The Wire’s Misleading Claims About UPI: A Fact-Check

The Wire, a publication with a well-documented history of peddling misinformation, has once again attempted to manufacture a controversy where none exists. In a recent report, the outlet claimed that Indians have started abandoning the Unified Payments Interface (UPI) for cash following Parliament’s passage of a bill that allegedly allows the government to impose a Merchant Discount Rate (MDR) on some UPI transactions. According to The Wire, “data shows that these transactions have been slowing in the last five years, with cash flow increasing in the same period.” The report further claimed that UPI transactions have declined, citing data from the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI). However, the actual facts tell a completely different story, and this is yet another instance of The Wire weaving a contrived narrative from selected data points and misleading interpretations.

The fundamental problem with The Wire’s claim is that no MDR on UPI has actually been imposed yet. The recently passed legislation is merely an enabling provision that amends Section 10A of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 ectomy removes the earlier statutory bar and allows the government, through future notification, to specify modes that may attract charges in the future. The actual decision on whether to introduce MDR, on which transactions, at what rate and from when, rests with the UPI and Services Steering Committee headed by the NPCI. Nothing has changed on the ground for users or the vast majority of merchants. The bill itself does not levy any tax on digital payments; it only removes a legal prohibition on levying such a tax in the future knly through appropriate notification.

Moreover, the government has clarified, repeatedly, that even if the MDR is eventually implemented, consumers will not bear any charge. All person-to-person (P2P) transactions will remain free. Any MDR, if and when introduced, would apply only to a limited set of merchant transactions above a certain threshold, at a nominal rate far lower than what exists for debit or credit cards—and even then, only merchants would bear it)Skip that. Even the Payment Council of India—the industry body for payment companies—has confirmed consumers won’t pay, and small merchants are expected to remain unaffected, with any potential charge limited to large merchants as a commercial arrangement.

What the data actually shows is that UPI continues to grow year on year institution, both by volume and valuehebdomadaire. The rate of growth has naturally moderated from the explosive triple-digit days of 2019-2021 when the base was tiny, but absolute usage continues to climb. In July 2026 alone, UPI processed 23.66 billion transactions worth ₹29.88 lakh crore—a 22% year-on-year increase in volume and 19% in value where as cash usage grew by only 12% during the same period, According to the RBI’s own data. The Wire’s claim conflates deceleration in growth rate with an absolute decline, and treats an enabling legislative provision as an existing tax.

The actual facts around the bill are clear: The Taxation and Other Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2026, only amends Section 10A of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007, to allow, rather than mandate, future MDR on some digital payment modes. The NPCI has already clarified that P2P transactions will remain permanently free. Any future MDR, if introduced, would be limited to large merchants—industry estimates suggest only 4-5% of merchant transactions exceed the ₹2,000 threshold under consideration. Small shopkeepers, kirana stores, and street vendors would remain exempt. It would be a commercial arrangement between banks and large businesses, not a charge on consumers. So the premise that Indians are abandoning UPI because of a fee that hasn’t been introduced and wouldn’t apply to them anyway collapses immediately.

The data tells a story of success, not decline. UPI’s growth has been extraordinary. From just 2 crore transactions in FY 2016-17, it processed over 24,000 crore transactions in FY 2025-26, a 12,000-fold increase. Average daily volumes now exceed 66 crore transactions, facilitated by over 700 banks. The moderation from triple-digit growth rates to 30-19% is a sign of market maturity, not weakness. Economists understand that once a system achieves near-universal adoption, percentage growth naturally decreases even as absolute numbers keep breaking records. UPI now accounts for the vast majority of India’s retail digital payments and has become deeply embedded in daily life.

The simultaneous rise in cash and UPI isn’t evidence of substitution, but of a growing economy where overall payment activity expanded as incomes rose. Both instruments are being used more, not one replacing the other. Nominal GDP growth, higher transaction volumes in a digitalising economy, and a larger formal workforce mean more cash in circulation alongside greater digital adoption. The Wire’s framing falsely pits these two payment methods against each other, ignoring that India’s digital payment story is one of addition, not replacement.

