governance, political economy, institutional development and economic regulation

Posts tagged ‘shared growth’

Fiscal 2018-19: Revive shared hopes

shared growth

Normally, the fate of the next fiscal is sealed even before the year begins. Barring windfall gains, the economic engines of value addition are quite stable — business keeps running and salts away its surplus; the government similarly keeps churning out public goods; and individuals — particularly us Indians — keep squirrelling away something for a rainy day, even out of our meagre earnings. But who can predict shocks?

But India is vulnerable

oil 2

India remains very vulnerable to external shocks — changes in the price of oil, the monsoon, the cost of guarding against external aggression, the state of the world economy and domestic events — more specifically elections, as these take away whatever mindspace the politicians have for sustainable development.

Fiscal 2019 will be election fodder

Fiscal 2018-19 is littered with state-level elections followed by the national general election in the first quarter of the next fiscal. Consequently, expect “plug the hole” type of fiscal tactics to be rampant in the government. Borrowing from banks to invest back in them is one such tactic to stick to the targeted fiscal deficit. Borrowing long but promising to liquidate short-term liabilities is another. This is great fiscal accounting. But that’s where it ends.

Growth data just one metric of government performance

There is a world, beyond the fiscal math, in which we all live. Did you feel the change economically in 2014-15 when economic growth jumped from 4.7 per cent in 2013-14 — the last year of the UPA government — to 7.4 per cent — a jump of nearly three percentage points?

Narendra Modi

Yes, our hopes soared with Narendra Modi’s elevating optimism and high energy. Yes, he made us believe in the future. We felt that we had put a large part of our colonial baggage behind us. But at the ground level, nothing much changed because GDP growth data is just that — numbers which are useful for nerds to track policy impacts and take corrective actions. It’s like the speedometer on your car. It can tell you when you rev up or slow down. But it tells you very little about when you will get to your destination. So please don’t tie your dreams to data. Treat it with the caution it deserves.

Ignore rarified metrics – the stock market & growth, focus on your economic reality

Fiscal 2017-18 will end with a real GDP growth of 6.5 per cent, helped by low inflation, versus 7.1 per cent last year. If you didn’t notice the upswing in 2014-15, you are unlikely to be substantially affected by this year’s downtick. Or for that matter by the uptick to seven per cent growth next fiscal, as the “satta market” for growth (if there is one) would predict. The stock market valuations, as measured by the Sensex, rose by 29 per cent over 2017 with just 6.5 per cent growth. Consider also that the market capitalisation of the top 10 family-owned business groups rose by 46 per cent. Clearly, the business biggies don’t live or die by GDP growth data, so why must you? Far better to hone your own tunnel vision of the economy — real stuff which matters to you, and leave growth rates to the genteel debates between the macro policy wonks.

Telescope 2

If you are one of the 20 million students graduating next year, judge the health of the economy from the availability of jobs. For 118 million farmers, who eke out a living on land holdings of less than two hectares, keeping a lookout for the timing and adequacy of the monsoon means much more than GDP growth. For 21 million large and medium farmers, who account for the bulk of the surplus food grain produced after meeting the needs of the family, it’s the government’s minimum support price for your produce, the cost of fertiliser and availability of water and electricity, which will determine your well-being. The point is that each of us has a specific reality which is only loosely tied to the GDP growth data.

Tying our well-being to the GDP growth rate is seeking false comfort when the numbers rise and equally false despair when they fall. The last two fiscals have been costly. Demonetisation in the third quarter of fiscal 2016-17 and implementation of the Goods and Services tax in this fiscal year were both major disrupters for businesses and their employees. But these are behind us now.

Reduce income tax rates at the lower slabs to compensate for tax reform related pain  

Over time, business entities who survived earlier by not paying tax will disappear. They will be substituted by more efficient, possibly scaled-up substitutes. But all that will take time, well beyond the next two fiscal years. Till the efficiency impacts of tax reforms kick in, the government must take steps to insulate citizens from the pain, just as it held state governments harmless — by insuring them against a fall in their tax revenues.


Citizens, particularly those who took to digital payments and bank transactions with gusto, find they now pay, not only the GST, but also the income tax (possibly never paid before) of the seller. Direct and indirect tax rates must be reduced to keep household budgets stable, till the efficiency impacts of tax reforms kick in.A fiscal bridge is necessary.

Overshooting the fiscal deficit target is ok to preserve capital outlay

Reforming governments factor in fiscal turbulence. If reform translates into collateral pain for consumers, it is dead in the water. We are battling a perfect storm of reforms — restoring the health of banks; reforming the tax structure to improve compliance while reducing transaction costs and dealing with the additional costs of mitigating climate change. It can’t all be done painlessly.

