Fuel price hike: Who bears the cost?

The latest fuel price increase will transmit through Bangladesh’s economy far beyond the petrol pump. A Tk 20 per litre rise across diesel, petrol, octane and kerosene comes at a time when inflation is already high, household purchasing power remains under pressure, and private investment is weak. 

The immediate concern is not simply the higher cost of fuel itself, but the second-round effects that will spread through transport, food, agriculture, industry and services. The government has yet to explain clearly how it intends to contain these additional inflationary pressures.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Diesel is particularly important because it dominates petroleum consumption and is deeply embedded in the cost structure of the economy. Higher diesel prices raise freight charges, bus and truck operating costs, irrigation expenses, and the costs of running generators and machinery. These costs are rarely absorbed fully by firms. A significant part is passed on to consumers. 

Food inflation could be especially sensitive because transport, irrigation and distribution costs all rise together. Once businesses and workers begin adjusting prices and wages in anticipation of further increases, inflation can become more persistent and harder to reverse.

The welfare impact will be regressive. Richer households consume more fuel directly, but poorer households are often more exposed indirectly because they spend a larger share of their income on food, transport and other necessities. A higher bus fare or a modest increase in rice, vegetables or cooking-related expenses can, therefore, have a much larger effect on their real living standards. Urban low-income workers, rural households dependent on diesel irrigation, and informal workers with little bargaining power are especially vulnerable.

Understandably, the government cannot indefinitely shield consumers from international oil price shocks. Large fuel subsidies weaken the fiscal position, create payment pressures for BPC, and divert resources from health, education, infrastructure and social protection. Yet the debate should not be reduced to a simple choice between subsidy and price adjustment. 

Bangladesh’s fuel sector also suffers from institutional weaknesses, limited transparency, inefficiencies in procurement and distribution, and a substantial tax burden on petroleum products. These issues receive too little attention. Raising retail prices without addressing these structural sources of cost risks shifting the burden of sectoral inefficiency onto consumers.

The timing also matters for growth. Higher energy and transport costs squeeze business margins when credit conditions are tight and domestic demand is fragile. Small and medium enterprises have less capacity than large firms to absorb such shocks. Investment may be delayed, production scaled back, and employment creation weakened. Exporters can also face higher inland transport and production costs, reducing competitiveness.

The policy response should, therefore, go beyond another round of administered price increases. Fuel pricing needs a transparent rule that separates temporary global shocks from permanent domestic cost pressures. The government should examine the tax structure on fuel, improve BPC governance, strengthen procurement efficiency and reduce avoidable distribution costs. 

Targeted support should protect low-income households, agriculture and essential public transport rather than subsidising consumption indiscriminately. That is why the quality of the policy response matters as much as the adjustment. Without such measures, the fiscal burden may decline, but inflation, inequality and weak growth could become the new cost of adjustment.