Bangladesh’s economy and businesses are under heavy, multi-front pressure. High inflation has eroded consumer purchasing power, driving down household spending. Exports are contracting. Imports of industrial raw materials, intermediate goods and capital machinery are falling. Businesses of all sizes — from small enterprises to large conglomerates — are grappling with deep strains. Against this backdrop, the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS) has published GDP data for the 2025–26 fiscal year that many economists and analysts dismiss as overstated. The agency estimates growth at 4.14 percent and puts the size of the economy at $501 billion.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has already raised fundamental questions about the statistical basis of Bangladesh’s widely promoted economic success story of the past decade. In its most recent Data Adequacy Assessment, released in January 2026, the IMF assigned a “C” rating to the country’s national accounts statistics. The fund noted that Bangladesh still uses outdated methods to calculate GDP — particularly a failure to regularly update its Supply and Use Table, which obscures the true picture of production. It also flagged significant weaknesses in national income data, citing severe delays in timeliness and publication.
The BBS report released on June 10 put GDP at over BDT 61.2 trillion (about $501 billion), up from BDT 55.15 trillion ($456 billion) a year earlier. That marks a $45 billion increase in a single year. The headline growth estimate of 4.14 percent compares with 3.49 percent in FY 2024–25.
The services sector led with 4.59 percent growth, up from 4.35 percent. Agriculture grew 2.78 percent, against 2.42 percent. Industrial growth, however, slowed to 2.86 percent from 3.71 percent.
Per capita income climbed to $3,020, or BDT 368,873, from $2,769 (BDT 334,511) the previous fiscal year. That represents a BDT 34,362 rise in one year and a BDT 64,000 increase over two years.
BBS’s latest GDP estimates, however, rest on a statistical record that multiple research bodies and economists say the ousted Awami League government systematically pumped up during its near-15-year rule. Their charge: the regime inflated GDP and other indicators to burnish its graduation from least developed country status, while deliberately understating inflation. The exaggerated numbers mainly gave the government extra borrowing headroom.
After the July uprising toppled Sheikh Hasina in August 2024, an interim government white paper committee also flagged the falsified BBS data. Interim leader Dr Muhammad Yunus repeatedly spotlighted the inflated GDP on the world stage and pledged to correct the figures. No reform followed. A corrected GDP calculation would now likely push the debt-to-GDP ratio above 50 percent, sharply shrinking the government’s borrowing capacity and making foreign lenders far less willing to extend credit.
The economy is straining under multiple loads. Inflation has gutted purchasing power, constricting consumption and stalling business activity. Private-sector credit growth has collapsed to an all-time low, and entrepreneurs are battling a working capital crunch.
The external sector has also weakened. Exports, mainly ready-made garments, have fallen in the first ten months of the fiscal year. Imports of industrial raw materials and capital machinery have also dropped, fanning concern about future production capacity. Industrial output and private investment are flagging. The stock market has been in a prolonged torpor, with new IPOs and investment expansion drying up. Factory shutdowns and layoffs are deepening the employment crisis.
Global headwinds — shifting tariff policies, conflict in the Middle East and volatile energy markets — are layering on additional stress. Bangladesh’s economy is losing momentum under the accumulated pressure. Against this backdrop, the GDP growth and size figures are drawing intensifying scepticism.
BBS National Accounting Wing Director (in charge) Md Sahabuddin Sarker told Bonik Barta that the government was not interfering in data. The GDP estimate, he said, was provisional. “Agriculture had contributed positively and services had a comparatively larger share. Although industry remained weak, the overall calculation still yielded modest growth — partly because subsidy reforms had curbed leakages, altering the expenditure structure in ways now reflected in the GDP numbers.”
Sarker acknowledged the economy was under pressure but pointed to positive signals in business indicators and the Purchasing Managers’ Index, which, he said, suggested it was not entirely stagnant but showing limited dynamism in some sectors.
Independent economic audits, however, indicate that Bangladesh’s actual nominal GDP may have been overstated by roughly $100 billion compared with the figures published by the previous government. Economists and the national white paper committee, in a separate assessment, concluded that the ousted Awami League administration systematically distorted and manipulated data to fabricate an image of high economic growth. While the officially declared nominal GDP was about $460 billion, prominent economists note that stripping out a decade of artificially inflated growth leaves the true size of the economy at approximately $322 billion to $350 billion.
The white paper committee, headed by prominent economist Dr Debapriya Bhattacharya, found that political influence had thoroughly compromised the BBS. The manipulation included inflating annual GDP growth by an average of 2.8 percentage points between 2009 and 2019 to project supercharged expansion. Consumer price index statistics were suppressed, showing inflation at around 9 to 11 percent when actual inflation is estimated to have run at 15 to 17 percent. In a healthy economy, high GDP growth correlates with job creation, rising private investment and an expanding tax-to-GDP ratio. None of these materialised in Bangladesh.
The white paper committee and independent analysts have identified three principal motives behind the previous government’s falsification of economic data. First, the regime artificially suppressed the debt-to-GDP ratio to make Bangladesh appear fiscally solvent, helping it secure massive foreign loans and investment. Second, it used grossly inflated development indicators to justify colossal infrastructure budgets; the committee estimated that billions of dollars were embezzled through inflated land valuations, procurement fraud and institutional kickbacks. Third, it fabricated per capita income to meet international thresholds and legitimise its timetable for graduating from least developed country status. Stripping the $100 billion overstatement from the national accounts would slash per capita income, inflate debt ratios and drag down other headline indicators.
“Bangladesh’s GDP crossing $500 billion is not an achievement of the past year or two; it’s the fruit of decades of economic growth, private-sector development, exports, remittances and rising productivity,” said M Masrur Reaz, chairman and chief executive of Policy Exchange Bangladesh. “So it’s not abnormal for the economy to keep expanding even amid the current crisis.”
“The industrial slowdown is concerning but not surprising,” he added. “Private investment, imports of capital machinery and raw materials, and credit flow to the private sector are all weak. This is the real economy showing through. Agriculture and services are performing relatively well, but for a country like Bangladesh, sustainable job creation and long-term growth require a strong industrial base.”
Reaz also questioned the reliability of GDP statistics, citing past controversies, persistent methodological weaknesses and data-collection constraints. “An independent review of the national accounts methodology is needed to improve credibility and public trust,” he said. “And given the large informal sector, we must also focus on narrowing its scope to measure economic activity accurately.”
A Bonik Barta report published on February 1, 2025 examined the consequences of a $100 billion overstatement. The report noted that if GDP for the 2023–24 fiscal year were $350 billion rather than the official $460 billion, the foreign debt-to-GDP ratio would rise to 29.65 percent from 22.6 percent. Total public debt, which stood at roughly $156 billion at the end of that fiscal year, would jump from 36.3 percent of GDP to 44.57 percent. Per capita GDP would fall from the government’s $2,675 to about $2,040.