Political funding in India has remained doggedly opaque, thanks to lawmakers putting parties\u2019 interests before the interests of the nation\u2014among many, a clean and transparent polity. So, when former law panel chief Justice AP Shah talks about how the non-disclosure clause governing political donations by companies needs to go, he is quite right. Unless a company is forced to reveal how much it donated to which party, a quid pro quo, if there is one, can\u2019t be established. On the flipside, forcing companies to disclose this will make it easy for parties to harass them to match donations to rivals. Also, good policies could be painted as cronyism if a large donor to the ruling party legitimately benefits from the reforms the latter brings. While electoral bonds ensure that the contributions are \u2018white\u2019 money, what they don\u2019t do is increase transparency. Shah also backs caps on corporate political donations. The Finance Act 2017 removed the cap set by the Companies Act. Bringing it back, however, won\u2019t make tackle the current opacity. In fact, capping could mean more corporate donations flow via the anonymous below-`2,000 cash donations route. The law on political donations needs to make the ecosystem manifest and clear. And that certainly doesn\u2019t come about from letting parties receive donations anonymously, whether from companies or from people. To that end, the amendments to the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, that help parties avoid scrutiny, also demand a rethink.