Digital gold purchases rise 110% despite SEBI warning that it remains unregulated
What happened
Digital gold purchases surged 110% year-on-year ahead of India's festive season, as buyers increasingly shifted from physical gold to app-based platforms. Despite this rapid growth, SEBI has repeatedly cautioned that digital gold is not regulated under any financial regulatory framework in India — not by SEBI, RBI, or IRDAI. Buyers hold no statutory investor protection. The product is sold through fintech apps as fractional ownership of physically stored gold, but no regulator formally oversees these platforms.
Why it matters
Digital gold allows buyers to purchase fractional quantities of gold online, typically starting from ₹1, with the physical gold held in insured vaults by entities like MMTC-PAMP, SafeGold, or Augmont. The purchase happens through third-party apps — often payment wallets or stockbrokers — who act as distribution partners.
The critical regulatory gap: digital gold does not fall under SEBI's securities regulation (it is not a security or mutual fund), it is not a bank deposit (so RBI rules don't apply), and it is not an insurance product. This places it in a regulatory vacuum.
SEBI first flagged this concern in 2021, directing its registered intermediaries (brokers, mutual fund distributors) to stop selling digital gold by September 2021. However, the underlying digital gold platforms themselves are not SEBI-regulated entities, so SEBI's jurisdiction is limited to its own intermediaries, not the product.
For exam purposes, understand the distinction between regulated gold investment instruments — Sovereign Gold Bonds (RBI-regulated, issued by GoI), Gold ETFs (SEBI-regulated, traded on exchanges), and Gold Mutual Funds (SEBI-regulated) — versus unregulated digital gold sold through apps. The 110% YoY surge despite warnings illustrates the gap between regulatory intent and market behaviour, a classic fintech regulatory arbitrage scenario that examiners test through statement-based MCQs.
PM Vishwakarma scheme: skill training plus ₹3 lakh credit for traditional artisans
What happened
PM Vishwakarma, launched on 17 September 2023, supports traditional artisans and craftspeople across 18 trades — from blacksmiths to potters — by offering free skill training, a toolkit incentive of ₹15,000, and collateral-free credit of up to ₹3 lakh at 5% interest. Implemented by the Ministry of MSME, the scheme targets self-employment and generational craft preservation among Vishwakarma communities, integrating digital payments and market linkage support.
Why it matters
PM Vishwakarma addresses a structural gap in India's welfare architecture: traditional artisans — those who work with hands and tools across hereditary trades — had no dedicated formal credit or skilling programme before this scheme. Most such workers belong to OBC and SC/ST communities and operate in the informal economy, making them invisible to mainstream financial inclusion efforts.
The scheme operates in two credit tranches: ₹1 lakh (Tranche 1) and ₹2 lakh (Tranche 2), both at a concessional 5% interest rate, with the interest subvention funded by the government. This is a key design feature — the market rate is higher, and the difference is borne by the Centre, making it a direct subsidy mechanism rather than a loan waiver.
The 18 covered trades include carpenter, boat maker, armourer, blacksmith, hammer and tool kit maker, locksmith, goldsmith, potter, sculptor, cobbler, mason, basket/mat/broom maker, doll and toy maker, barber, garland maker, washerman, tailor, and fishing net maker.
The toolkit incentive of ₹15,000 is given as an e-voucher (not cash), ensuring it is used only for tool purchase. Artisans receive a PM Vishwakarma certificate and ID card upon registration, which serves as proof of recognition.
From a financial inclusion perspective (RBI/NABARD angle), this scheme expands the formal credit frontier to a previously excluded segment — micro-entrepreneurs in hereditary crafts — using the Common Service Centre network for registration and PM SVANidhi-style delivery logic.
NSDL appoints Ankit Sharma as Executive Director, compliance, with SEBI approval
What happened
NSDL has appointed Ankit Sharma as Executive Director heading its regulatory and compliance vertical. The appointment required approval from the Securities and Exchange Board of India, as well as from NSDL's Nomination and Remuneration Committee. NSDL, or National Securities Depository Limited, is India's first and largest depository, holding securities in electronic form for millions of investors. Senior appointments at NSDL require SEBI's explicit sign-off, reflecting the regulator's oversight role over market infrastructure institutions.
Why it matters
NSDL — the National Securities Depository Limited — was established in 1996 under the Depositories Act, 1996, making it India's first depository. It holds securities such as shares, bonds, and mutual fund units in dematerialised (electronic) form on behalf of investors, eliminating the risks associated with physical share certificates. Its counterpart is CDSL (Central Depository Services Limited), established in 1999.
NSDL is classified as a Market Infrastructure Institution (MII) under SEBI's regulatory framework, along with stock exchanges and clearing corporations. Because MIIs are systemically critical — a failure can cascade across the entire securities market — SEBI exercises direct oversight over their governance, including senior appointments. This is why Ankit Sharma's appointment as Executive Director required SEBI's prior approval, a procedural safeguard that ensures regulatorily compliant leadership at the top of such institutions.
The regulatory and compliance vertical at a depository like NSDL is specifically responsible for ensuring adherence to SEBI regulations, managing inspections, and interfacing with the regulator on policy matters. Appointing a dedicated Executive Director for this function signals the growing regulatory complexity that MIIs face.
For exam purposes, the key static concepts here are: NSDL's founding year (1996), its status as India's first depository, the Depositories Act under which it operates, SEBI's role as the apex regulator for capital markets, and the MII classification that triggers mandatory regulatory approval for key appointments.
MoSPI releases updated guide on how India measures its GDP
What happened
The Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation released an updated edition of 'Sources and Methods for Compilation of National Accounts Statistics,' detailing how India computes its GDP and related macroeconomic aggregates. The document covers data sources, estimation methodologies, and sector-wise compilation approaches aligned with the System of National Accounts 2008 framework. It serves as the authoritative reference for understanding how CSO constructs India's national income estimates across agriculture, industry, and services sectors.
Why it matters
National Accounts Statistics (NAS) are the backbone of macroeconomic policymaking. India's GDP is compiled by the National Statistical Office (NSO), formerly the Central Statistics Office (CSO), under MoSPI. The compilation follows the System of National Accounts 2008 (SNA 2008), an internationally agreed standard maintained by the UN, IMF, World Bank, OECD, and Eurostat.
India measures GDP using three approaches: the Production (or Output) approach, the Expenditure approach, and the Income approach. In practice, India primarily uses the production approach at constant and current prices. The base year currently used is 2011-12, adopted in the 2015 revision that shifted from 2004-05.
Key data sources vary by sector. For agriculture, the document relies on Crop Production Statistics and area-yield data. For industry, it uses the Annual Survey of Industries (ASI), Index of Industrial Production (IIP), and MCA21 corporate database. For services, it draws on NSSO surveys, RBI data on financial services, and administrative records.
The document also explains the difference between Gross Value Added (GVA) and GDP: GDP = GVA + Taxes on products − Subsidies on products. GVA is compiled at basic prices; GDP is measured at market prices.
For aspirants, understanding these source distinctions matters because examiners test which agency provides data for which sector, and whether a given statistic is computed at constant prices (real) or current prices (nominal). The MCA21 database being used for non-financial corporations since the 2015 revision is a frequently tested modernisation detail.
