India's ambassador to the United States, Vinay Mohan Kwatra, has pushed back against criticism of the proposed Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, saying the legislation is aimed at improving transparency, governance and clarity in the rules governing foreign funding.
In a series of posts on X, Kwatra addressed five claims surrounding the FCRA Bill. The concerns have centred on its possible impact on NGOs, religious organisations and assets created using foreign contributions.
What the government says the FCRA Bill changes
Kwatra said regulating foreign financial flows is a sovereign function linked to national security and is not intended to stop legitimate civil society organisations from receiving overseas donations.
He pointed to the history of the law, noting that India's first FCRA was introduced in 1976 and replaced by a new framework in 2010. Amendments followed in 2016, 2018 and 2020.
According to Kwatra, foreign contributions received by registered organisations have increased from about $1.2 billion in 2010-11 to $2.67 billion in 2024-25.
He also said India has more than three million NGOs, while 14,450 organisations hold FCRA registration. The law, he explained, requires organisations to register, receive foreign funds through the prescribed process and report their use.
Asset seizure concerns addressed
One of the major concerns around the proposed legislation is the provision dealing with assets when an organisation loses, surrenders or fails to renew its FCRA registration.
Kwatra said the existing framework already provides for foreign contributions and assets created from them to vest with a State Government authority after cancellation or surrender of registration. According to him, this provision has been in place since 2010.
The 2026 Bill proposes a designated authority to safeguard such assets, while also providing for their return if the organisation restores its registration.
Kwatra further said properties linked to places of worship would be transferred to another FCRA-registered organisation of the same faith if the original association's registration is cancelled.
Bill draws criticism in India and US
The legislation has faced opposition in India, with critics arguing that organisations could risk losing assets and that minority-run institutions may be disproportionately affected.
The debate also gained attention in the US after Republican Congressman Riley Moore raised concerns about the proposed provisions involving churches and religious charities.
"Christians have been in India since St Thomas the Apostle travelled to the Malabar Coast just decades after the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. But despite this long Christian history, India's Parliament is considering amending Foreign Contribution Regulation Amendment (FCRA) rules to permit government takeovers of churches and religious charities,” he wrote on X.
Responding to the criticism, MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said the matter falls within India's domestic legislative process.
“Legislative matters concerning India are our internal affairs on which decisions are taken by the Parliament of the country. I would also like to point out that there are several nations, including the United States, which regulate the flow of foreign funds," said MEA Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal.
Kwatra also cited foreign-funding regulations in countries including the US, Australia, Canada, the UK and the EU to argue that India is not alone in regulating overseas financial flows.