NEW DELHI DEC 17 :Congress leader Rahul Gandhi launched a sharp attack on the Modi government on Wednesday, alleging that it is systematically encouraging “monopoly or duopoly” across virtually every sector of the Indian economy, while squeezing out smaller players. He asserted that the control of the economy must be restored to Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) if India is to generate jobs, preserve competition, and ensure fair opportunities for ordinary entrepreneurs.
Speaking in New Delhi on December 17, Gandhi claimed that government policies are paving the way for a handful of large corporate groups to dominate markets, leaving little room for small and medium businesses to survive or grow. According to him, this concentration of economic power in a few hands is not accidental but a deliberate outcome of the ruling dispensation’s approach to governance and economic management. He described “monopoly or duopoly” as a “curse for India” and alleged that such a model is being replicated “in every sector, every industry”.
Gandhi argued that when monopoly power is handed over to select corporate houses, market dynamics are destroyed because smaller competitors are unable to compete on unequal terms. In his view, monopolists can then dictate prices, supply conditions and business practices without adequate checks, which ultimately harms both producers and consumers. This, he suggested, undermines the basic structure of a healthy market economy, where multiple firms should be able to participate and thrive.
To illustrate his argument, Gandhi referred to his recent interactions during the Winter Session of Parliament, when he met a delegation of small and medium ice cream manufacturers as part of what he called a “Jan Sansad” or People’s Parliament exercise. He said that listening to their grievances made it evident to him that the government’s policies are “determined to destroy small businesses” in order to benefit a few “favoured industrialists”. The experiences shared by these entrepreneurs, he suggested, offer a microcosm of the wider distress faced by small and medium enterprises across the country.
Gandhi emphasized that these ice cream manufacturers primarily serve poor and lower middle-class customers, and thus play an important role in catering to everyday consumption needs at affordable prices. He pointed out that there are thousands of such small units across India, collectively providing employment to millions of people. In his telling, their struggles are not isolated but part of a pattern in which small producers are pushed to the wall through policy design, administrative pressure, and fiscal burdens.
A major part of Gandhi’s criticism focused on the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime and the way it is applied to small businesses. He argued that the GST framework is excessively complex for small and medium enterprises, making it extremely difficult for them to comply and bear the associated costs. He noted that a special ‘composition scheme’ was originally created to ease the tax burden and compliance load for small entities, but alleged that the BJP government “deliberately excluded” ice cream from this scheme.
Alongside GST, Gandhi also accused BJP-ruled states and municipal corporations of sharply increasing various fees and charges, adding yet another layer of financial stress on small manufacturers. He said that the combination of high taxes, complicated paperwork, and rising local levies has created an “onslaught” that many small ice cream businesses are unable to withstand. As a result, he claimed, these units are collapsing in large numbers, to the point where such local brands are “hardly visible” even at iconic tourist spots such as India Gate, where they once had a noticeable presence.
Gandhi insisted that the plight of ice cream manufacturers is emblematic of a broader and deeper crisis affecting small and medium businesses across sectors. He maintained that “this story is being repeated in every sector,” asserting that only those business groups perceived as the Prime Minister’s “favourite monopolists” are able to survive and expand. According to him, these big corporate houses allegedly fund the ruling party and, in return, receive policy advantages and an effective monopoly over large segments of the market.
In a video shared on his channel, Gandhi broadened the argument by stating that the problems narrated by ice cream makers mirror the difficulties faced by small and medium enterprises in general. He stressed that if India genuinely wants to create large-scale employment, the focus must be on strengthening small and medium businesses, because “that is the place where it is going to be done”. Instead, he accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi of “helping monopolies crush these people”, thereby weakening the country’s economic fabric.
Gandhi warned that granting monopoly power to a small group of companies “basically destroys the market”, as it eliminates meaningful competition and places undue power in the hands of a few. In such a scenario, he argued, the monopolist “can do whatever he wants”, while regulators and smaller manufacturers have little leverage or control. This, he contended, leads to fewer options for consumers, higher prices, and reduced innovation.
He further alleged that the creation and nurturing of monopolies has a direct bearing on the country’s employment situation. By sidelining MSMEs—which typically absorb a large share of the workforce and are often more labour-intensive—Gandhi said the system “ensures a large number of Indian youngsters are unemployed”. In his view, the erosion of small enterprises not only hurts the current generation of workers and entrepreneurs but also undermines long-term economic resilience and social stability.
Delving into the political dimension, Gandhi claimed there is a specific reason why monopolies are being cultivated under the present government. He alleged that favouring large corporate houses is “the easiest way” for the ruling party to secure funding, as these big players have direct access to top political leadership and its offices. By contrast, he said, small entrepreneurs and MSMEs “don’t have access to him, they don’t have access to his offices”, and therefore cannot compete in financing the party.
He singled out industrial groups such as Adani and Ambani as examples of what he described as “the largest” beneficiaries of this monopoly-driven model, asserting that similar patterns can be observed “in every sector”. Gandhi argued that this nexus between political power and concentrated corporate power is “dangerous for the country” because it distorts policy choices, weakens institutional checks, and entrenches inequality, both economic and political.
Concluding his remarks, Gandhi called for “breaking this vicious cycle” of concentration and cronyism. He urged that the “strong reins” of India’s economy be handed back to MSMEs so that they can function as genuine partners in the nation’s progress. In his vision, empowering small and medium enterprises would help generate jobs for young people, provide the public with “affordable and quality options”, and ensure that small businesses are not mere spectators but equal participants in the growth story.
Gandhi also stressed the need to give clear preference to small and medium industries in policy design and implementation, arguing that they must be “looked after” and guaranteed a proper “space in the economy”. Only then, he suggested, can India hope to build an economic structure that is broad-based, inclusive, and capable of sustaining both growth and employment without being skewed in favour of a select few corporate giants.
