Month: November 2014

Is the stock market rally for real or will the bubble burst soon?

bubble

The BSE Sensex closed at 28,177 points on November 17, up by around half a percent from its last close. Its been good going for the Sensex, having rallied by 33.3% since the beginning of this year. This probably led to a reader asking me on Twitter whether the stock market rally was for real or would the bubble burst soon?
These are essentially two questions here. First, whether the current rally is a bubble? Second, how long will it last? These are not easy questions to answer. Also, instead of trying to figure out whether the current rally is a bubble or not, I will stick to answering the second question, that is, how long will the current rally last.
As I have written on a few occasions in the past, the current rally is being driven by foreign institutional investors (FIIs). The domestic institutional investors(DIIs) have had very little role to play in it. The FIIs have made a net investment of a little over Rs 68,000 crore since the beginning of the year. During the same period the DIIs have made net sales of Rs 32,468 crore.
This data makes it very clear who has been driving the market up. Given this, instead of trying to figure out whether the current market is a bubble or not, it makes more sense to figure out whether the FIIs will keep bringing in fresh money into the Indian stock market.
The foreign investors have been borrowing money at very low interest rates and investing it in financial markets all around the world. They have been able to do that because Western central banks have been printing money to maintain low interest rates.
The Federal Reserve of the United States (the American central bank) recently decided to stop printing money and almost at the same time, the Bank of Japan decided to increase it. The Japanese central bank will now print around 80 trillion yen per year. The central bank had been printing around 60-70 trillion yen since April 2013, when it got into the money printing party, big time.
Like other central banks it pumped this money into the financial system by buying bonds. Interestingly, the size of the balance sheet of the Bank of Japan stood at around 164.8 trillion yen in March 2013. Since then, it has increased dramatically and as of October 2014 stood at 286.8 trillion yen.
The Bank of Japan hopes that by printing money it will manage to create some inflation. Once people see the price of goods and services going up, they will go out and shop, in the hope of getting a better deal. Also, with all the money printed and pumped into the financial system, interest rates will continue to remain low. And at low interest rates people were more likely to borrow and spend. Once people start to shop, it will lead to economic growth. Japan has had very little economic growth over the last two decades.
The trouble is that the Japanese aren’t falling for this oft tried central bank formula. And there is a clear reason for it. James Rickards in his book The Death of Money explains the point using what Eisuke Sakakibara, a former deputy finance minister of Japan, said in a speech on May 31, 2013, in South Korea.
As Rickards writes “Sakakibara…pointed out that Japanese people are wealthy and have prospered personally despite decades of low nominal growth. He made the often-overlooked point that because of Japan’s declining population, real GDP per capita will grow faster than aggregate GDP. …Combined with the accumulated wealth of the Japanese people, this condition can result in well-to-do-society even in the face of nominal growth that would cause central bankers to flood the economy with money.”
The question to ask here is will the Japanese continue to print money? The answer is yes. The Japanese politicians are desperate to create some inflation and the central bank has decided to get into bed with them. Also, more than that the Japanese government spends much more than it earns and needs to be bailed out by the Bank of Japan.
