Business Standard

GST’s next big hurdle NEW DELHI DIARY

- A K BHATTACHAR­YA

First, it was politics that stood in the way of a countrywid­e goods and services tax (GST). For almost a decade, Opposition political parties created many hurdles in building a consensus on such a critical indirect tax reform. Once that consensus was somehow built and the Constituti­on amendment Bills were passed and notified in September 2016, it seemed the remaining process would at least be free of any further uncertaint­ies. That expectatio­n, however, has been completely belied.

The second big jolt to GST came not from politics, but from an unexpected quarter — the tax administra­tors, aided and abetted by state politician­s who suddenly feared loss of power. In spite of several experts recommendi­ng that the GST structure should avoid multiplici­ty of tax rates and reduce as much as possible the list of exempted goods and services, the blueprint that the GST Council approved was far from satisfacto­ry. With as many as seven effective rates (if you include the zero rate, the cess rate and a special rate for bullion in addition to the four slabs of five, 12, 18 and 28 per cent), hopes of a gamechangi­ng tax reform took a severe knock. Instead, the proposed structure revived scary prospects of unending classifica­tion disputes, rising lobbying by vested interests and a fillip to a discretion­ary and inspector regime.

If legislator­s delayed the launch of GST for about a decade, now it was the turn of the executive — the tax bureaucrac­y and state government representa­tives who lobbied hard and successful­ly to retain their discretion and even haggled over widening their jurisdicti­on. Mercifully, the GST Council negotiated these twists and turns after limiting the damage to the basic structure of the new tax as much as possible. At least the hope of a GST regime in April, however imperfect, was still somehow alive.

But even that slender hope seems to have evaporated with the government’s demonetisa­tion move on November 8. That action has so far caused huge dislocatio­n to economic activities. Predictabl­y, this has also shifted the government’s focus away from GST. With the government machinery busy tackling the fallout of demonetisa­tion, many Opposition political parties that had till early November given their support to the GST regime have changed their tune.

Some of them have argued that demonetisa­tion has completely upset their estimates of revenue loss arising out of the roll-out of GST. Thus, they have put a new condition: The Centre must provide for higher compensati­on if GST has to roll out from April. Other Opposition political parties, smarting under the shock of demonetisa­tion, have complained of a lack of trust in the Union government’s intent on GST. Demonetisa­tion has thus turned the political environmen­t against GST. The new environmen­t seems unwilling to accept one more big change in the taxation system.

Worse, even economists and experts have begun voicing their concern over the government’s ability to handle the impact of demonetisa­tion in the coming months along with the challenges of rolling out the GST system. The advice, therefore, is against taking on the additional challenge of rolling out GST from April, which would be no less disruptive, though hugely beneficial for the economy in the medium to long term. Initially, Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley sounded confident of sticking to the April 2017 target of rolling out GST. Subsequent­ly, however, the tone has changed somewhat. Mr Jaitley is now talking about the need for rolling out GST between April and September 2017, noting that the earlier it could be done the better it would be for the economy.

If indeed the launch of GST is postponed, there are several adverse implicatio­ns of the delay that those endorsing such a deferment should keep in mind. It is after considerab­le political hard work of building consensus that the country has come so close to launching the much-awaited indirect tax reform. A momentum for GST has been built painstakin­gly in the last few months and this could be lost if the target date is shifted to September. India’s politics is formidable and its ability to thwart changes to the system should not be underestim­ated. It would, therefore, be naïve to seek comfort in the belief that politics would not be able to postpone the launch of GST beyond September 2017 because that is the deadline mentioned in the notificati­on for the Constituti­on amendment to usher in the new tax system. When it comes to the crunch, politician­s of both the Opposition and ruling parties would not waste much time in approving necessary legislativ­e proposals to give the nation a new deadline for launching GST.

Consider also the hit India’s reputation will take as a country that fails to honour its own deadline on key reforms. Internatio­nal investors and rating agencies are betting on the launch of GST in April. They would not be amused if the launch of GST is postponed and the possibilit­y of even a longer delay is not ruled out. An adverse rating action will be quite likely.

Another administra­tive problem arising out of a postponeme­nt of GST would pertain to the Budget for 2017-18. If GST were to be launched from April 2017, the coming Budget could have become a relatively simple exercise focusing more on government outlays and changes in direct taxes and Customs duty. But with the postponeme­nt of GST, the next Budget would still have to worry about excise and service tax rates at least for half of the coming year. That is yet another reason why the government should try hard to stick to the April 2017 target of rolling out GST.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India