Home › Blog › Lok Sabha Passes Bill Enabling Possible MDR on UPI

Lok Sabha passes Taxation and Other Laws Amendment Bill 2026 modifying legal framework for UPI merchant discount rates.

Lok Sabha Passes Bill Enabling Possible MDR on High-Value UPI Transactions – Digital Payments Reform Explained for Exams

India’s Unified Payments Interface has grown into one of the world’s largest real-time payment systems on the foundation of a zero-Merchant Discount Rate framework for most transactions. On 6 August 2026 that legal foundation shifted. The Lok Sabha passed the Taxation and Other Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2026, which amends the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007. The amendment removes the statutory barrier that had prevented banks and payment service providers from levying charges on notified electronic payment modes, including UPI. It does not itself impose any fee. It empowers the central government to decide, through future notification, which modes or categories of transactions may attract a Merchant Discount Rate.

Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman clarified outside the House that any eventual charge would apply to merchants, not to end-users, and that person-to-person transfers would remain outside the ambit. Discussions within the industry and among officials have centred on possible rates in the range of 0.25–0.4 per cent on commercial transactions above ₹2,000, or alternative structures linked to merchant turnover, with an overall ceiling. The National Payments Corporation of India-led steering committee is expected to finalise recommendations only after the legislative change is complete. Person-to-person and low-value payments, which constitute the bulk of transaction volume, are intended to stay free.

The policy rationale advanced by the government and by many banks is sustainability. Zero-MDR succeeded in driving rapid adoption and financial inclusion. It also left banks and fintechs bearing the cost of infrastructure, fraud management, customer support and continuous innovation. As transaction values and volumes scaled, the absence of a revenue stream from high-value commercial payments became a point of strain. Officials argue that a modest, targeted MDR on larger merchant transactions can fund further investment without undermining the free character of everyday consumer payments.

Critics, including opposition members, warned that even a merchant-side charge risks being passed on to customers through higher prices and that the long-standing zero-fee promise was a core reason for UPI’s public acceptance. The government responded that the amendment merely restores flexibility and that any actual levy would be carefully calibrated, lower than card MDR rates, and confined to a small percentage of transactions that account for a large share of value.

The legislative change forms part of a broader taxation and investment-facilitation package. Its significance for the digital payments ecosystem is nevertheless distinct. UPI’s success has been cited globally as a model of public digital infrastructure. Maintaining that model while ensuring the underlying operators remain financially viable is the policy balance the amendment seeks to strike. Implementation will depend on subsequent notifications, NPCI recommendations, and the response of banks, large merchants and smaller traders.

For competitive-exam aspirants the development sits at the intersection of several syllabus themes. Digital public infrastructure, financial inclusion, the role of the Reserve Bank of India and NPCI, the economics of two-sided payment markets, and the trade-off between rapid adoption and long-term sustainability all appear regularly in questions on the Indian economy and technology. Understanding the difference between person-to-person and person-to-merchant flows, the concept of MDR, the legal link that previously existed between the Payment and Settlement Systems Act and the Income-tax Act, and the distinction between enabling legislation and actual imposition of charges is essential for precise answers.

The zero-MDR phase demonstrated how policy design can accelerate behavioural change. The current amendment tests whether a carefully limited reintroduction of charges on high-value commercial legs can preserve the inclusion gains while strengthening the financial health of the ecosystem. The ultimate test will lie in the details of any future notification and in the market’s response. Until then, the legal framework has changed; the everyday free UPI experience for ordinary users has not.

Frequently Asked Questions