As analyst John Mauldin wrote in a recent column titled The Last Argument of Central Banks “According to my friend Nouriel Roubini, in 2013 Japan’s total tax revenue fell to a 24-year low. Corporate tax receipts fell to a 50-year low. Japan now spends more than 200 yen for every 100 yen of tax revenue it receives. It is likely Japan will run an 8% fiscal deficit to GDP this year, but the Bank of Japan is currently monetizing at a rate of over 15% of GDP, thereby theoretically reducing the level of debt owed by government institutions other than the central bank.”
Fiscal deficit is the difference between what a government earns and what it spends.
What Mauldin basically means is that a part of the debt raised by the Japanese government is being repaid through the Bank of Japan printing money and lending it to the government. With all this money continuing to float around in the financial system, interest rates in Japan will continue to remain low.
This will allow large financial institutions to borrow money at low interest rates in Japan and invest it in financial markets all over the world, including India.
The European Central Bank (ECB) also seems to be in the mood to start quantitative easing (QE, i.e. printing money to buy bonds). As Mohamed A. El-Erian, Chief Economic Adviser at Allianz wrote in a recent column “In fact, ECB President Mario Draghi signaled a willingness to expand his institution’s balance sheet by a massive €1 trillion ($1.25 trillion).”
While the United States might have decided to stop printing money, Japan and the Euro Zone, want to take a shot at it. Interestingly, chances are that the United States might go back to money printing in the years to come. As Niels C. Jensen writes in The Absolute Return Letter for November 2014 “If my growth expectations are about correct, QE is far from over – at least not in some parts of the world, and it is even possible that the Fed[the Federal Reserve of the United States] will come creeping back after having distanced itself from QE recently.”
The Federal Reserve of the United States has been financing the American fiscal deficit by printing money and buying treasury bonds issued by the government. In mid September 2008, around the time the financial crisis started, the Fed held treasury bonds worth $479.8 billion dollars. Since then, the number has shot up dramatically and as on October 29, 2014, it stood at $2.46 trillion dollars.
The fiscal deficit of the United States government shot up in the aftermath of the financial crisis. It was financed by more than a little help from the Federal Reserve. Nevertheless, the fiscal deficit has now been brought down. As Mauldin points out “The 2014 government deficit will be only 2.8% of GDP (it last saw that level in April 2005), the first time in a long time it has been below nominal GDP.”
The bad news is that the fiscal deficit will start rising again in 2016. “It is projected to fall again next year before rising in 2016. For the United States, this represents a reprieve, allowing us some time to deal with potential future problems before government spending rises to a proportion of income that is impossible to manage without severe economic repercussions. Government spending on mandated social programs will rise more than 50%, from $2.1 trillion this year to $3.6 trillion in 2024, potentially blowing the deficit out of control,” writes Mauldin.
The Federal Reserve might have to start printing money again in order to finance the government fiscal deficit.
Moral of the story: There are enough reasons for the Western nations to continue printing money and ensuring low interest rates. This means, FIIs can continue to borrow money at low interest rates and invest it in financial markets all over the world, including India.
The easy money party hasn’t ended. The only condition here is that the current government should not create a negative environment like the previous one did.
To conclude, the difficult thing to predict is, until when will this easy money party continue. I don’t have any clue about it. Do you, dear reader?

