By Priya Raman

On 12 November 2026, Reuters reported that the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) was considering a rule barring any private equity (PE) firm from controlling more than one non-banking financial company (NBFC), citing two people familiar with the matter. The proposal, not a restriction, is what exists today.

What is RBI actually considering?

RBI has not issued an official circular or direction, and the central bank did not respond to Reuters’ request for comment. Reuters said a draft might come after public consultation, possibly early 2027. RBI publishes official communications on its website, but no such document or consultation timetable has been notified.

Reuters’ account framed the possible outcome plainly: a PE firm “would not be allowed to control more than one NBFC.” The report described three possible routes to control:

• A 25% stake in a listed NBFC.
• The ability to appoint a majority of directors.
• Influence over management or policy.

One of the two people cited said a holding of 15% or less might be treated as a financial investment and face less scrutiny. That would distinguish smaller financial holdings from effective operating influence, although the threshold remains an unnamed, unofficial element of the reported plan.

How would the rule change deals?

Under Reuters’ reported one-firm ceiling, a sponsor with no controlled NBFC could still control one. A sponsor already controlling one would face a harder question over any second company, because the proposed test reaches beyond registered share ownership.

The reported control test makes governance rights as important as the percentage bought. A transaction that avoids the 25% test might still fall within the definition if it grants majority-director appointment rights or creates influence over management or policy. Reuters supplied no remedy or implementation detail for those scenarios.

For a sponsor already controlling one NBFC, the proposed cap reaches into governance as well as ownership. That makes the final drafting decisive: a workable rule would need to distinguish financial participation from the power to direct a lender.

These are proposed outcomes, not current obligations. No firm faces a notified one-NBFC cap, and Reuters reported no RBI explanation of how existing holdings would be handled.

Why has the report landed now?

Reuters situated the account within a week of large primary investments in Indian NBFCs and alongside other ownership and supervisory moves. It cited three developments:

• Bain Capital planned a controlling investment in Manappuram Finance.
• TPG committed to Arka Fincap.
• RBI granted MobiKwik an NBFC licence.

Bain’s agreement to acquire a 41.7% stake in Manappuram Finance was conditioned on divesting a 93% holding in Tyger Capital, formerly Adani Capital. Reuters did not connect that condition to the proposed RBI rule.

The Bain example in Reuters’ account shows why the proposal could matter for transaction design. If a sponsor sought control of a second NBFC, the final test might require existing holdings or governance rights to be restructured. That is a consequence of the reported mechanism, not evidence that RBI has targeted Bain or any other named sponsor.

How much capital is at stake?

Grant Thornton figures cited by Reuters put PE investment into India’s financial sector at US$5.4 billion last year and US$3.6 billion in the year to end-September. The figures cover the wider financial sector, not only NBFCs, so they do not quantify the holdings directly affected by a one-firm cap.

The Indian Venture and Alternate Capital Association (IVCA) has been lobbying on the issue. Reuters reported that Siddarth M. Pai of the association had said the industry has been making representations to the regulator; the coverage supplied reported speech rather than a direct quotation released by IVCA.

What would make this an official rule?

Recent RBI operating controls, including application programming interface (API) access rules for banks and NBFCs, have taken the form of formal directions. The multiple-NBFC proposal has not reached that status.

Until RBI publishes a consultation draft or final direction, the Reuters account remains a report based on two unnamed sources. It does not explain how the proposed rule would treat smaller holdings or existing control positions. The distinction is simple. A proposal has been reported; a restriction has not been notified.