Who would know better than Shaktikanta Das, the former
secretary of the Department of Economic Affairs, the ’Good, Bad, and
Ugly’ side of demonetisation and GST, the two factors that disrupted the
balance sheets of not only the government and corporates but also that
of the common man. Das would like to call it "positive disruption" as he
believes that the turbulence caused was short-term, and that once
stability sets in, things will improve.
As the Narendra Modi-led government prepares to present probably its last Budget before the general elections, media caught up with Das to know the challenges remaining; it is time to
further push the agriculture reforms and strengthen the subsidy
mechanism, as the government contends with the issue of fiscal deficit.
Two
critical decisions of the government - demonetisation and GST - have
impacted the entire economic structure. The after-effects were also seen
in the agriculture sector, particularly for small farmers…
I
will not agree that small farmers are facing distress due to
demonetisation; they got their agriculture inputs either in the form of
plant nutrients or fertilisers. Instructions were given to fertiliser
companies to provide nutrients or fertilisers on credit. Even
cooperatives were provided with sufficient cash. Small farmers take
agriculture credit from the cooperatives, so the cooperatives were
provided with substantial cash. In fact, NABARD provided an additional
accommodation of ?20,000 crore to give agriculture credit/crop loans to
small farmers, and cooperatives provided them with cash. To say small
farmers suffered because of demonetisation, I think, is not correct.
What is the main challenge, then, for the sector?
The
main challenges of this sector are on the marketing and procurement
side. You still have restrictions under the APMC Act. The ball is in the
court of the States. States will have to amend the Act - some have done
it. There is a strong necessity to either repeal or amend this Act to
allow more markets to come up, so that the procurement mechanism for
farmers is robust.
You cannot entirely depend on
government procurement. The economy requires private procurement, small
shops and kirana stores to sell products. The government cannot do all.
As
as far as the government is concerned, it has to see which are the
shadow areas where private procurement cannot be reached, and then go
there. I think focus is now being given on this aspect.
In
the last few years, not only have more remunerative MSPs been
announced, there has also been an assurance and effort to back it with
good procurement arrangements.
The focus of the
government has been to plug leakages. While fertiliser subsidy is
continuing, leakages must be plugged. And this is being done through
neem-coated urea, DBT etc. In the present system there are lot of
leakages.
You said subsidy will continue for the
sector. Does it mean free electricity should also continue, or is it
time to correct the tariff structure?
As regards
agriculture tariff - wherever agriculture power is provided at a
concessional rate - metering has to be done first. It should be at the
receiving point, but some States do it at the sub-station level.
Metering at the farmers’ level will ensure that farmers draw as much
power as they require. Now, a lot of people draw electricity in an
unauthorised way in the name of the farmer, and it gets camouflaged as
free power. There is a need to have 100 per cent metering. The farmer
must be convinced that the intention is not to restrict supply, but to
plug diversion of concessional power.
Is the use of DBT working here?
At
the present juncture you cannot do away with subsidy. Besides, in
India, farm holdings are very small. Nearly 90 per cent of the holdings
are small or marginal, so till it changes or is reformed, you cannot do
away with subsidies. But you have to ensure that the benefit goes to the
right people, and this is where DBT works.
Debates keep taking place about taxing the farm sector. Do you think the time is right to tax this segment?
Let
us be clear...taxing farmers with bigger holding requires wider
political consensus. It cannot be done without political will.
Anyway, rich farmers have to pay taxes on their income. For example, for the money in the bank, there is an interest tax.
For GST do you think many issues remain unanswered, particularly input credit…
Let
me restate what is obvious and stated earlier. This is a new taxation
which is replacing a 70-year-old indirect taxation framework. There will
be initial challenges. What is critical and important is how you are
dealing with these.
GSTN is also going through a
process of evolution because tax rates are being changed; other aspects
that require changes in programming have also evolved. Here it is not
only the Central government department but also interface with the State
GST department that is involved. Technology will take time to
stabilise.
As far as the input tax credit
is concerned, I think the government has made some assessment. But once
the GSTN is fully streamlined, I think input tax credit will flow
automatically. It is currently in a settling-down process. It is not
that somebody is running away with the money. Initially, industry and
traders faced difficulties , but as we go forward, things will stabilise
and smoothen out.
02 Jan 2018, 09:04 AM