The article originally appeared on www.equitymaster.com on Nov 18, 2014

Raghuram Rajan won’t cut interest rates even in Hindi

ARTS RAJANAt a recent function, Raghuram Rajan, the governor of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), spoke in Hindi. The joke going around in the social media after that was that even in Hindi, Dr Rajan refused to cut the repo rate. Repo rate is the interest rate at which the RBI lends to banks. Nevertheless, four pieces of data that came out last week, will increase the pressure on Rajan to cut the repo rate. These four pieces of data are as follows:

  1. Inflation as measured by the consumer price index fell to 5.52% in October 2014. It was at 6.46 % in September 2014 and 10.17% in October 2013. 

  2. Inflation as measured by wholesale price index fell to 1.77%. It was at 2.38 % in September 2014 and 7.24% in October 2013. 

  3. The index of industrial production, which is a measure of the industrial activity within the country, grew by 2.5% in September 2014, in comparison to September 2013. The IIP for August 2014 was only 0.4% higher in comparison to August 2013. Interestingly, some economists believe that this marginal recovery in the IIP will not hold for October 2014. The reason for this lies in the fact that indicators of industrial activity like car sales, bank loan growth etc., have slowed down in October 2014. 

  4. The bank loan growth for a period of one year ending October 31, 2014, stood at 11.2%. This had stood at 16.4%, for the period of one year ending November 1, 2013. The loan growth year to date stands at 4.6%. It was at 7.6% last year.

