At the lay level there is strong outrage at what is considered to be against general public interest, but public discourse is largely emotive and rhetorical. Here my attempt is to demystify the phenomenon.
What is the scale of black money and why has it become important to the ordinary citizen? Because funds are of a clandestine nature, there is no accurate estimate of its magnitude. Estimates had been made in the past, but these were based on many broad assumptions. The last estimate of black money generated, made by the Indira Gandhi Institute of Development, gave a figure of 20 per cent of the GDP in 1999-2000. Many experts consider this a gross under-estimate.
Still, it is evident that the magnitude of black money is gigantic. Twenty per cent of the current GDP would be more than the annual budget of the country. No serious estimate of this black economy has yielded an estimate that is not huge. Therefore, we must accept this scale as a huge parallel economy.
How does this illegal black economy impact the economy, and ultimately on an individual citizen? The situation — in which the quantum of black money generated in a year (which is pumped back into the economy) exceeds the resources injected into the economy by the central government through its budget — is a disturbing one. The government designs its budget consistent with its socio-economic vision. If the volume of black money injected into the economy is more than the budget, quite clearly public policy will be overwhelmed by the priorities of black money.
Black money generally originates from heinous activities – arms running, narcotic trade, purchase of influence in the political domain, etc. — where the social cost is infinitely more than any loss of tax revenue. Therefore, the parallel economy tends to mutilate the structure of the legit economy. As the clout of the parallel economy increases, it tends to capture political power and disable legitimate public policy, eventually threatening the integrity and sovereignty of the State.
One economic policy instrument that
significantly
aggravated the
disease of black money was the
exemption granted from direct taxes to units located in
special export enclaves and to 100 per cent export-
oriented units.
|
The black money economy is primed by the underlying macro-economic factors. In the early days of Independence the prevailing resource constraints necessitated a high tax regime, which increased the propensity in the business/corporate class to carry out much of its activities off the formal account books.
With reduced tax rates in the post-reforms period, one would have expected a reduced propensity for off-the-book transactions. However, the business/corporate class seems to have got habituated to the evasion of direct taxes, and the generation of black money does not appear to have declined in recent years.
One economic policy instrument that significantly aggravated the disease of black money was the exemption granted from direct taxes to units located in special export enclaves, and to 100 per cent export-oriented units. It is widely believed that this concession resulted in large-scale “round-tripping” of black money over the last two decades.
Exporters in these categories wishing to launder their black money used the modus operandi of hugely over-invoicing their exports. In the first instance, the party transferred its domestic black money to foreign accounts in tax havens using the hawala route. The over-invoiced export earnings were then partly funded from illegal assets held by the exporter abroad. The over-invoiced earnings, once remitted to the country, were exempt from direct tax and also served as laundered assets to the entrepreneur.
Support for this hypothesis is provided by the evidence that over the entire reforms period the premium rate for hawala transactions continued to rule high; the normal expectation was that this should have slumped with the decrease of the direct tax rates. This modus operandi provided a fool-proof way of laundering domestic black money.
There is good reason to believe that a large part of the extraordinary export earnings in the post-reforms period were ramped up by exporters laundering their domestic black money. Global Financial Integrity, a highly regarded international research NGO, has estimated that in 2006 the outflow of black money from India was $44.6 billion. The facility of laundering black money, and recycling it at will has given domestic black money tremendous muscle in the economy.
Black money generally originates from heinous activities – arms running, narcotic trade, purchase of influence in the political domain
etc. — where the social cost is
infinitely more than any loss of tax revenue.
|
It is self-evident that the increasing shadow of black money over the domestic economy is the result of the failure of the economic law enforcement agencies. The direct taxes have to be collected by the Income Tax Department. The efficiency of the department will determine the supply-side of the black money circuit. The lower-than-expected collection in direct taxes reflects the fact that the tax administration has not been able to capture all the tax due – partly because of evasion and partly because of the abuse of the exemption afforded to export earnings.
It is useful to examine the issue of black money looking at the ambient environment for the enforcement of economic laws. The truth of the matter is that, in the post-reforms period, the enforcement of economic laws has not been a priority of governance in the country. The approach of the State has been to handle the business/corporate sector with kid gloves.
The persistent signal to the law enforcement agencies has been that nothing by way of enforcement should impede growth. The economic law enforcement agencies have not been encouraged or held accountable for rigorous enforcement of the law. In fact, it can be said that they have merely been suffered.
