfunding: Education groups hit back at NITI Aayog working paper

A preliminary working paper by Arvind Virmani, economist and member of the Government of India think tank NITI Aayog, has concluded that the Right to Education (RTE) Act — enacted to guarantee free and compulsory schooling for children between six and fourteen — has actually worsened learning outcomes rather than improved them. The paper, published in March 2026 and reported by The Print on 16 April, has drawn sharp pushback from education rights advocates, who argue it builds a politically motivated narrative against constitutionally guaranteed entitlements.