Demonetisation, GST held back growth: Raghuram Rajan

Agencies
November 11, 2018

Washington, Nov 11:Demonetisation and the Goods and Services Tax (GST) are the two major headwinds that held back India’s economic growth last year, former RBI governor Raghuram Rajan has said, asserting that the current 7% growth rate is not enough to meet the country’s needs.

Addressing an audience at the University of California in Berkeley on Friday, Rajan said for four years — 2012 to 2016 — India was growing at a faster pace before it was hit by two major headwinds. “The two successive shocks of demonetisation and GST had a serious impact on growth in India. Growth has fallen off interestingly at a time when growth in the global economy has been peaking,” he said delivering the second Bhattacharya Lectureship on the Future of India.

On the second anniversary of demonetisation on November 8, finance minister Arun Jaitley staunchly defended the drive, saying ‘prophets of doom’ have been proven wrong as hard data of two years shows an increase in tax base, greater formalisation of the economy and India retaining the fastest growing economy tag for the fifth year in a row. “By the time the first five years of this government are over, we will be close to doubling the assessee base,” he said in a Facebook blog ‘Impact of Demonetisation’.

Rajan, in his address, said a growth rate of 7% per year for 25 years is “very very strong”, but in some sense this has become the new Hindu rate of growth, which earlier used to be 3.5%, Rajan said. “The reality is that seven is not enough for the kind of people coming into the labour market and we need jobs for them, so we need more and cannot be satisfied at this level,” he said. Observing that India is sensitive to global growth, he said India has become a much more open economy, and if the world grows, it also grows more. “What happened in 2017 is that even as the world picked up, India went down. That reflects the fact that these blows (demonetisation and GST) have really really been hard blows…Because of these headwinds we have been held back,” he said.

While India’s growth is picking up again, there is the issue of oil prices, the economist noted, referring to the huge reliance of India on import of oil for its energy needs. With oil prices going up, Rajan said things are going to be little tougher for the Indian economy, even though the country is recovering from the headwinds of demonetisation and initial hurdles in the implementation of the GST.

Commenting on the rising non-performing assets (NPA), he said the best thing to do in such a situation is to “clean up”. It is essential to “deal up with the bad stuff”, so that with clean balance sheets, banks can be put back on the track. “It has taken India far long to clean up the banks, partly because the system did not had instruments to deal with bad debts,” Rajan said. The bankruptcy code, he asserted, cannot be the only way to clean up the banks. It is the only one element of the larger cleanup plan, he said and called for a multi-prong approach to address the challenge of NPAs in India.

India, he asserted, is capable of a strong growth. As such the 7% growth is now being taken granted. “If we go below 7%, then we must be doing something wrong,” he said, adding that that is

the base on which India has to grow at least for the next 10-15 years. The country today is facing three major bottlenecks. One is the torn infrastructure, he said, observing that construction is the one industry that drives the economy in early stages. “Infrastructure creates growth,” he said. Second, short-term target should be to clean up the power sector and to make sure that the electricity produced actually goes to the people who want the power, he said. Cleaning up the banks is the third major bottleneck in India’s growth, he said.

Part of the problem in India is that there is an excessive centralisation of power in the political decision making, he said. “India can’t work from the centre. India works when you have many people taking up the burden. And today the central government is excessively centralised,” Rajan said. An example of this is the quantum of decisions that requires the ascent of the Prime Minister’s Office, Rajan said as he highlighted the recent unveiling of the ‘Statue of Unity’ of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel as an example of a massive project that required the approval of the PMO.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 19,2020

Denser places, assumed by many to be more conducive to the spread of the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, are not linked to higher infection rates, say researchers.

The study, led by Johns Hopkins University, published in the Journal of the American Planning Association, also found that dense areas were associated with lower COVID-19 death rates.

"These findings suggest that urban planners should continue to practice and advocate for compact places rather than sprawling ones, due to the myriad well-established benefits of the former, including health benefits," says study lead author Shima Hamidi from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in the US.

For their analysis, the researchers examined SARS-CoV-2 infection rates and COVID-19 death rates in 913 metropolitan counties in the US.

When other factors such as race and education were taken into account, the authors found that county density was not significantly associated with county infection rate.

The findings also showed that denser counties, as compared to more sprawling ones, tended to have lower death rates--possibly because they enjoyed a higher level of development including better health care systems.

On the other hand, the research found that higher coronavirus infection and COVID-19 mortality rates in counties are more related to the larger context of metropolitan size in which counties are located.

