Re: Indian Economy News & Discussion - Nov 27 2017
Posted: 13 Jun 2019 17:17
Rooftop solar penetration in India is still very low. That could ease a lot of pressure from the grid for EV charging.
Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/
when they are able to match the gurantees, rightVenkataS wrote:We need to exploit roof top solar power aggressively. We need EVs because of the amount of pollution in our cities. This level of pollution for example in Delhi will affect the health of the citizens. However we should be buying locally manufactured solar panels and battery packs. We must not rely on imports here.
PS: equivalent page on IndiaBordering the manufacturing giant that is China, Vietnam benefits from the manufacturing expertise that continues to spill over as existing factories in China become more and more overcrowded.
Chinese manufacturers have been moving their factories to Vietnam since the early 2000s because sourcing from Vietnam offers refuge from the brutal competition of Chinese businesses. This is turning a large portion of Vietnam’s manufacturing industry into an extension of China’s industry.
India Inc’s advance tax figures grew exponentially by 171 per cent during the first quarter of 2019-20, prompting the tax authorities to say that the economy may be back on track after witnessing lacklustre growth in earlier quarters.
In overall direct tax collection, Mumbai has registered 133 per cent growth, collecting Rs 17,174 crore of advance taxes against Rs 7,356 crore in the same period last year, according to the data compiled by the tax department.
Corporate tax collections stood at Rs 14,873 crore, against Rs 5,477 crore a year ago. Individuals paid Rs 2,301 crore, up 22.4 per cent over Rs 1,879 crore in Q1 of 2018-19 (FY19).
The first instalment of advance tax for the current fiscal year ended on June 15. Assessees falling under the ambit of advance tax payment are required to pay 15 per cent of the evaluated tax liability.
Vietnam is right across the border from China, in particular the Pearl River Delta region around Guangdong province. There are excellent logistics facilities connecting Vietnam with China, which facilitates the quick and low cost movement of all sorts of parts/components in the supply chain in both directions. China has built not only a massive manufacturing ability, but has captured almost the entire supply chain to support this. For instance, look at shoes - there are probably 25 distinct components that go into a pair of sneakers, and these are all produced in the pearl river delta - rivets, laces, soles (which have multiple parts of different types of plastics/rubbers), upper fabric & structural parts, cartons & labels etc. For Vietnam, these are just a short truck ride away and can be stocked on a JIT basis; not only that, components can even be made in Vietnam and shipped North to China for assembly.vijayk wrote:I heard Vietnam is taking over the Chinese market share of US exports especially in texttiles. Wonder why India can't
No, its 2.1. 1.5 is dangerous territory. Not even Germany and Japan have such low TFR. The rise t0 1.6 billion by 2060 even though we will achieve replacement rate by 2030 is because of longer lives and previous high birth rates. If our TFR declines below 2.1 after 2030, it will eventually start falling.Singha wrote:we need urgent measures to reduce the fertility rate to 1.5 range - 1.3 is said to be replacement rate below which pop starts to decline.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_s ... ility_rate
the 4 BIMARU states with a giant pop of 400 mil are dragging us down and they have little job creation so just exporting these hordes of people to the other states.
I think its already reached 1.3 - 1.2 in many of southern states, the amount of couples in TN having 1 kid is increasing. Anecdotal experience with my cousins who all have 1, do not have plans to having another kid as of present, may change their mind later, but for now, they all are happy with just 1.hanumadu wrote:No, its 2.1. 1.5 is dangerous territory. Not even Germany and Japan have such low TFR. The rise t0 1.6 billion by 2060 even though we will achieve replacement rate by 2030 is because of longer lives and previous high birth rates. If our TFR declines below 2.1 after 2030, it will eventually start falling.Singha wrote:we need urgent measures to reduce the fertility rate to 1.5 range - 1.3 is said to be replacement rate below which pop starts to decline.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_s ... ility_rate
the 4 BIMARU states with a giant pop of 400 mil are dragging us down and they have little job creation so just exporting these hordes of people to the other states.
We were 70 crores approximately in 1980. Our troubles compounded because our population double in the next 20 years.Singha wrote:yes there is no great reason why we need a 1.5 billion horde population.
a pop of 1 billion if managed well will both decrease pressure on land and resources yet provide us a massive economic pool to play in.