This observation would be true not only for the I-T Department, but also for the agencies enforcing the laws relating to economic crimes – Central Bureau of Investigation, Directorate of Enforcement, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Reserve Bank of India etc. Such devaluation of the responsibility of economic law enforcement has not merely harmed certain sectors of the economy, but has more generally created a dismissive contempt of the rule of law amongst the citizenry.
If the country is to tackle the menace of black money, the
artificial distinction between foreign exchange involved in heinous crimes and the ordinary foreign exchange infractions would have to be removed.
|
In the context of black money problem, the experience of the Directorate of Enforcement is of illustrative value. In 1999 the stringent Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was replaced by a diluted Foreign Exchange Management Act. In the same period a new and stringent Prevention of Money Laundering Act was passed. However, the PMLA was only applicable to foreign exchange transactions involved in certain heinous crimes such as drug trafficking, arms running, etc.
This differential in the degree of stringency of the two laws — FEMA and PMLA — is based on a misconception of approach. Black money in the global economy constitutes one large universe of illegal resources. From that corpus, some may go into heinous crime, while some other portion may go into non-criminal activity.
At any point of time the owners of the resources would be trying to maximise their returns. The various uses of black money are freely interchangeable between various activities. Thus, the strategy of attempting to effectively control heinous crime with stringent powers, while handling the other foreign exchange infractions with a lighter touch is unworkable.
The above conclusion is particularly pertinent when one analyses to what extent the provisions under FEMA have been diluted. Historically, laws covering serious economic crimes (FERA, NDPSA, COFEPOSA, etc) have had more stringent provisions than the general criminal law. Such stringent provisions include the power to arrest at a relatively lower level, the power to summon, search and seize, and the onus of proof is imposed on the accused to prove his innocence in reversal of the normal principle of jurisprudence; stringent penalties; etc. These powers have been removed from FEMA.
Thus, for pure foreign exchange infractions, the Enforcement Directorate has been rendered entirely toothless. If the country is to tackle the menace of black money, the artificial distinction between foreign exchange involved in heinous crimes and the ordinary foreign exchange infractions would have to be removed. The nature of the criminal circuit is such that it can only be tackled if all types of foreign exchange infractions are brought under the purview of a single stringent law.
Black money has both domestic and foreign dimensions. The foreign leg of the black money transactions is very difficult to investigate. Some countries/tax havens have made it their area of financial specialisation to offer secrecy to their banking clients.
There are some 70 tax havens over the globe, of which Switzerland is the best known. Their iron-clad secrecy laws/practices enables them to obtain deposits of high net worth individuals who demand inviolable secrecy.
The tax havens, by offering such iron-clad secrecy, are able to get deposits on low interest terms. The rationale they offer for their secrecy laws is that individual clients are entitled to their right to privacy. This ethical position is hypocritical – these banking entities find it justifiable to rake in huge profits by denying cooperation to countries in which these funds are suspected of fiscal crimes.
These tax havens do not recognise the concept of a fiscal crime – fiscal violations, for them, are mere civil irregularities. They refuse to offer cooperation for fiscal crimes recognised in most countries; it is only in the rare case, where the offence is a crime in our country, and also in the tax haven, that cooperation may be offered. Such a self-serving basis of cooperation is not an appropriate premise for international relations.
Though India has been at the receiving end of such one-sided arrangements over ages, our position, in future, need not be so weak. Amongst the emerging economies, India and China are the two most notable ones. The banking giants of the developed world are most anxious to establish a foot-hold in India at the earliest.
For India the non-cooperation of foreign banking companies in the investigation of fiscal crimes is of the highest sensitivity. India, while negotiating with foreign banks to set up units in the country, should make cooperation without demur, in the investigation of domestic fiscal crimes, an irreducible condition for the grant of banking permission. This can hardly be considered an unreasonable demand.
India should not agree to enter into banking/tax information assistance agreements with foreign countries if they do not agree to full cooperation in all fiscal investigations. The integration of the global banking system can only be conceptually justified if cooperation across the world is readily available for enforcing fiscal and banking laws in all countries.
Most importantly, the resolute commitment of the political/bureaucratic will to the pursuit of probity in public life is needed. All the instruments have to be used to converge in a pincer attack to bring the economic Frankenstein of black money under control.
The writer is a former Union Revenue Secretary and former Director of Enforcement Directorate