MONDAY, MARCH 18, 2002
THE TIMES OF INDIA
COMMENT
POWERED BY
INDIATIMES

Search in The Times of IndiaWeb Indian Sites    Advanced search
 Indiatimes >  The Times of India > Comment > Article
 Home
 CLASSIFIEDS
 Matrimonial
 Jobs
 Real Estate
 Automobiles
 Post Print Ads
 All Classifieds
 NEWS
 India
 Cities
 World
 Sports
 Entertainment
 India Business
 Intl Business
 Infotech
 Health/Science
 Photo Gallery
 Weather
 TOI Headlines
 Top Media Headlines
 OPINION
 Editorial
 Interview
 Readers' Opinion
 NRI Services
 Remit2India
 SUPPLEMENTS
 Education Times
 Financial Times
 SUNDAY SPECIALS
 Review
 Comment 
 Special Report
 Crossword
 DAILY DOSE
 Horoscope
 Jokes
  Channels
 Entertainment
 Contests
 Filmfare
 Games
 Music
 TV Guide

 Explore
 Astrology
 Auto
 Bill Pay
 Cricket
 Cuisine
 Femina
 Festival
 Fitness & Health
 Infotech
 Learning
 Medianet
 Mobile
 Model Watch
 People
 Pets
 Remit2India
 Spirituality
 Travel
 Tween Times
 Women

 Connect
 Chat
 Clubs
 Dating
 Egreetings
 Email
 Invites
 Message Boards
 Messenger
 SMS 8888

 City Life
 Map
 Times City
 Yellow Pages

 The Mall
 Auctions
 Planet M Online
 Shopping
 Travel Bookings

 Channel Partners
 Brandquiver
 Broking
 Times of Money
 NetCarrots

 Tools
 Newsletter
 Search
 Web Directory

Is the Budget milking salaried class dry?

IN BLACK AND WHITE / ILA PATNAIK

 [ SUNDAY, MARCH 17, 2002  12:08:21 AM ]
The imposition of an additional three per cent surcharge on income tax and the reduction of tax incentives for savings in Yashwant Sinhaís budget will pinch the salaried sections more than anyone else.

Indeed, the budget will milk the salaried sections dry, not because there are no cows in the country, but because these are the only ones Sinha has decided to milk. So every time he needs more revenue, he decides to take more from the same people.

It is true that more people have been brought into the tax net with the one-by-six schemes, but they have not been made to pay more taxes.

The latest Economic Survey reports that compliance among non-salaried income-tax-payers remains low and that better systems are need to improve compliance of higher income-tax-payers.

It also said that whatís needed are improved systems to enforce compliance such as modernisation, extensive use of IT, data warehousing etc.

Instead, Sinha chose the easy way out. A true commitment to reforms would have meant making improvements in tax administration that would have increased the tax burden of those who are not complying.

The salaried tax-payer does not mind making sacrifices for the country when required to. But the more you take away from the honest citizen, the more you are letting the dishonest get away with.

Unable to avail of rules and exemptions that the self-employed can and unable to show various items of expenditure such as entertainment as costs, the salaried sections are among the highest tax-payers in terms of the proportion of income they pay as tax.

This introduces inequity in the system i.e. people earning the same amount are not paying the same proportion of their income as taxes. Any increase in tax rates without an increase in compliance increases the inequity.

And, that is why the budget should have been tax neutral for the salaried sections. But that is not what Sinha chose to do. Indeed, he chose to ignore expert advice on this.

Let us, for instance, look at one reform. Yashwant Sinha has reduced tax incentives for savings under Section 88. The rationale for reducing them was that tax incentives for small saving schemes were given at a time when financial savings of the household sector were low.

They have now outlived their usefulness. Fair enough. But Yashwant Sinha could have changed the tax slabs so that the move was tax neutral. In fact, thatís what had been proposed to him.

Parthasarathi Shome, who headed the committee on direct taxes, had proposed a removal of tax benefits. But he had also proposed that since prices have risen over the last 25 years, it made perfect sense to change tax slabs so that tax rates were not hurting people more every year.

The committee had recommended that rates of 10 and 20 per cent should be applicable for incomes upto Rs 1,00,000 and Rs 2,00,000 respectively, and a rate of 30 percent for income above Rs 2,00,000. But Sinha chose to ignore this advice.

Second, he should have retained tax incentives for long-term savings. And, again, that is what had been proposed to him. The Y.V. Reddy Committee had recommended that tax incentives for long-term saving instruments such as the Employees Provident Fund, Public Provident Fund and Public Pension Fund may continue to be provided.

These are old age security schemes and should be encouraged. Raising tax rates rather than broadening the tax base is not a strategy that will pay off in the long run. After all, how much can you take away from people with limited incomes?

(The writer is Senior Fellow, Indian Council for Research in International Economic Relations)
 Print this page  Email this page  Post your opinion
COMMENT HEADLINES
");
           TOP
Times Group Sites Indiatimes - The Economic Times - Navbharat Times - Education Times - Femina - Filmfare - Jobs & Careers - Maharashtra Times - Property Times - Responservice - Indianadsabroad - Times Classifieds - Times Multimedia
About the Publisher | For reprint rights: Times Syndication Services
Copyright © 2002 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved.  |  Terms of Use  |  Feedback  |  Sitemap
Ila Patnaik