These four data points have got the Delhi based economic experts and industry lobbyists brushing up their economic theory again. “It is time that the RBI started to cut interest rates,” we are being told. Chandrajit Banerjee, the director general of the Confederation of Indian Industries, a business lobby said “This provides sufficient room to the RBI to review its prolonged pause in policy rates and move towards policy easing in its forthcoming monetary policy especially as investment and consumption demand are yet to show visible signs of a pick-up.” This was a sentiment echoed by A Didar Singh as well. Singh is the secretary general of Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI), which is another industry lobby. As he put it “The inflationary expectations are fairly tamed and we see no immediate upside risks with regard to prices. Given that, it is important to reiterate that demand remains subdued. The consumer durables segment reported negative growth for the fourth consecutive month in September. It is imperative that all levers are used to pep up demand.” The idea here is simple. If the RBI cuts the repo rate, banks will cut the interest rates they charge on their loans as well. If that were to happen, people would borrow and spend more, and businesses would borrow and invest more. And this will lead to faster economic growth. Economics 101. QED. Banerjee and Singh are not the only ones asking for an interest rate cut. Sometime back industrialist Anand Mahindra had said that “It might be time for the RBI to think of a rate cut…The need of the hour has changed and its time to start to look to support growth.” Sunil Mittal, chief of Bharti Airtel, also suggested the same when he told CNBC TV 18 that the finance minister Arun Jaitley “had spoken for the nation,” when had asked for an interest rate cut. In an interview to The Times of India in late October Jaitley had said “Currently, interest rates are a disincentive. Now that inflation seems to be stabilizing somewhat, the time seems to have come to moderate the interest rates.” While all this sounds good in theory, things are not as simple as the businessmen and the politicians are making it out to be. It is worth recounting here what Rajan had said in a speech in February 2014: “But what about industrialists who tell us to cut rates? I have yet to meet an industrialist who does not want lower rates, whatever the level of rates.” And what about the politicians? Alan Greenspan, the former chairman of the Federal Reserve of the United States, recounts in his book The Map and the Territory that in his more than 18 years as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, he did not receive a single request from the US Congress urging the Fed to tighten money supply and thus not run an easy money policy. In simple English, what Greenspan means is that the American politicians always wanted lower interest rates. The Indians ones aren’t much different on that front. Nonetheless, the question is will lower interest rates help in reviving consumption and investment? Let’s tackle the issues one by one. Let’s say an individual wants to buy a car. He borrows Rs 4 lakh to be repaid over a period of five years at a rate of interest of 10.5%. The EMI on this works out to Rs 8,598. Let’s say the RBI cuts the interest rate and as a result the interest rate on the car loan falls to 10%. The EMI now works out to Rs 8,499 or around Rs 100 lower. Now will an individual go out and buy a car because the EMI is Rs 100 lower? Even if interest rates fall by 200 basis points (one basis point is one hundredth of a percentage) to 8.5%, the EMI will come down by only around Rs 400. For two wheeler and consumer durables loans, the differences are even smaller. Hence, suggesting that lower interest rates lead to higher consumption isn’t really correct. The real estate experts think that cutting interest rates will help revive the sector. The basic problem with the real estate sector is that prices have gone totally out of whack and a cut in interest rates is not going to have any significant impact. What about corporate investment? As Rajan had asked in his speech “Will a lower policy interest rate today give him more incentive to invest? We at the RBI think not…We don’t believe the primary factor holding back investment today is high interest rates.” So what is holding back investment? The answers are provided in a recent report titled “Will a rate cut spur investments?Not really“, brought out by Crisil Research. As the report points out “Investment growth, particularly private corporate investment, plummeted in the fiscals 2013 and 2014, despite low real interest rates. During this time, the policy rate in real terms – repo rate minus retail inflation – has been negative, and real lending rates averaged 2.4%. This is significantly lower than the 7.4% seen in the pre-crisis years (2004-2008). Yet investment growth dropped to 0.3%, down from an average 16.2% seen in the pre-crisis years.” The accompanying chart makes for an interesting read. 

