Economic Highlights
New Delhi, 3 April 2017
Finance Bill Passed
TAX TERROR MAY MOUNT
By Shivaji Sarkar
Finance Bill 2017 has moved beyond its customary role to
make major amendments and linkages. The changes are beyond the monetary
provisions. It is not for the first time such a route has been adopted. Earlier
too it was done for creation of an independent agency to manage government
debt, the Monetary Policy Committee to target inflation and the merging of the
Forward Markets Commission with the securities regulator.
The Finance Bill is a money bill since it gives effect to
tax changes proposed in the Union Budget. A money bill is defined in Article
110 of the Constitution as one which only contains provisions related
to taxation, borrowings by the government, or expenditure from Consolidated
Fund of India. A money bill only needs the approval of the Lok Sabha, and is
sent to the Rajya Sabha for its recommendations. Even if the Rajya Sabha makes
amendments, it goes back to the Lok Sabha, which as it did now, can reject the
amendments.
The Opposition of course made a hue and cry. Its criticism
was restricted to government adopting an unconventional route for making
legislative business. In addition to tax changes, Finance Bill, 2017 amended
several laws including the Securities Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 and the
Payment and Settlements Act, 2007 to make structural changes such as creating a
payments regulator and changing the composition of the Securities Appellate
Tribunal.
The most debated was making Aadhaar mandatory for PAN and
income tax. It may expose a citizen to unscrupulous hackers. Though the system
is said to be foolproof, the recent incidents of some banks misusing Aadhaar
shows that people are at risk. The leaking of former cricket captain Mahendra
Singh Dhoni’s personal details by a sanctioned Aadhaar enrolment agency is
stated to expose a deeper flaw in the identification project’s data collection
and storage systems, with experts saying no citizens’ private information is
safe.
Aadhaar creates a data trail and virtually pips into the
deals made by an individual. While the intention is to tackle the few
non-tax-compliants, there is said to be an uncanny situation. A future
government can make use of such information for a motive other than that is
being stated now. An income tax paper itself is a public document. Linking it
to Aadhar increases the risk. It may include blackmailing of individual or
corporate as well as throwing critical information to international fraudsters.
No digital data is considered safe, least of all, that
exposes one’s financial details. The authorities need not look to the criticism
from a mere political angle. A rethinking is needed. Some experts apprehend
that even information of some government functionaries may be at risk, at least
theoretically.
Though no government accepts it, the leaks on some
international systems, are attributed to the digital trails. The rules say that
failure to give iris and biometric linked number would lead to invalidation of
PAN. It possibly needs a rethink. It would lead to harassment of citizens.
Apparently, it is the handiwork of the bureaucracy to cover
up their failures in locating shady deals. It empowers the bureaucracy. It also
shows that the system distrusts everyone in the society. This may have serious
fall-out and lead to angst. An act that has such wider ramification should have
called for a wider debate.
Nobody can ensure that it would not lead to unscrupulous
ways to be taken by the authorities. The note-ban has reportedly led to
increase in the “legitimisation” charges several fold, harassment of
individuals and business people. More stringent the policing, higher are the chances
of corruption. In this case too, common taxpayers may have to pay and hush up.
Such provisions increase graft and the black money that the nation wants to
end. Yes, it adds to tax terror.
The PAN itself is enough. Linking it to another card is
superficial. Private medical institutions take money through cheques and turn
that into black. Can PAN or Aadhar prevent this? The business community is
concerned over restriction of deals in cash beyond Rs 2 lakh. The special
investigation team had put it at Rs 3 lakh. The wholesale business though
itself routes most businesses through banks, but still majority of these take
place through cash at least up to Rs 5 lakh. It makes transactions fast and the
businesses do not have to run for defaults. The reduction of limit and
stringent provisions again leads to avoidable harassment.
Parliament’s own research system, PRS, is skeptical over the
Finance Bill, 2017 making structural changes to many laws. Parliamentary
committees allow for a forum for detailed scrutiny, deliberations and public
consultation on proposed laws. “The opportunity to build rigour into the
law-making process is lost if such legislative changes are not examined by
committees”.
Amendments to the Finance Bill seek to replace certain tribunals
and transfer their functions to existing ones. The rationale behind replacing
these Tribunals is unclear. For example, the Telecom Disputes Settlement and
Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) will replace the Airports Economic Regulatory
Authority Appellate Tribunal. It is unclear if TDSAT, which primarily deals
with issues related to telecom disputes, will have the expertise to adjudicate
matters related to the pricing of airport services. Similarly, it is unclear if
the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, which will replace the Competition
Appellate Tribunal, will have the expertise to deal with matters related to
anti-competitive practices.
Tribunals affected by the move include those before which the
Central government could be a party to disputes – such as those related to
income tax, railways and administrative matters. Parliamentary procedure requires
wider discussion to understand the moves. The political leadership of a
government is trusted, but often the bureaucratic process leads it to take
decisions, which may not always be in the interest of the people. The
leadership has to be cautious.
The aim to reduce cash political donation to Rs 2000 looks
pious. However, its practicability has to be looked into. The bogey of black
money trail has constricted open discussion. Finance Minister Arun Jaitley’s
conversation on the issue also stated the reservation of political parties as political
bonds are a grey area. The move has not been openly opposed or criticised by
any party. But it certainly needs a deep insight to prevent creation of a
devious method. Budget secrecy is a sham. It can go through a process of open
discussion, which can lead to better decisions. ---INFA
(Copyright, India News and Feature
Alliance)
|