Skip to main content

Will Income tax rate cut increase Demand?

Is Budget 2020 a middle-class budget?

Finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman unveiled the budget for the financial year 2020-21 by Feb 1. The theme of the budget is observed as Aspirational India, Economic Development and Caring Society.



Income tax rate cuts

The tax rates were reduced for the various income slabs. The tax reduction is seen as a scheme that the taxpayer should opt for ie., The new tax rates are for the taxpayers who do not claim any tax exemptions like leave travel allowances, House rent allowances, House loan repayments, Savings such as LIC, PPF etc. Those who claim for exemptions should stick to the older tax rates and new tax rates do not apply for them.

The objective of the tax rate cut is to reduce the tax burden and to put more money in the hands of the people to increase the consumer demand in the economy.

Nistaar has been saying in previous articles that more money should be given in the hands of the people to increase consumer demand by which the economy would revive. And govt has taken steps for it by reducing the tax rates.

But is it right to reduce the tax rate to increase demand? Many economists say that the new tax scheme is not attractive for salaried taxpayers and those who opted for exemptions already.

Most of the Indian salaried employees are not capable of spending lavishly and they tend to save money or take loans and repay them through salary. For eg. Either People take house loans, car loans etc. and repay them as monthly EMI or they save money through chits or otherwise for their later expenses. Those who have taken loans can claim the exemption to pay tax as he/she has debt/loan to repay. Most of the salaried employees either take loans or show expenses like house rent, educational expenses etc. to claim exemptions to pay tax.

Those who already took loans and claiming exemptions cannot opt for the new tax scheme. And for the salaried income taxpayers, the new scheme is not attractive compared to the old. Then to whom this new scheme is for? For those who work in the unorganised sector, MSME?

Will the new scheme adversely affects demand?

The new scheme obstructs the taxpayers to take loans as they couldn't claim exemption. This prohibits the people to take house loans, car loans etc. This may affect the construction sector, automobile sector etc. adversely and affect the growth. The construction sector is very large and important in terms of employment and growth in the country. Affecting the sector would adversely affect the income of labours, contractors etc. relying on the sector. Then how the objective of giving more money in the hands of people to increase demand is possible?

People saving money through LIC, PPF would be reduced so that money going to these organisations reduce and they don't get profit out of it.

I suspect this tax rate cuts are only for eyewash as no taxpayer would opt for the new scheme if he had already taken loans. Moreover, the scheme is very complicated to understand and it is a burden for the taxpayers.

Also, the funds allocated to the MGNREGA scheme is reduced. This increases the burden on the states and MGNREGA being a saviour of poor people getting affected is not a good sign. Govt has increased the public spending to boost the growth in the economy, we will see how much it helps in employment and growth. Also, govt has announced disinvestment of Air India, LIC to get money for the expenses.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

சமூக நீதி - அரசியல் பிரதிநிதித்துவம்

சுயமரியாதை இயக்க பிரச்சாரமே சமூக மாற்றத்தை ஏற்படுத்த போதுமானது என்று பெரியார் நம்பிக்கொண்டிருந்தபோது ஆட்சி அதிகாரம் மூலமாகத்தான் சமூக மாற்றத்தை உண்டாக்க முடியும் என்று அண்ணா அரசியலில் இறங்கினார். சமூக மாற்றமே (social change) சமூக நீதியை (social equity/ justice) அடைய உதவும். நீதி கட்சி முதல் திராவிட கட்சிகள் வரையிலான சமூக நீதிக்கான பயணத்தில், கல்வி வேலை வாய்ப்புகளில் இட ஒதுக்கீடு, வாழ்வாதார மேம்பாடு என பல திட்டங்கள் பிற்படுத்தப்பட்ட மக்களுக்கு வெகுவாக சென்றடைந்தது. ஆனால் இவை ஒடுக்கப்பட்ட மக்களுக்கும் சென்றடைந்ததா, அவர்களின் வாழ்க்கை தரம் உயர்ந்ததா என்று பார்த்தால் பிற்படுத்தபட்ட மக்களுக்கு கிடைத்த நன்மைகள் ஒடுக்கப்பட்டோருக்கு கடத்தப்படவில்லை என்பது தெளிவாக தெரியும். இதற்கு நிலவுடைமை, சமூக மூலதனம் (social capital, term introduced by CJI D Y Chandrachud) ஆகியவை முக்கிய காரணம். இதை பற்றி S நாராயன் IAS, வாஜ்பாய் ஆட்சியில் Finance  Secretary ஆக இருந்தவர் அவரின் புத்தகத்தில் (The Dravidian Years) குறிப்பிட்டுள்ளார். இதன் மூலமாக கல்வி மற்றும் வேலை வாய்ப்புகளில் கிடைக்கும் இட ஒதுக்கீடு மட்டும்

Protectionism

In a major setback for the Haryana government, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Nov 17, 2023 struck down a state law mandating 75 per cent reservation for locals in private sector jobs, calling it "unconstitutional". While stating that private employers cannot be forced to employ persons from a particular state, the court, in its order, underlined that discriminating against individuals based on their state would be negative treatment against other citizens of the country. I have discussed the Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act, 2020 in the perspective of problems due to protectionism in the article dated July 10, 2020. I have advocated that these kind of protectionist laws are irrational as it infringes fundamental rights of the citizens and rights and liberty of the corporates and private companies too. Im glad that the High court pronounced a judgement striking down the law as it is unconstitutional. Excerpts from Protectionism and Reverse migration, July

Liquor shops in India – Celebrated Glory or Shameful Dishonor?

Due to the nationwide lock-down from March 25, all the economic activities are shut down except for the essential services. Since liquor doesn’t come under essential needs liquor shops have also been closed. Though the pandemic situation is still in persistence, the government has allowed the shops to sell liquor. From then there are so many controversies and debates happening for and against the liquor ban. And the people are also agitating against the opening of liquor shops. So, here we will discuss, whether the country really needs a liquor ban or not, along with other associated aspects. Rights come first Though opening liquor shops during this severe pandemic situation is totally irrational and highly condemnable, I differ in the idea of a complete ban on liquor.  The state cannot interfere or coerce its ideologies to the citizens.  It is the right of people to choose their food or drink . People who don’t eat beef would raise voice to ban cow slaughter and who don’t drink would