This pain must be shared. The government must abandon its managerial instinct to stick to the budgeted fiscal deficit target of 3.2 per cent this year — in fact it already has. For the next fiscal, the “glide path” for the fiscal deficit must be kept stable, as advised by the majority opinion in the N.K. Singh Committee on Fiscal Reform. Even at 3.5 per cent, the fiscal deficit will be 15 per cent (0.6 basis points) less than the 4.1 per cent achieved in 2013-14. When the facts change, one must change one’s opinions and tactics. That’s the way to shared growth.

Adapted from the author’s opinion piece in The Asian Age, January 6, 2018

Saintliness versus efficiency

BJP winner

The BJP can put India on auto-pilot over the next eighteen months and probably still win the next general election, principally because, things are going well and the combined opposition has still to acquire the characteristics – leadership, resolve and broad agreements – of credibility. This high probability of winning in 2019 should push the BJP to evolve strategies, rather than tactics, particularly for the economy.

The key decision – morality or results

The key decision is to choose between prioritising morality or efficiency. The former entails more public delivery, the latter more private enterprise. Going down the moral route, say “zero tolerance” for corruption, has severe consequences – continued economic dislocation over the next two years; losing out on economic growth and inhibiting the availability of jobs. In a largely informal, cash based economy, like India, putting anti-corruption first, requires the private sector to reorganise, become more efficient and profitable, other than, by just avoiding tax. Whilst this adjustment plays out, the state – despite it being more inefficient than private enterprise – would need to step in with an enhanced role. The moral choice puts us on the long route to efficiency, which could last, well into the second term of the government starting 2019.

Corruption has its uses

The “amoral” choice is to junk the fundamentalist approach to anti-corruption, fix one’s eyes on the objective of high growth and navigate the waters by feeling the stones underfoot, to avoid deep pools, where corruption and inefficiency, overlap the most. Some examples of such action are – sticking to a reasonable “real” interest rate rather than go for an artificially “low” interest rate. The latter may enhance investment. But it comes at the cost of possible future stressed assets via “gold plated” bank-financed projects. Similarly, choosing Direct Benefit Transfers rather than the physical provision of subsidised public goods of indifferent quality is another example, which reduces corruption and enhances efficiency. But, in many other cases, the choice is not so obvious.

Corruption can be functionally efficient. Consider the case of information asymmetries – shorn of jargon, this simply means that it is not easy to know how or why government acts in a certain manner – whilst awarding contracts; appointing employees or allowing its assets – like land, to be misused.

Democratising access to information

If I bribe an official to understand the politics around a pending economic decision, corruption ends up “democratising information”, which is what a perfectly “transparent” system would achieve in Norway or Sweden. Consider, that prisoners in Indian jails bribe guards, merely to get minimum sanitary and nutrition conditions. Turning a blind eye to such “corruption” is “amorally pragmatic” till prisons become more acceptably habitable. After all, prison is meant to reform not penalise prisoners through health hazards. Petty corruption is the common persons way of dealing with administrative inefficiency.

Morality tends to exclude private enterprise

So, why does morality and a “big” state go together? Consider a government, which is stuck with a poorly motivated; inadequately qualified and shoddily managed workforce. Suppose it chooses to bypass public inefficiency by outsourcing public service delivery to the private sector. How will they oversee the private provider? Poor drafting of agreements and enforcement of contractual obligations generates corruption or delays execution. This is what took the fizz out of the juggernaut of Public Private Partnerships. Why for instance, did Mr. Piyush Goyal, the minister of railways decide to call in the Army to repair the collapsed pedestrian over-bridge at Elphinstone Station, Mumbai? Could it be that, contracting private parties, on an emergency basis, inevitably has lags and creates opportunities for corruption? We saw a lot of this in the run-up to the Commonwealth Games, New Delhi in 2010.

Preferring to work in-house is the obvious safe, default option for an executive which is capable and willing to work 24X7. The downside is that extensive use of state enterprises crowds out the private sector, which is hard put to better the riskless cost of finance available to the public sector. If publicly managed service delivery is sustainable, there is no harm in that. But not every public leader is an efficient “saint” and public systems, set-up by them, revert quickly to the mean, once the leadership changes.

How many Saints do we have?

Saintliness, humility and frugality make great copy and attract votes. The problem lies in scaling up a system based on virtue and otherworldliness. It is not for nothing that the competitive spirit -so important for sustainable efficiency- springs from the basic “killer” instinct to be numero uno. Saintliness is also rigid in adapting to the world. Effectiveness – getting results on the ground,  requires flexibility in implementation.

“Jhooming” can’t generate shared growth

closed market

A tax system with high nominal tax rates, which is efficiently oppressive can reduce supply because producers and service providers will shut shop, rather than risk getting their personal assets forclosed. This is worse than a tax system, which is not completely evasion proof but encourages growth in value addition. Black money, in progressively, smaller doses over time is better than a clean but scorched economy. Unlike in nature, “jhooming” may not generate shared growth.

Also available at TOI Blogs November 15, 2017

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: