News shortcuts: From the Courts | Top Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | Professional Updates | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
ę General »
 SDMC starts offline facility for depositing property tax
 Covid-19 crisis threatens to wipe out gains from corporation tax cut
 Big tax shortfall raises Centre‚Äôs fiscal deficit to 4.6%
 Experience with GST holds valuable lessons for One Nation One Ration Card
 Firms may get input tax credit for masks, PPEs
 Traders seek deferring of property tax
 COVID-19: Kerala Government extends Time Limit of Payment of License Fee and Renewal of Registration under various Acts
 Rajasthan HC grants Bail to Chartered Accountant accused of Corruption and Money Laundering
 Will your tax liability go up with no reimbursement?
 Residency relief for NRIs and foreigners: A welcome tax initiative
 Finance Ministry dismisses reports of pay cuts for central government employees

Decoding the tax code
September, 01st 2010

There are many good reasons for the cautious and conservative approach the Union finance ministry has adopted towards direct tax reform. Expectations of a radical reform of tax policy have understandably been belied because of the governments cautious approach. The most important reason for such cautious conservatism would be the likely revenue implications of the changes being proposed.

The Union revenue secretary has let it be known that the government would be giving away as much as '53,000 crore in the first year of implementation of the new direct taxes code (DTC). Clearly, this fact may have also shaped the governments decision to delay the implementation of the new tax code by an year. No finance minister can afford to take chances with revenues and reform when the fiscal deficit and the budgetary deficits of the government are so high.

Fiscal policy and public finance purists may like neat and decisive reform, while taxpayers would like simplicity of procedure and clarity in language, but fiscal authorities worry more about the revenue implications of tax reform. The government cannot afford to risk reduced revenues at a time when there is such uncertainty about growth and deficit management. Further, given the recent decline in the savings rate, the government may have also been wary of reducing the incentives for saving.

As a consequence of such concerns, the final DTC has proved to be less radical in scope and intent than was widely expected. Critics would say the government has missed an opportunity to undertake more wide-ranging reform. But the fact is that tax reform is always a continuing process and no government can afford to put a full stop to policy change unmindful of the revenue and deficit management implications of such change.

Even so, it is necessary to ensure reasonable stability, predictability and transparency in policy. Hence, whatever the change the government now intends to bring should remain in place for a reasonable period of time to enable individuals and firms to plan and manage their incomes, savings and investment decisions.

The governments decision to offer some comfort to lower middle-class families is well taken, especially when inflation continues to hurt them, and so also its decision to end gender preferences, considering that in India the phenomenon of single mother households is still not significant and most women taxpayers belong to double-income families. However, it is not clear why the government wishes to keep in place so many exemptions. The scope of exempt-exempt-exempt ought to have been reduced and that of exempt-exempt-tax widened. Health and education expenditure and retirement benefits are about the only items that ought to benefit from tax exemptions.

There is no reason why any other sort of income or expenditure should attract tax exemption. It is the margin for discretion and the lack of clarity that complicate tax systems and their administration. These considerations must inform policy on general anti-avoidance rules (GAAR) so that the taxpayer is not at the mercy of tax administration and tax consultants. GAAR principles must be clearly defined by the government and not left to tax authorities to decide. At the end of the day, even the simplest of policies can become a nightmare for the honest taxpayer if authorities have the leeway to harass.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2020 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting