Several Indian states have come forward with small subsidies for housewives as a way of recognizing the importance of domestic work. The popularity of the measure is such that it has already helped decide elections.
In a village in the state of Madhya Pradesh, in central India, a woman receives a small but constant sum of money every month.
It’s not about salary, as she doesn’t have a formal job. It’s a unconditional money transfer of the government.
Premila Bhalavi says she uses the money to buy medicines, vegetables and pay her son’s school fees.
The amount — 1500 rupees (about 14 euros) — may be small. But it is a predictable recipe, which generates a feeling of control and a glimpse of independence. Therefore, its effects are very important.
This story is becoming more and more common.
Across India, 118 million adult women 12 states receive unconditional cash transfers from the government. As a result, the country became the setting for one of the largest and least studied social policy experiments in the world.
Long accustomed to subsidizing grain, fuel and jobs in rural areas, India is venturing into something even more radical: paying adult women for taking charge of running the home.
They take on the burden of unpaid care work and constitute a large electorate too large to be ignored.
Eligibility criteria vary. There are age and income limits, exclusions for families of public servants, taxpayers and owners of cars or large tracts of land.
“Unconditional financial transfers represent a significant expansion of Indian states’ social welfare systems in favor of women,” law and social justice professor Prabha Kotiswaran, from King’s College London, told the BBC.
The transfers range from 1000 to 2500 thousand rupees (between 9.35 euros and 23.35 euros) per month. These are modest amounts, representing around 5% to 12% of family income, but are paid regularly.
With 300 million women now having bank accounts, the administrative process for transfers has been simplified.
Transfers without conditions
Women tend to spend money on home and family needs, such as children’s education, food, gas for cooking, medical and emergency expenses, payment of small debts and, occasionally, personal items such as jewelry or small luxuries.
What differentiates India from Mexico, Indonesia and Brazil — countries that have large conditional cash transfer programs — is the absence of conditions.
In India, money arrives regardless of whether the child attends school or whether or not the family is below the poverty line.
Goa, in western India, was the first state to launch an unconditional cash transfer program for women in 2013.
The phenomenon gained strength just before the pandemicin 2020, when Assam, in the northeast of the country, created a program for vulnerable women. Since then, transfers have become an uncontrollable political force.
The recent wave of unconditional transfers targets adult women. Some states recognize their unpaid domestic and care work.
The southern state of Tamil Nadu calls its payments a “duty grant.” The program in West Bengal, in the east, also recognizes unpaid contributions of women.
In other States, recognition is implicit. Government officials expect women to use transfers to the home and family well-beingaccording to experts.
Influence on elections
This focus on the role of women in the economy has also influenced policy.
In 2021, actor and politician Kamal Haasan from the state of Tamil Nadu promised “salaries for housewives“, but his fledgling party lost the elections.
In 2024, promises of cash transfers to women contributed to the victory of political parties in the states of Maharashtra, Jharkhand, Odisha, Haryana and Andhra Pradesh.
In the recent elections in Bihar, the political power of transfers it was clear and manifest.
In the weeks leading up to the elections in that state, which is the poorest in the country, the local government transferred 10,000 rupees to 7.5 million women’s bank accounts, as part of a livelihood generation program.
As women voted in greater numbers than mendecisively influencing the outcome of the election.
Critics called the system blatant vote buying, but the result was clear. Women helped the Bharatiya Janata Party-led coalition to achieve a landslide victory.
Many believe the cash injection demonstrated how financial support can be used as political leverage. But Bihar is just one part of a much larger picture.
Across India, unconditional financial transfers reach tens of millions of women regularly.
Maharashtra alone promises benefits to 25 million women, while the program in the eastern state of Odisha reaches 71% of women voters.
Unpaid work
Certain political circles criticize these programs because, in addition to being considered vote buyingthey put pressure on state finances.
Twelve Indian states plan to spend around $18 billion on these payments during the current fiscal year.
A report by the PRS Legislative Research study center highlights that half of these States face a fiscal deficit, which occurs when there is debt to pay for regular expenses, without generating revenue.
But many argue that the payments reflect a belated recognition of something Indian feminists have advocated for decades: the financial value of domestic work and unpaid care.
The latest Time Use Survey indicates that by 2024, Indian women will spend almost five hours a day to this type of work, which represents more than 7.6 times the time dedicated by men.
This disproportionate burden helps explain women’s low participation in the Indian workforce.
Financial transfers, at least, recognize this imbalance, according to experts. But do they work?
The evidence is still scarce, but revealing. A 2025 study in Maharashtra concluded that 30% of women entitled to payments did not enroll in the program, either due to documentation problems or, sometimes, a feeling of self-sufficiency.
But, among those who have registered, almost all control their own bank accounts.
A survey conducted in 2023 in West Bengal revealed that 90% of women manage their accounts personally, while 86% decide how to spend the money. Most of them use the funds to food, education and medical expenses. It is not a transformative value, but its regularity offers security and a feeling of autonomy.
“Evidence shows that cash transfers are immensely helpful for women to meet their own immediate needs and those of their homes,” says Kotiswaran. “They also restore dignity to women who would otherwise would depend economically on their husbands for every little expense.”
It is important to highlight that none of the research found evidence that money takes away from women the incentive to seek paid work, nor that reinforce gender roles. These are two big fears of feminists, according to a report prepared by Kotiswaran, Gale Andrew and Madhusree Jana.
The transfers also did not reduce women’s unpaid work burden, according to researchers. But they strengthen their autonomy financial and, to a certain extent, negotiating power.
They are neither a panacea nor a poison. They are useful tools, but limited in a patriarchal society, where money alone cannot undo structural inequalities.
