| Official comparison point | Total public debt |
|---|---|
| June 2018 | Rs24.953 trillion |
| June 2022 | Rs49.242 trillion |
| March 2026 | Rs83.285 trillion |
| Increase from June 2018 to June 2022 | Rs24.289 trillion |
| Increase from June 2022 to March 2026 | Rs34.043 trillion |
| Total increase from June 2018 to March 2026 | Rs58.332 trillion |
The graphic’s Rs58–59 trillion total is therefore directionally correct. Its Rs19.5 trillion and Rs39 trillion political division may be based on April 2022 rather than fiscal-year endpoints, or may mix “total debt of government” with “total public debt.” It should not be presented as an official like-for-like comparison without naming the exact dates and definition.
The debt data do not prove anything about the sugar transactions. They explain why Pakistan cannot tolerate opaque commodity decisions. Public debt reached Rs83.285 trillion by March 2026, while interest expenditure consumed Rs4.948 trillion in the first nine months of FY2026. Every avoidable procurement premium, storage expense, tax concession and foreign-exchange loss ultimately enters a state already borrowing to service previous borrowing.
What the Government Must Publish Now
Tarar says the market is stable and growers and consumers will remain protected. Excellent. Prove it through the transaction record.
The government should release the original export approvals, mill-wise quotas, actual quantities shipped, FOB export prices, foreign-exchange proceeds, production revisions, TCP import bids, winning suppliers, global benchmarks on each contract date, freight and insurance, tax waivers, domestic buyers, sale prices, storage costs and the final re-export tender result.
The decisive calculation is straightforward:
Net public result = domestic-sale proceeds + re-export proceeds − purchase cost − freight − insurance − storage − financing cost − tax expenditure.
If the result is positive, the government should publish it proudly. If it is negative, officials should publish the loss, explain why it occurred and identify the stock assumptions behind the original export permission.
A government spokesperson saying “market conditions are stable” is not a financial statement. Miftah Ismail saying “foreign exchange was lost” is not an audited calculation. The tender ledger can settle the argument.
Frequently Asked Questions
Did Tarar disprove Miftah’s factual sequence?
No. Tarar confirmed that sugar was exported, later imported and is now being re-exported. He disputes Miftah’s interpretation, the alleged motive and the claim that the decisions harmed consumers and growers.
Does the lower sugarcane yield clear the original export decision?
No. It helps explain the later import but does not prove that the original export assessment contained adequate risk margins or that exports were suspended promptly when the outlook weakened.
