The government’s move to form a high-level, nine-member inter-ministerial committee to assess the financial losses caused by the prolonged strike of Customs, VAT, and Tax officials is a timely and strategic response to a crisis that posed serious risks to national revenue, trade operations and economic stability. In a country where public revenue is the backbone of development financing, any disruption to tax administration must be addressed with urgency, transparency and farsightedness.
The committee, headed by IRD Joint Secretary Syed Robiul Islam, will investigate the losses caused by the two day closure of Chattogram Customs House (June 28-29, 2025) as well as by the countrywide work abstention of customs houses, VAT offices, bond commission rates and tax zones across the country, said the government order. The directive includes assessing the economic fallout caused by disruptions at key land ports and river ports that are lifelines to the country’s export-import economy.
Arrangement of the committee with members from Finance Division, Ministries of Commerce, Industries and Shipping, National Board of Revenue (NBR), Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BGMEA) and Federation of Bangladesh Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FBCCI) makes the committee multidisciplinary and broad-based having skills and institutional reach to go into the base and root level of the review. This collaborative structure represents an important undertaking away from single-stakeholder control by economic governance.
Transparency will be essential
in keeping the public’s trust.
The committee must be
authorised to report its findings
and address them publicly
There will be financial and economic consequences from the strike. Chattogram Port, which accounted for more than 90 percent of the country’s external trade, suffered serious operational difficulties. Delayed clearances meant backups of goods, more lead time, more storage costs and disrupted supply chains. At the same time, at a time of rising fiscal pressures from inflation, construction projects and social service costs, the government's revenue intake was plummeting.
But this evaluation has to be done beyond numbers. It also has to show structural vulnerabilities that allowed such sustained strike action. We must be clear as to why a segment of the bureaucracy involved in essential public work took recourse to an extreme step. Was it the pay structure is not satisfactory and the promotion or working condition? Were there missing institutions for dialogue and negotiation?
The government should do two things after the losses are assessed. Firstly, it should implement the committee’s recommendations swiftly, including recovery measures and contingency protocols for future disruption. Secondly, it will introduce human resource management reforms in revenue departments to ensure delivery of public services without interruption. Automation of customs and tax systems may also make societies less dependent on manual processes and more resilient.
Transparency will be essential in keeping the public’s trust. The committee must be authorised to report its findings and address them publicly. The people and businesses deserve to know the scope of the economic loss and how the government intends to mitigate it.
This initiative is more than a damage assessment—it is an opportunity to remake a revenue system that is more accountable, more efficient and better prepared for the future. The Government must turn these findings into powerful actions that safeguard the national interest and ensure that these crises do not repeat.