After 6 years, real repro rate (adjusted for CPI inflation) turns positive

Source: RBI, Central Statistical Office, CRISIL Research Note: Nominal repo rate at the fiscal year-end minus average CPI inflaction , F= Forecast

As Crisil Research points out “During fiscals 2013 and 2014, when investment growth slumped to 0.3% per year, the real repo rate was still minus 2.1%, while the real lending rate was only +2.8%. Only in June 2014, for the first time in six years, did the real repo rate turned mildly positive.” So companies were borrowing and investing at higher “real” interest rates earlier but they are not doing that now. Why is that the case? This is primarily because the expected rate of return on investments has fallen “because of high policy uncertainty, slowing domestic and external demand, and rising input costs driven by persistently elevated inflation.” “The rate of return on investments – as proxied by return on assets (RoA) of around 10,000 non-financial companies as per CMIE Prowess database – have fallen sharply to 2.8% in fiscal 2013 and 2014 from 5.9% in the pre-crisis years,” Crisil Research points out. Moral of the story: Corporates invest when it is profitable to invest, and not simply because interest rates are low. Indeed, the other factors that are likely to revive investment are in the hands of the government and not RBI. Hence, a cut in interest rates is neither going to revive consumer demand nor corporate investments. Having said that, high food inflation has been a big factor behind high inflation. And the RBI really cannot control that. Also, food inflation has come down considerably in the recent past. So why not just cut interest rates? Rajan explained it very well in his February speech where he said “They say the real problem is food inflation, how do you expect to bring it down through the policy rate? The simple answer to such critics is that core CPI inflation, which excludes food and energy, has also been very high, reflecting the high inflation in services. Bringing that down is centrally within the RBI’s ambit.” Further, food prices might start rising again. The government has forecast that the output of kharif crops will be much lower than last year and this might start pushing food prices upwards all over again. Also, recent data showsthat vegetable and cereal prices have started rising again because of the delayed monsoon. To conclude, despite falling inflation, the inflationary expectations (or the expectations that consumers have of what future inflation is likely to be) are on the higher side. As per the Reserve Bank of India’s Inflation Expectations Survey of Households: September – 2014, the inflationary expectations over the next three months and one year are at 14.6 percent and 16 percent. In March 2014, the numbers were at 12.9 percent and 15.3 percent. Hence, inflationary expectations have risen since the beginning of this financial year. And for inflationary expectations to come down, low inflation needs to stay for a considerable period of time. As Rajan said “A more important source of our influence today, therefore, is expectations. If people believe we are serious about inflation, and their expectations of inflation start coming down, inflation will also come down…Sooner or later, the public always understands what the central bank is doing, whether for the good or for the bad. And if the public starts expecting that inflation will stay low, the central bank can cut interest rates significantly, thus encouraging demand and growth.” If inflationary expectations are controlled only then will consumer demand revive and that in turn, will lead to revival of corporate investments as well. Given this, it would be surprising to see Rajan start cutting the repo rate any time soon. The article originally appeared on www.equitymaster.com on Nov 17, 2014

Vivek is a writer who has worked at senior positions with the Daily News and Analysis (DNA) and The Economic Times, in the past. He has just finished writing a trilogy on the history of money and the financial crisis. The series is titled Easy Money. His writing has also appeared in The Times of India, Business Standard, Business Today, The Hindu and The Hindu Business Line. 

