Explore
Flagship studies, sector briefs, and recurring reports, by topic.
Long-form data narratives that walk through an argument.
Recurring advisor series, from weekly reads to annual reviews.
The daily policy prescription, generated each morning.
Seven sector deep-dives: banking, trade, energy, agriculture, and more.
Ask the corpus: answers grounded in published work, with citations.
Grounding verified
Hundi crackdown, KSA/UAE corridor sanctions, or fee shock; remittances ~6% of GDP
Remittances are worth roughly 6% of GDP (curated note), which makes them one of the largest and steadiest sources of foreign exchange the country has. The risk here is not a slow decline. It is a sudden channel disruption: a hundi crackdown that pushes senders toward informal substitutes, sanctions or compliance friction on the Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates corridors, or a fee shock that makes the formal route abruptly more expensive than the informal one. Any of these can move large flows off bank and MFS rails within weeks.
The mechanism that makes this a tier-1 short-horizon problem is substitution. Migrant workers choose the channel that is cheapest, fastest, and most reliable at the moment they send. When formal cost or friction rises even modestly relative to hundi, volume migrates, reserves lose a predictable inflow, and the informal network strengthens in ways that are hard to reverse. The current_state indicator is not yet collected (data_status: needs_collector), so the immediate exposure is also a measurement gap: the lead body cannot see corridor-level stress in time to react. The binding insight is that this channel is defended by keeping the formal price advantage intact and visible, not by enforcement against the informal one alone.
Start with monitoring (action 1): without corridor-level visibility, every other action is blind, and this is the cheapest, fastest item to build. Once the dashboard exists, lock in the price advantage (action 2) and corridor redundancy (action 3) in parallel, since both are defensive and do not depend on a shock having occurred. Those three unlock the conditional actions: a safe-to-execute hundi enforcement posture (action 4) and a pre-armed response trigger (action 5), both of which require the data and the formal on-ramp to be in place first. The unlock logic is simple: visibility enables defense, and defense enables safe enforcement.
The binding constraint is fiscal: the cash incentive that keeps the formal channel competitive is a recurring budget cost, and in a tight year MoF and the Internal Resources Division face pressure to trim it, which is exactly when a fee shock does the most damage. The second constraint is external and outside Dhaka's control: corridor compliance and sanctions decisions on the Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates side are set by counterparty jurisdictions, so the realistic lever is redundancy, not negotiation. The third is institutional: an enforcement-led hundi crackdown is politically attractive and quick, but if it runs ahead of the formal on-ramp it pushes volume into the informal network it was meant to shrink.
Remittances worth about 6% of GDP stay on formal rails only as long as the formal channel is cheaper and more reliable than hundi, which means the defense is price and redundancy, not enforcement alone. MoF and Bangladesh Bank should build corridor monitoring first, protect the formal cost advantage as a standing budget line, and never tighten against the informal channel before the formal on-ramp is ready.
The figures and responsible bodies cited in this prescription are drawn from the platform's own data and the GovTwin registry listed below.
Drafted by an Opus writer grounded in the facts above. Where the prescription cites a figure, it is drawn from those facts. The diagnosis derives from the BDPolicyLab crisis taxonomy; the responsible body and budget from the GovTwin registry. Recommended actions are the think tank's policy judgment.