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government has kick-started its second term by setting the ball rolling for “structural” reforms in agriculture, by announcing a task force under the NITI Aayog. The fundamental problem to be solved is that agriculture supports 48.9 percent of the population but contributes only 14 percent to the GDP. This implies a very low standard of living for half the population. As India strives to become a $5 trillion economy by 2024 ($3 trillion today), the challenge is to reverse this trend.
Interestingly, in 1938, roughly 60 percent of the population was agriculture-dependent and policymakers had wanted this number to decline to 50 percent. A hundred years earlier, in 1871, around 90 percent of India’s population was rural. The difference was that in the 1870s, rural India comprised 65 percent of the economy.
Fine if you want to reduce TFR to 1.3 which is actually suicidal from civilizational perspective, but do also remove universal sufferage which automatically gives every adult right to vote upon reaching 18 yrs of age.Singha wrote:we need urgent measures to reduce the fertility rate to 1.5 range - 1.3 is said to be replacement rate below which pop starts to decline.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_s ... ility_rate
the 4 BIMARU states with a giant pop of 400 mil are dragging us down and they have little job creation so just exporting these hordes of people to the other states.
This is only validating screwdriver-in-India, most of this is defense offsets, as discussed in mil forum.vijayk wrote:Year Defence Exports in INR crores
2014-15 1940
2015-16 2059
2016-17 1521
2017-18 4682
2018-19 10,745
India's Defence exports has gone up by 5 times in last 5 years validating Successful #MakeInIndia
That is true. The idea of making in India is to start with the screwdriver and end with "made in India" products. It is a long way to go, but we need to start somewhere.abhik wrote:This is only validating screwdriver-in-India, most of this is defense offsets, as discussed in mil forum.
Any truth in above or a lot ofWhat can revive India’s GDP growth — consumption and investment
By: Sunil Jain
Updated: June 24, 2019 2:44:32 AM
Budget 2019-20: Cutting corporate taxes, or RBI cutting repo, won’t help much if the government’s policies are seen to be hitting investments
Budget 2019: Though government economists have done a comprehensive job of demolishing ex-CEA Arvind Subramanian’s
argument that India has overestimated its GDP growth by as much as 2.5 percentage points, what is worrying is that while average growth for FY19 may be a little over 6.8%, that for the January to March quarter (Q4) has fallen to a mere 5.8% versus 8.1% a year ago. It is this growth level that India has to pull itself up from, and the prospects aren’t good, which is why some forecasts are looking at an FY20 growth that is lower than that in the previous year. While growth in private consumption levels have remained at the same 7% level in both Q1 and Q4 of FY19 (they fell from 12% to 10% in terms of current prices), investment growth has collapsed from 13% to 4% (and from 17% to 7% in current prices). In such a scenario, the only way GDP growth can pick up is if investment levels or government consumption rises dramatically—it grew from 7% in Q1 to 13% in Q4 in constant prices, and from 12% to 16% in current prices—but with the government quite cash-strapped, that isn’t a possibility; in any case, since government expenditure is just 9-10% of GDP, there is just that much it can achieve. Indeed, given the NBFC crisis, and its impact on credit growth, the downside pressure on GDP growth is even higher.
