Tamil Nadu’s GST revenue growth rose by just 3% in October, trailing neighbouring Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Telangana, according to figures cited by former finance minister Thangam Thennarasu. The figures have triggered a political dispute over the state’s economic performance and its ability to retain new investment.
Thennarasu cited the October growth figures in a post on X, saying Kerala recorded 23% growth, Andhra Pradesh 24%, Karnataka 18% and Telangana 14%. Tamil Nadu’s 3% growth was substantially lower than the rates reported for the four neighbouring states.
The former finance minister called for an urgent effort to strengthen domestic production. He said the modest increase in Tamil Nadu’s overall tax revenue was partly supported by taxes collected on certain key goods imported into the state, while revenue linked to the state’s own production continued to decline.
Thennarasu described the pattern as a sign of wider economic stagnation. His comments place the focus not only on the headline GST figure but also on the composition of tax growth—whether it is being generated by production within Tamil Nadu or by goods entering the state from elsewhere.
Former chief minister and DMK president M K Stalin separately criticised the state government’s economic record. Stalin said Tamil Nadu’s GST growth under the TVK government was below the national average, according to the report. The figures cited in the report do not include a national GST growth number.
Stalin also alleged that Korean investments worth Rs 1,614 crore intended for Tamil Nadu had shifted to Andhra Pradesh. He attributed the alleged shift to negligence by the state government and said Guidance Tamil Nadu, the agency responsible for attracting investments, had been sidelined because of what he described as personal egos within the administration.
The allegations come amid a broader political dispute over the priorities of the state government. Stalin accused Chief Minister C Joseph Vijay of concentrating on campaigning in bypoll constituencies instead of addressing economic concerns. The report does not include a response from the chief minister or the state government to the allegations.
GST growth is one indicator of economic activity and does not, by itself, establish the full condition of a state economy. However, the differences cited by Thennarasu have become part of the political argument over production, consumption and revenue mobilisation in Tamil Nadu. The distinction between taxes linked to imported goods and revenue from the state’s own production is central to that argument.
The reported investment shift also raises questions about the role of state investment-promotion agencies in competing for manufacturing and other projects. Guidance Tamil Nadu’s position in the process, and the status of the Korean investments mentioned by Stalin, were not independently detailed in the supplied report.
The immediate developments to watch are the state government’s response to the GST figures, any clarification on the Rs 1,614 crore investment claim and further data on Tamil Nadu’s tax collection and production-linked revenue.