Nifty 10,000: Coming soon at a stock market near you

bullfightingVivek Kaul

It is that time of the year when the stock market analysts get busy predicting what levels do they see Sensex/Nifty reaching during the course of the next financial year.
First off the blocks this year are Gautam Chhaochharia and Sanjena Dadawala of UBS Global Research, who have predicted that the NSE Nifty will touch 9,600 points by the end of 2015. As I write this, the Nifty is trading at around 8375 points. Hence, the UBS analysts are basically talking about the Nifty index, rallying by around 15% over the course of the next thirteen and a half months by end 2015.
The prediction of 9,600 points has been arrived at by making certain assumptions, including the expectation of earnings of companies growing by 15% during the course of the next financial year (i.e. the period between April 1, 2015 and March 31, 2016).
Over the next few weeks you will see a spate of analysts of making such predictions. And it won’t be surprising if someone comes up with a Nifty target of 10,000 points or more. For one, saying that Nifty will touch 10,000 points is inherently more sexier than saying Nifty will touch 9,600 points. A big round number always sounds so much better.
Further, Nifty at 10,000 points will be around 19.4% higher than the current level of 8375 points. It has rallied by 32.6% during the course of this year (from January 2014 to November 13, 2014). Hence, a rally of 19.4%, assuming that Nifty will touch 10,000 by end 2015, sounds pretty reasonable.
Nevertheless, the question is how do these analysts know? John Kenneth Galbraith explains this in his book The Economics of Innocent Fraud. As he writes “The fraud begins with a controlling fact, inescapably evident but universally ignored. It is that the future of economic performance of the economy, the passage from good times to recession or depression and back, cannot be foretold. There are more ample predictions but no firm knowledge.”
And why is that ?“There is the variable effect of exports, imports, capital movements and corporate, public and government reaction thereto. Thus the all-too-evident-fact: The combined result of the unknown cannot be known,” writes Galbraith.
Nevertheless, these predictions serve a useful purpose. They tell people what they want to hear, especially during a bull market, when share prices are going up and people are inherently optimistic about things. As Galbraith puts it “The men and women so engaged[i.e. the ones making the predictions] believe and are believed by others to have knowledge of the unknown; research is thought to create such knowledge. Because what is predicted is what others wish to hear and what they wish to profit or have some return from, hope or need covers reality.”
The stock market rally this year has been more about “easy money” from abroad coming into India, rather than any fundamental improvement in economic activity. Since the beginning of the year (and upto November 13,2014) foreign institutional investors have made a net investment of Rs 67,359.4 crore into the Indian stock market.
This has largely been on account of Western central banks maintaining low interest rates. Hence, foreign investors have been able to borrow money at low interest rates and invest it in the Indian stock market. The inflows have been particularly strong since May, when Narendra Modi came to power. Since May 2014, Rs 35,545.7 crore has been the net investment made by FIIs in India.
The basic point is that in an environment where easy money is essentially driving up stock prices, predictions are more about understanding investor psychology than the underlying fundamentals of the market.
An excellent analogy here is that of Henry Blodget, who used to work as a senior analyst with the Wall Street firm CIBC Oppenheimer, in the late 1990s. In October 1998, Blodget brought out a report on Amazon.com. In this report he had predicted that the stock would go past $150 in a year’s time. He had also added in that report that the stock was worth anywhere between $150 and $500. At that point of time, the stock was quoting at $80. The stock raced past Blodget’s one-year target within a few weeks, so huge was the flow of money into the stock market.
His sales team then began to pester him for a new target. By December 1998, the price of the Amazon stock had crossed $200. As Maggie Mahar recounts in Bull!—A History of the Boom and Bust, 1982–2004 “Privately, he[Blodget] was confident that Amazon would hit $400—he just didn’t know if he had the balls to say it. But as his very first boss on Wall Street had told him, “You’re not a portfolio manager—you‘re not trying to sneak quietly into a stock before someone else sees it. You’re an analyst: your job is to go out and take a position.”
And that is what Blodget did. He took the position that Amazon would hit $400 within a year’s time. There must have been hundreds of other analysts on Wall Street who could have said the same thing. It was just that Blodget had the balls to say the right thing at the right time. He told the stock market what it wanted to hear.
Blodget put out his recommendation of Amazon hitting $400 on December 16, 1998. Within minutes, his forecast was traveling around the world. A Bloomberg reporter got a tip and put out the story. Soon, CNBC picked it up. And in no time, the recommendation had hit the chat boards across the various internet sites. And once that happened, the stock simply went through the roof. Amazon, which had closed at a price of $242.75 on December 15, 1998, closed 19 percent higher at $289 on December 16, 1998.
After this, the price of Amazon went on a roll. The stock was split in early January 1999, and the price crossed the $400 level that Blodget had predicted in March 1999, in split adjusted terms. Blodget got the investor psychology right. At some level, Blodget understood that he was in the midst of a stock market driven more by emotion and momentum. Hence, more than the price of the stock, he had to predict investor psychology and where that could take the price.
The Indian stock market is going through a similar era of easy money right now, though of a lower degree in comparison to the dot-com bubble that was on in the United States in the late 1990s. Hence, making predictions is going to about predicting investor psychology than the underlying fundamentals.
Given this, it won’t be surprising to see forecasts predicting that Nifty will cross 10,000 points next year, coming out over the next few years. Of course all these forecasts will indulge in what American writer Steven Pinker calls “compulsive hedging”. As he writes in his new book The Sense of Style “Many writers cushion their prose with wads of fluff that imply that they are not willing to stand behind what they are saying.”
The UBS analysts do just that. After predicting that Nifty will touch 9600 points by end 2015. They go on to write “If our expectations of the earnings growth recovery are not met (with only 10-12% growth in corporate earnings)…the Nifty could decline to the 7,500 levels.”
So much for being in the business of making predictions.

