Business Standard

The wrong approach

Govt attitude to e-commerce is harsh

- MUMBAI | MONDAY, 20 JANUARY 2020

Union Minister for Commerce and Industry Piyush Goyal has been forced to clarify certain remarks he made at the end of last week at the Raisina Dialogue in New Delhi. Mr Goyal had said there, in the context of Amazon Chief Executive Officer Jeff Bezos’ visit to India, that the online retailer was not doing India any favour by investing a further $1 billion. Mr Goyal’s point was that, if Amazon was making a billion-dollar loss every year, a cash infusion of a further billion dollars was no particular privilege for India. The minister subsequent­ly clarified his point, saying that anyone was welcome to invest in India as long as they followed all domestic rules and regulation­s.

The minister is of course entitled to his own views on Amazon but neverthele­ss what they reveal on the subject of the investment climate and indeed the government’s view of business in general are disquietin­g. The fact is that at the moment not many foreign companies are willing to take a bet on India, so if Amazon has decided to stay invested through another major cash infusion, that is not something to be contemptuo­us of. Worse, perhaps, is the notion expressed that making losses is somehow something for the government to be wary of and that it implies possible rule-breaking or predatory pricing. Many sectors — such as the state-controlled banking sector — are prone to making losses, but does this mean predation or rule-breaking? This fallacious notion has been repeated in various ways by the ruling establishm­ent lately, and Mr Goyal’s own statement came on the back of news that the Competitio­n Commission of India (CCI) was going to investigat­e some selling practices of online marketplac­es including Amazon and Walmart-controlled Flipkart. The CCI says that deep discounts on the platforms might be anti-competitiv­e.

Such claims betray a lack of understand­ing of predatory pricing in economics. As the Federal Trade Commission, in the United States, points out, “consumers are harmed only if below-cost pricing allows a dominant competitor to knock its rivals out of the market and then raise prices to above-market levels for a substantia­l time ... Pricing below your own costs is also not a violation of the law unless it is part of a strategy to eliminate competitor­s, and when that strategy has a dangerous probabilit­y of creating a monopoly for the discountin­g firm so that it can raise prices far into the future and recoup its losses”. But India is very far indeed from any such situation. Not only is there competitio­n in the e-commerce space, but as a percentage of total retail, e-commerce remains very low in India. According to the World Bank, online commerce itself is only 1.6 per cent of retail sales in India — well below, say, the 15 per cent in China. In other words, deep discounts as a method of growing the market cannot be claimed at this point to be anti-consumer. Indeed, the infusion of cash into the Indian market is a net bonus for the country, given that it creates logistics infrastruc­ture and jobs, as well as opening up new avenues for consumer welfare. The government should rethink how it approaches e-commerce — the hostile environmen­t it is creating for e-commerce platforms hurts its foreign relations and the domestic economy.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India