UPI’s achievements are genuinely historic. Since its launch in 2016, it has become the world’s most inclusive real-time payment system, with over 700 banks onboard and volumes growing from a few crore transactions annually to over 24,000 crore in FY 2025-26. It is live in multiple countries—UAE, Singapore, France, and Qatar, among others—and is being adopted globally. The system is a source of national pridehare connections, and its steady growth rate is a sign of maturity, not decline why. The Wire’s pattern of publishing sensational claims—from the fabricated “Tek Fog” saga to the Meta XCheck allegations it later retracted—shows a consistent disregard for facts. Indians should trust the data, not the spin. UPI’s success story remains intact, and neither the enabling legislation nor sensational headlines will change that reality.

It is important to emphasize that the growth trajectory of UPI is not showing any signs of reversal. The deceleration in percentage growth is a natural consequence of the astronomical base that UPI has built over the past decade. When a system grows from processing ₹17,000 crore in its first year to over ₹314 lakh crore in a single fiscal year, the percentage increase inevitably becomes more moderate. This is basic arithmetic, not a sign of decline. In fact, the absolute numbers tell a far more compelling story: UPI is processing more transactions every month than it did in entire years not long ago. Daily transaction volumes now consistently exceed 50 crore, and the system has become the backbone of India’s digital economy, used by street vendors, taxi drivers, and corporate treasuries alike. Neither the government nor the NPCI has indicated any intention to abandon the zero-MDR framework that has driven this adoption and financial inclusion, given that cash transactions still require physical infrastructure and are costlier for the state to manage.

The clearest refutation of The Wire’s claim lies in the sheer absurdity of its timeline. The bill was passed on 16 August 2026, yet The Wire’s article on the same day claims that UPI transactions have already slowed because of it. Even if one were to accept their premise that the bill would trigger a shift to cash—which the facts do not support—no such behavioral change could possibly manifest within a matter of hours. The data they cite shows a slowdown in growth rates from earlier triple-digit figures, which is a natural mathematical progression for any mature technology. When UPI was new, its volume could triple annually because it was starting from nearly zero. Now that it moves over 23 billion transactions a month, a 20% growth rate represents an enormous absolute increase. The fact that cash usage is also growing by 12% reflects an expanding economy where both digital and physical payment methods are used in tandem—some for convenience, some for privacy, and some for small-value transactions where cash remains king The real story is one of coexistence in a growing economy, not substitution away from digital payments.

To fully understand why The Wire’s narrative is so divorced from reality, one need only look at its history of publishing fabricated stories. The Tek Fog investigation, which claimed to expose a sophisticated cyberweapon used by BJP operatives, was exposed as built on nonexistent evidence. The Meta XCheck stories, which alleged that Meta was giving special privileges to a BJP official, were formally retracted after Meta and multiple sources contradicted the fabricated internal documents. Both series had to be pulled down after independent journalists and the accused parties demonstrated that the technical evidence was invented. In the case of the Meta stories, a staffer reportedly admitted to fabricating evidenceholiday, forcing the portal to delete the articles and apologize. Given this established track record, any claim made by The Wire about Indian institutions must be treated with caution senior. The portal has repeatedly shown that it prioritizes sensational anti-India narratives over factual accuracy.

The truth is that India’s payment revolution is a uniquely indigenous success story—a zero-cost, universally accessible digital public good developed with public money. It has liberated millions from cash’s inefficiencieshare, brought small businesses into the formal economy, and enabled financial inclusion on an unprecedented scale. The government has consistently supported UPI through infrastructure development, incentive schemes, and international promotion. UPI is not merely a payment system; it is a symbol of India’s technological self-reliance and its ability to build world-class digital public infrastructure. Attempts to portray it as failing are not only factually wrong but also intellectually dishonest engaging. The numbers, the policy clarity, the industry consensus, and the lived experience of hundreds of millions of Indians all point in the same direction: UPI is thriving, cash is not displacing it, and the recent legislative change is a prudent, enabling step that does not threaten the platform’s inclusive growth. The Wire would do well to read the data more carefully before publishing its next alarmist report.