The article originally appeared on www.FirstBiz.com on Nov 15, 2014

(Vivek Kaul is the author of the Easy Money trilogy. He can be reached at [email protected])

What Narendra Modi can learn from Narsimha Rao

narendra_modiVivek Kaul

Before PV Narsimha Rao took over as the prime minister of the country, the finances were in a bad shape. Under the previous regime, the foreign exchange reserves had fallen to a level which was enough to pay only for three weeks worth of essential imports. In this scenario India had to take an emergency loan of $2.2 billion from the IMF. This was done by offering 67 tonnes of gold as a collateral.
Given this, Rao realized that he needed a ‘technocrat’ as his finance minister. IG Patel, a former governor of the Reserve Bank of India(RBI) was approached first. Patel, had been the fourteenth governor of the RBI between 1977 and 1982. After retiring from the RBI he was the director of IIM Ahmedabad. Between 1984 and 1990 he was the director of the London School of Economics.
Patel refused Rao’s offer and instead recommended Manmohan Singh. Singh had taken over from Patel as the governor of the RBI. He had a three year tenure at the RBI. After that he took over as the deputy chairman of the planning commission. In March 1991, Singh was appointed as the Chairman of the University Grants Commission(UGC). And this is when Narsimha Rao came calling and on June 21, 1991, the day Rao took over as the prime minister of the country, Singh was appointed as the finance minister.
Singh with the firm backing of Rao unleashed a spate of economic reforms which unshackled the moribund Indian economy and placed it on a much better footing. What is interesting nonetheless is that the entire period of Rao’s rule was not reform oriented. The economic reforms happened in the first three years and after that election considerations for the next Lok Sabha took over. Hence, the last two budgets of Manmohan Singh were of the ‘populist’ nature.
There is a lesson in this for the current prime minister Narendra Modi. Modi is likely to have elections on his mind more than Rao for the simple reason that his party and his allies are outnumbered in the Rajya Sabha. And if he has to establish a majority in the upper house, he first needs governments of the Bhartiya Janata Party in states. The BJP currently has 43 MPs in the Rajya Sabha and the NDA 63 MPs. This makes it difficult for the government to enact any legislation unless it calls for a joint sitting of both the houses.
Hence, elections for state governments are very important for the Modi government.
In this scenario it might is quite possible that economic reforms and even simple administrative decisions for that matter, may take a back seat. A very good example of this is that Modi had to wait for elections in Maharasthra and Haryana to get over before the government could announce the decontrolling of the price of diesel.
The good news is that an election free window of almost 11 months is coming up. As analysts Abhay Laijawala and Abhishek Saraf of Deutsche Bank Market Research point out in a recent report titled Policy action to intensify “Following three state elections in December – Jharkhand, Jammu and Kashmir – there will be a near eleven month election free window, before Bihar state goes to the polls around November 2015.”
As can be seen from the accompanying table, after elections in the states of Jharkhand and Jammu and Kashmir are over, there is an election free window of close to 11 months. This table does not account for elections in Delhi, which also may happen soon.
The next big election is scheduled only in November 2015 in Bihar. The state has around 7.3% of the country’s Lok Sabha seats. It also elects 16 members to the Rajya Sabha. The Rajya Sabha has 241 seats in total. Hence, the Bihar election will be of significant importance. And it may not be possible to push economic reforms around the time elections happen in the state.
Hence, the time to push reforms is early next year, when the election free window starts. A good place to start with would be take the deregulation of diesel prices further, and start gradually increasing the price of cooking gas. Currently, the oil marketing companies make an under-recovery of Rs 393.50, every time they sell a cooking gas cylinder.
As was done in the case of diesel, prices can be increased gradually at the rate of Rs 10-20 per month. Currently, the oil marketing companies face an under-recovery of Rs 188 crore per day on the sale of cooking gas and kerosene. A part of this amount is reimbursed by the government. This leads to an increase in the expenditure of the government and hence, its fiscal deficit. Fiscal deficit is the difference between what a government earns and what it spends. An increase in price will also ensure that over a period of time the black marketing of domestic cooking gas to hotels will become unviable.
Also, over a period of time as the government is able to increase its numbers in the Rajya Sabha it needs to introduce land and labour reforms as well. As Laijawala and Saraf point out “Most of the reforms in India, since 1991, have been broadly focused towards product and capital markets. Reforms in factor markets, other than capital, principally land and labor, have been broadly left out by all political administrations since 1991. We believe that a long era of coalition governments may be the reason for this anomaly.”
Narendra Modi’s government is not held back by the coalition dharma, as almost all governments since 1996 have been. Hence, it is in a position to push through some real economic reforms on this front. These reforms are of great importance if Modi’s call of Make in India is to be take seriously.
Other than this, the Goods and Services Tax (GST) bill which has been in the works for a while, needs to be passed as well. The benefits of GST over the long term will be tremendous. “It has a very ambitious objective to wean away inefficiencies in India’s indirect tax value chain and ensure smoother movement of goods and services by converting India into a one common market, versus the current status where different states levy different types and rates of taxes, which introduces several inefficiencies,” write Laijawala and Saraf.
To conclude, Narendra Modi and his government need to make the best of the election free window that starts from January 2015 and try and make the best of it.

The article originally appeared on www.valueresearchonline.com on Nov 14, 2014

(Vivek Kaul is the author of the Easy Money trilogy. He can be reached at [email protected])