Some argue that, along with a sharp cut in corporate tax rates—India’s are amongst the highest in the world—a sharper cut in repo rates by RBI will do a lot to stimulate investment; so, while finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman can do the first in the budget, RBI Governor Shaktikanta Das will do the rest in the next credit policy. Both moves will help, but how much is not clear. Even if RBI cuts repo, this may not translate into lower rates for a variety of reasons, including the fact that the government-mandated savings rates on ‘small deposits’ puts a floor to bank-deposit rates and, in turn, lending rates. And tax cuts can’t help if the investment climate is poor. If an investor in a power plant can’t get enough coal to run it because the public sector monopolist Coal India isn’t producing enough, or if a bankrupt state electricity board can’t either buy the power or pay for it on time, how will a lower interest rate or a tax cut help? Though these are not strictly budget issues, traditionally budgets are used to make larger policy announcements that will be followed through during the year; so, apart from the actual numbers on deficits etc, Sitharaman’s budget will be watched for whether the government uses it to shed its anti-industry image. In the case of telecom, as this newspaper has catalogued regularly, the investment climate turned hostile even before RJio’s entry with its very low tariffs; while the government used to charge industry a revenue-share at the time it gave out spectrum almost free, it carried on with this even after it started charging an arm and a leg for the spectrum. It was relatively easy for prime minister Narendra Modi to fix this, but Congress president Rahul Gandhi’s suit-boot-ki-sarkaar jibe seemed to have given him cold feet. In the oil and gas sector, despite Modi’s professed aim to lower import dependence, oilcos do not get the market price for all their output. In the case of natural gas, only that produced from new fields will get the market price; but if firms don’t make higher profits on their existing production, how will they invest to find new gas? And while firms are free to get market prices in the case of oil, if the government specifies which buyers are to get how much oil, this ensures there is no real price discovery. Nothing exemplifies this anti-investor attitude better than the government’s treatment of UK firm Cairn Energy which, within a few years, produced a fourth of India’s oil output. It was slapped with a retrospective tax, its shares worth $1bn were confiscated and dividends etc worth $300-400mn were appropriated; indeed, when Cairn (by then sold to Vedanta) wanted an extension of its lease—so that it could add to India’s oil production—the government agreed only if Cairn raised the revenue it would share by a whopping 10 percentage points (bit.ly/2OZUy2r).
In the case of minerals like coal and iron ore—even without oil, they comprise 25% of India’s imports, and 55% with oil—hardly 10% of India’s geology has been explored even though doubling this can create another 5 million jobs. Apart from unconscionable delays in getting environment clearances, as in the telecom sector, rapacious government levies are a big problem; as compared to 8-12% levels globally, Indian levies on most non-oil minerals work out to around 30% of top-line revenues. The government is focused on increasing the country’s overall exports—this can’t be done if taxes and interest rates aren’t slashed and rigid labour laws abolished— but if imports of minerals fall due to higher local production, the forex impact is the same. If investment levels have fallen dramatically due to poor government policy, so has FDI, from 1.9% of GDP in FY16 to 1.6% in FY19. If the government changes it policy on e-commerce after Walmart spent $16bn to buy Flipkart, for instance, it is difficult to see how foreign investors are going to remain enthused. Certainly, PE funds and others will bring in money to take advantage of the bargains available at the NCLT, but greenfield investment requires a more predictable regime. Much like in 1991, the budget will be watched for whether it unleashes a slew of reforms, the new industrial policy that President Ram Nath Kovind spoke of on Thursday. How sweeping the reforms will be depends on whether prime minister Modi thinks India is in a crisis. Given the state of the fisc, the falling investment levels and the rising joblessness, the crisis is apparent even if no one is mortgaging their gold.
TN has one...Singha wrote:perhaps good tax breaks for locally made solar , wind and battery is in order.
Question is ... is subsidizing good in long term or not? are we setting a precedent of demands from every company? If this is good, we need to set up a committee to process these requests professionally and announce the reasons. Otherwise, PAPPU will go around shouting CHOR CHOR. Hope we do this systematically rather than on adhoc basisuskumar wrote:Vedanta’s $10 billion LCD project may fall flat
A Big ticket investment in Electronics Falls Flat.this at a time when we are trying to control our trade deficit and encourage Make in India
Manu wrote:https://www.financialexpress.com/opinio ... t/1616509/What can revive India’s GDP growth — consumption and investment
By: Sunil Jain
Updated: June 24, 2019 2:44:32 AM
Budget 2019-20: Cutting corporate taxes, or RBI cutting repo, won’t help much if the government’s policies are seen to be hitting investments
Budget 2019: Though government economists have done a comprehensive job of demolishing ex-CEA Arvind Subramanian’s
argument that India has overestimated its GDP growth by as much as 2.5 percentage points, what is worrying is that while average growth for FY19 may be a little over 6.8%, that for the January to March quarter (Q4) has fallen to a mere 5.8% versus 8.1% a year ago. It is this growth level that India has to pull itself up from, and the prospects aren’t good, which is why some forecasts are looking at an FY20 growth that is lower than that in the previous year. While growth in private consumption levels have remained at the same 7% level in both Q1 and Q4 of FY19 (they fell from 12% to 10% in terms of current prices), investment growth has collapsed from 13% to 4% (and from 17% to 7% in current prices). In such a scenario, the only way GDP growth can pick up is if investment levels or government consumption rises dramatically—it grew from 7% in Q1 to 13% in Q4 in constant prices, and from 12% to 16% in current prices—but with the government quite cash-strapped, that isn’t a possibility; in any case, since government expenditure is just 9-10% of GDP, there is just that much it can achieve. Indeed, given the NBFC crisis, and its impact on credit growth, the downside pressure on GDP growth is even higher.