Large metropolitan areas with a higher number of counties tightly linked together through economic, social, and commuting relationships are the most vulnerable to the pandemic outbreaks.

According to the researchers, recent polls suggest that many US citizens now consider an exodus from big cities likely, possibly due to the belief that more density equals more infection risk.

Some government officials have posited that urban density is linked to the transmissibility of the virus.

"The fact that density is unrelated to confirmed virus infection rates and inversely related to confirmed COVID-19 death rates is important, unexpected, and profound," said Hamidi.

"It counters a narrative that, absent data and analysis, would challenge the foundation of modern cities and could lead to a population shift from urban centres to suburban and exurban areas," Hamidi added.

The analysis found that after controlling for factors such as metropolitan size, education, race, and age, doubling the activity density was associated with an 11.3 per cent lower death rate.

The authors said that this is possibly due to faster and more widespread adoption of social distancing practices and better quality of health care in areas of denser population.

The researchers concluded that a higher county population, a higher proportion of people age 60 and up, a lower proportion of college-educated people, and a higher proportion of African Americans were all associated with a greater infection rate and mortality rate.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 27,2020

Mumbai, Jun 27: The Bombay High Court observed that COVID-19 patients from poor and indigent sections cannot be expected to produce documentary proof to avail subsidised or free treatment while getting admitted to hospitals.

The court on Friday was hearing a plea filed by seven residents of a slum rehabilitation building in Bandra, who had been charged ₹ 12.5 lakh by K J Somaiya Hospital for COVID-19 treatment between April 11 and April 28.

The bench of Justices Ramesh Dhanuka and Madhav Jamdar directed the hospital to deposit ₹10 lakh in the court.

The petitioners had borrowed money and managed to pay ₹10 lakh out of ₹12.5 lakh that the hospital had demanded, after threatening to halt their discharge if they failed to clear the bill, counsel Vivek Shukla informed the court.

According to the plea, the petitioners were also overcharged for PPE kits and unused services.

On June 13, the court had directed the state charity commissioner to probe if the hospital had reserved 20% beds for poor and indigent patients and provided free or subsidised treatment to them.

Last week, the joint charity commissioner had informed the court that although the hospital had reserved such beds, it had treated only three poor or indigent persons since the lockdown.

It was unfathomable that the hospital that claimed to have reserved 90 beds for poor and indigent patients had treated only three such persons during the pandemic, advocate Shukla said.

He further argued that COVID-19 patients, who are in distress, cannot be expected to produce income certificate and such documents as proof.

However, senior advocate Janak Dwarkadas, who represented the hospital, said the petitioners did not belong to economically weak or indigent categories and had not produced documents to prove the same.

A person who is suffering from a disease like COVID-19 cannot be expected to produce certificates from a tehsildar or social welfare officer before seeking admission in the hospital, the bench noted and asked the hospital to deposit ₹10 lakh in court within two weeks.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 12,2020

New Delhi, Jun 12: The Supreme Court on Friday asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to convene a meeting of the Finance Ministry and RBI officials over the weekend to decide whether interest incurred on EMIs during the moratorium period can be charged by banks.

A bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan, Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.R. Shah queried Mehta as the court was concerned since the Centre has deferred loan for three months.

"Then how can interest of these 3 months be added?" the apex bench asked. Mehta replied: "I need to sit down with the RBI officials and have a meeting."

SBI's counsel, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, intervened during the proceedings and said "all banks are of the view that interest cannot be waived for a six month EMI moratorium period".

"We need to discuss it with the RBI," insisted Rohatgi.

Justice Bhushan then asked Mehta to convene a meeting of the RBI and Finance Ministry officials over the weekend, and listed the matter for further hearing on June 17.

The top court, during the hearing, indicated that it was not considering a complete waiver of interest but was only concerned that postponement of interest shouldn't accrue further interest on it.

After the RBI said the waiver of interest charges on EMIs during moratorium will lead to loss of 1 per cent of the nation's GDP, the top court had earlier asked the Finance Ministry to reply, whether the interest could be waived or it would continue during the moratorium period.

The top court said these are not normal times, and it is a serious issue, as on one hand moratorium is granted and then, the interest is charged on loans during this period.

"There are two issues in this (matter). No interest during the moratorium period and no interest on interest," said Justice Bhushan. The observation from the bench came on a petition by Gajendra Sharma, in which he sought a direction to declare portion of the RBI's March 27 notification as ultra vires to the extent it charged interest on the loan amount during the moratorium period.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.