Kaala Dhandha Gore Log – Why politicians are not serious about black money

kaala dhandhaVivek Kaul

Sometime in the mid 1980s, I vaguely remember spending a few days with my family, in one of the many small coal producing towns that dot what is now known as the state of Jharkhand. As was common in those days, we had hired a VCR and had decided to go on a movie watching spree.
One of the movies on the list was Kaala Dhandha Gore Log. The movie was directed by Sanjay Khan. That is the only bit about it that I still remember. I don’t know why, but I found the title of the movie very fascinating and was really looking forward to watching it.
But the adults in the family threw a spanner in the works and banned us “kids” from watching the movie, without really going into the reasons for it. Around three decades later I can speculate as to why we weren’t allowed to watch the movie.
I guess the movie must have had a few scenes with the heroine mouthing the most famous cliché of the eighties,“mujhe bhagwan ke liye chhod do,” or it must have had songs we now call “item numbers”.
Those were days when cable television hadn’t come to India (that would happen only in late 1991, early 1992). Middle class India still hadn’t discovered The Bold and the Beautiful or Santa Barbara for that matter, two shows that went a long way in Indian parents becoming a lot more liberal in deciding what their kids could watch on television.
For some reason the title of the movie has always stayed in my mind, and I have speculated now and then, on its possible storyline. As the title of the movie suggests, the story could possibly be about businesses run by white people (meaning foreigners) which throw up black money.
Three decades later, reel life seems to have turned into real life. There is a great belief in this country that all of the black money generated over the years is now with foreigners. It has been transferred into foreign banks operating out of tax havens. The prime minister Narendra Modi has promised to get the money back.
In an earlier piece I had explained why getting this money back is not a feasible proposition, even though it might sound possible. And a better thing to do would be to simply concentrate on unearthing all the black money that is there in the country. I had also said that a lot of black money which has gone abroad over the years is possibly now being round-tripped to India, given that the chances of earning a good return are better in India.
Nevertheless, there are two questions that arise here? First, why has the black money problem been allowed to become so huge? Second, will the politicians choose to do anything about it? Let me answer the second question first.
Political analyst Mohan Guruswamy shared some very interesting data in a recent column in The Asian Age. Between 2004-05 and 2011-12, national political parties collected Rs 435.87 crore as donations. Of this the Bhartiya Janata Party received Rs 192.47 crore from 1,334 donors and the Congress Rs 172.25 crore from 418 donors.
Corporates made 87% of these donations. Interestingly, over and above this, the parties received donations from unknown contributors as well. The Congress party received a total of Rs 1,185 crore in three financial years (2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10) and the BJP received around Rs 600 crore during the same period.
It is worth remembering that in the period between 2004-05 and 2011-12, there were two Lok Sabha elections and many elections to state assemblies. It doesn’t take rocket science to come to the conclusion that the amount of donations declared by the political parties were clearly not enough to fight so many elections.
In fact, a study carried out by Centre for Media Studies in March earlier this year estimated that around Rs 30,000 crore would be spent during the 16th Lok Sabha elections which happened in April and May 2014. Of this total, the government would spend around Rs 7,000-8,000 crore to conduct the elections through the Election Commission and the home ministry.
The remaining amounts would be spent by the candidates contesting the elections and the political parties they belonged to. Candidates standing for Lok Sabha elections are allowed to spend only Rs 70 lakhs for fighting an election in bigger states. For other states, the amount varies from anywhere between Rs 22 lakh to Rs 54 lakh.
These amounts are peanuts when it comes to fighting elections. Even candidates from major political parties fighting state level elections spend more money than this. Candidates stay within these limits officially, but political parties spend much more money outside the set limits, during the course of campaigning.
What this tells us clearly is that political parties have got access to funding beyond what they have declared in the public domain. This money that comes to them is black money. This black money can possibly be the money that politicians have accumulated through corruption or money handed over by crony capitalists looking at possible favours in the days to come.
Hence, a crackdown on black money within the country would lead to the major source of funding for political parties and politicians being impacted. Guruswamy put it very aptly in his column when he said “Their own taps will run dry.”
Now, let me try and answer the first question, which was that why has the black money problem been allowed to become so huge? Why has it been left unattended for so many decades? As Daron Acemoglue and James A Robinson write in Why Nations Fail—The Origins of Power, Prosperity and Poverty “Political institutions determine economic institutions…Extractive political institutions concentrate power in the hands of a narrow elite and place few constraints on the exercise of power. Economic institutions are then often structured by this elite to extract resources from the rest of the society. Extractive institutions thus naturally accompany extractive political institutions. In fact, they must inherently depend on extractive political institutions for their survival.”
So what does this mean in the Indian context? It means that the Income Tax department, which is supposed to be unearthing the black money in this country, is corrupt because the politicians running this country are corrupt. The way the economic incentives of politicians have evolved has led to a situation wherein they simply cannot become active in cracking down on black money.
It explains why only 3.5 crore individuals out of a population of 120 crore pay income tax in this country.
To conclude, the question worth asking is, what will it take for politicians of this country get serious about unearthing black money?

The column originally appeared on www.equitymaster.com on Nov 14, 2014