Some argue that, along with a sharp cut in corporate tax rates—India’s are amongst the highest in the world—a sharper cut in repo rates by RBI will do a lot to stimulate investment; so, while finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman can do the first in the budget, RBI Governor Shaktikanta Das will do the rest in the next credit policy. Both moves will help, but how much is not clear. Even if RBI cuts repo, this may not translate into lower rates for a variety of reasons, including the fact that the government-mandated savings rates on ‘small deposits’ puts a floor to bank-deposit rates and, in turn, lending rates. And tax cuts can’t help if the investment climate is poor. If an investor in a power plant can’t get enough coal to run it because the public sector monopolist Coal India isn’t producing enough, or if a bankrupt state electricity board can’t either buy the power or pay for it on time, how will a lower interest rate or a tax cut help? Though these are not strictly budget issues, traditionally budgets are used to make larger policy announcements that will be followed through during the year; so, apart from the actual numbers on deficits etc, Sitharaman’s budget will be watched for whether the government uses it to shed its anti-industry image. In the case of telecom, as this newspaper has catalogued regularly, the investment climate turned hostile even before RJio’s entry with its very low tariffs; while the government used to charge industry a revenue-share at the time it gave out spectrum almost free, it carried on with this even after it started charging an arm and a leg for the spectrum. It was relatively easy for prime minister Narendra Modi to fix this, but Congress president Rahul Gandhi’s suit-boot-ki-sarkaar jibe seemed to have given him cold feet. In the oil and gas sector, despite Modi’s professed aim to lower import dependence, oilcos do not get the market price for all their output. In the case of natural gas, only that produced from new fields will get the market price; but if firms don’t make higher profits on their existing production, how will they invest to find new gas? And while firms are free to get market prices in the case of oil, if the government specifies which buyers are to get how much oil, this ensures there is no real price discovery. Nothing exemplifies this anti-investor attitude better than the government’s treatment of UK firm Cairn Energy which, within a few years, produced a fourth of India’s oil output. It was slapped with a retrospective tax, its shares worth $1bn were confiscated and dividends etc worth $300-400mn were appropriated; indeed, when Cairn (by then sold to Vedanta) wanted an extension of its lease—so that it could add to India’s oil production—the government agreed only if Cairn raised the revenue it would share by a whopping 10 percentage points (bit.ly/2OZUy2r).
In the case of minerals like coal and iron ore—even without oil, they comprise 25% of India’s imports, and 55% with oil—hardly 10% of India’s geology has been explored even though doubling this can create another 5 million jobs[/b]. Apart from unconscionable delays in getting environment clearances, as in the telecom sector, rapacious government levies are a big problem; as compared to 8-12% levels globally, Indian levies on most non-oil minerals work out to around 30% of top-line revenues. The government is focused on increasing the country’s overall exports—this can’t be done if taxes and interest rates aren’t slashed and rigid labour laws abolished— but if imports of minerals fall due to higher local production, the forex impact is the same. If investment levels have fallen dramatically due to poor government policy, so has FDI, from 1.9% of GDP in FY16 to 1.6% in FY19. If the government changes it policy on e-commerce after Walmart spent $16bn to buy Flipkart, for instance, it is difficult to see how foreign investors are going to remain enthused. Certainly, PE funds and others will bring in money to take advantage of the bargains available at the NCLT, but greenfield investment requires a more predictable regime. Much like in 1991, the budget will be watched for whether it unleashes a slew of reforms, the new industrial policy that President Ram Nath Kovind spoke of on Thursday. How sweeping the reforms will be depends on whether prime minister Modi thinks India is in a crisis. Given the state of the fisc, the falling investment levels and the rising joblessness, the crisis is apparent even if no one is mortgaging their gold.
Any truth in above or a lot of
Is their any doubt? Anyway terms like Socialist & Capitalist are not applicable to India they are intended for a European view pointkit wrote:I feel Modi 1.0 was a closet socialist despite professing to be capitalist oriented