What is new
Turn Protectionism into Launch Pad for New World Trade Order
- Published on 26 May 2017
(Image courtesy: IMF)
Is the Trump Administration merely flexing muscles against free world trade to extract concessions from trading partners? Will Mr. Donald Trump’s Presidential Executive Orders (PEOs) on trade culminate in strong protectionist measures, which would obviously invite retaliation and/or complaints from affected countries?
Concern over US President playing victim card is growing among its trading partners. “The return of isolationism has cast doubts over the future of international trade and multilateralism,” says European Commission in its White Paper on the Future of Europe released in March this year.
China has also expressed concern at a meeting convened by World Trade Organization (WTO) to discuss US trade policy review (TPR) report in March this year.
As put by China, “The recent campaign rhetoric of ‘pulling out of the WTO’ made by the U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has caused serious worries among WTO Members regarding the future of the multilateral trading system”.
The US, on the other hand, has repeatedly assailed China’s protectionism over the last few years.
Environment (Protection) Act is Perfect Ass!
- Published on 18 May 2017
(Image Courtesy: gujarattourism.com)
If novelist Charles Dickens were alive & stayed in India, he would have turned his phrase ‘law is an ass’ into a hard fact. And he might have cited The Environment (Protection) Act (EPA), 1986 & its asinine implementation to prove that law is indeed an ass. It kicks well in India.
Dickens might have cited many instances to show why EPA is a perfect ass. Discretion-driven EPA provides no penalty on slum lords (at least there is no case history of EPA enforcement on this count). It, however, does provide for penalty against a government entity such as Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board (TNSCB) for starting work on pollution-preventing slum rehabilitation/housing projects without waiting for environmental clearance (EC).
EPA implementation has avoided levying any penalty on naxalities feted as Left Wing Extremists for destruction of forests through landmine explosions. It, however, does provide for penalty against miners including public enterprises for delay in getting EC for mines that have functioned much before enactment of EPA.
EPA is flaunted by eco-terrorists as overarching ‘right to life’ (RTL) protecting law. And RTL matters only when it is perceived through EPA. If a pharmaceuticals firm, for example alters its product-mix to produce a life-saving drug, then it becomes EPA violator – a threat to RTL of the masses. CIPLA Limited finds itself in dock precisely on this count.
Check what will be Missing from NDA's 3rd yr Report Card
- Published on 01 May 2017
(Image Courtesy: PIB)
The NDA Government is set to get into chest-thumping mode next month. The word had last month gone to all ministries to list all achievements for inclusion in the NDA’s report card for its 3rd year. Modi Government would complete three years in office on 25th May 2017.
A news story dated 31st March 2017 stated that Information and Broadcasting Minister Venkaiah Naidu has urged all ministers to garner all attainments and communicate them to masses.
The story quoted Mr. Naidu’s note to ministers as stating “We need to transform ourselves into mission mode to present to the people the three-year report card ... we must prepare concrete action plan and be ready with facts, figures, data to propagate the government's achievements in a big way”.
The most interesting part of news is that two editors-turned-MPs have been assigned the task of countering “any possible negative narratives”.
Should self-certified, sterling performance of Modi regime overshadow its alarming governance deficit. Bhakts might well ridicule even whispers about governance deficit as outlandish and irrelevant. They believe Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s policies are repeatedly getting thumbs-up from voters. This is a fallacy.
Have voters endorsed increase in unemployment rate for three years in row? Has electorate voted for continued paralysis in framing National Employment Policy (NEP), which is key to reforming labour markets and growth? Have citizens voted against BJP’s 2014 poll promise of “Zero Tolerance on Terrorism, Extremism and Crime”? This resolve is articulation of Modiji's forgotten quote: “Terrorism and Modi cannot coexist in country”. The ground realty is contrary with Mr. Modi rocking and terrorism rocketing.
Trash tax distortions to perk up economic efficiency & growth
- Published on 21 April 2017
(Image Courtesy: pwc's Paying Taxes 2017 report)
The flavor of fiscal policy as growth accelerator remains as refreshing as ever. The freshness implies the scope for more fiscal corrections notwithstanding implementation of numerous tax and expenditure reforms in different countries.
Multilateral institutions are thus once again putting on policy makers’ platter the idea of tweaking fiscal policy to spur economic development.
G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, for instance, have pitched for such approach. In a Communiqué issued after their meeting in Germany held last month, they observed: “Fiscal policy should be used flexibly and be growth-friendly, prioritise high quality investment, and support reforms that would provide opportunities and promote inclusiveness, while ensuring debt as a share of GDP is on a sustainable path”.
The scope for growth-stimulating innovation, both on the taxation and the expenditure side, is ample in many countries. The challenge lies in combining growth-aiding tax policies with expenditure policies that direct larger investments in infrastructure, which acts as plank for growth of different sectors.
International Monetary Fund (IMF) has thus aptly focused on ‘Upgrading the Tax System to Boost Productivity’ in its latest Fiscal Monitor released on 13th April 2017.
According to Fiscal Monitor, “Potential TFP (total factor productivity) gains from reducing resource misallocation are substantial and could lift the annual real GDP growth rate by roughly 1 percentage point. Payoffs are higher for emerging market and low-income developing countries than for advanced economies, with considerable variation across countries.”