How provident is this fund?
Indian Express, 10 March 2006
- Ila Patnaik
Do
you know where your provident fund money is being invested? Are you
certain
that your company is actually investing the PF contribution it
is deducting
from your salary? Most people are keenly aware about
their consumption
choices, but don't have a clue when it comes to
their financial savings.
And, that is why it is important to regulate
provident and pension funds
and keep an eye on what companies are
doing with their employees money.
However, what Finance Bill 2006
proposes to do in this regard will cause
more harm than good.
There are three possibile places your PF money
could be in. First,
your money could be with the EPFO. Second, your company could have an
'exempt
fund', which is recognised by the EPFO and which pays you at
least as much
interest as the EPF rate. If the company defaults you
will be looked after
by the EPFO which will attach the company's
assets and try to get your
money back. And third, your company could
hold your provident fund contributions
in an unregulated 'excluded'
fund under which it is looking after the funds
itself. It could be
that for employees with salaries below Rs.6,500 a
month, the company
subscribes to the EPFO or runs an exempt fund, but for
employees with
higher salaries, it runs its own scheme. It could even be
that it is a
member of the EPFO for the basic contribution rate, but for
additional
contributions it runs its own scheme. Or, your company might
be
deducting your PF contribution, and the money is being embezzled, so
when
the time comes to payout, you get nothing.
The difficulties faced by
EPFO are well known. In recent years the top
management of the EPFO has
been trying to address some of its
problems. The problems with the 2500 odd
exempt funds which are known
to default on contributions and have
difficulties in paying the high
interest rates that match the EPF rate are
also known. But almost
nothing is known about the 'excluded funds'. How
many companies are
running their own provident fund schemes ? What schemes
are they
offering? Do they have the ability to meet their obligations? Is
the
money actually invested by the company where they claim it is?
What
happens if the company goes bankrupt? What if the money is
stolen?
Today the government knows nothing about number of such funds,
the
size of their assets or the number of employees under these
schemes.
Some guesswork suggests that assets in this sector could be
in the region
of Rs.1,00,000 crore, or roughly half the size of the
Indian mutual fund
industry. Every year companies get income tax
exemptions if they say that
the PF investments they are making follow
the investment guidelines laid
down by CBDT. But since this is done at
the level of regional income tax
offices, there is no central database
that keeps this information in one
place.
Worse, these PF schemes are completely unregulated. What sort
of
benefits are they offering? Are the interests of the subscribers
being
looked after? There is no way to check that there is no fraud or
malpractice
in the running of the schemes. What if there is a default?
In the absence
of a database and a regulator, there is no option for a
subscriber but to
go to court in case he is cheated. And, it may be
decades before he gets
justice.
There is clearly a good reason to remedy this situation.
However, what
the Finance Bill 2006 has proposed is a giant step in the
wrong
direction. It has proposed that unless an excluded fund is
recognised
by the EPFO, it will not be recognised by the income tax
department.
This means either some companies will not take tax breaks,
which is
unlikely, or they will rush to get recognition by the EPFO.
It is
difficult to believe that the Finance Minister is serious about
this
proposal. EPFO is not a regulator: it simply lacks the capacity
to perform
regulatory functions for excluded funds. After the public
differences
between the high interest rates on EPF demanded by trade
unions and the
Finance Minister who has, correctly, been unwilling to
give a subsidy to
the EPFO, it is odd to see this leap of faith in the
EPFO.
While
it is not entirely clear from the wording of the Finance Bill
that it seeks
to equate the status of the excluded PFs which will be
'recognised' by the
EPFO to that of the presently 'exempt' funds, if
it does, then it implies
three things. First, the EPFO will have to
regulate all these funds which
it does not have the capacity, and we
even don't know how many funds there
are. Second, these funds will
have to pay interest rates that match the
politically decided EPF
interest rate which could well push them into
bankruptcy. And third,
that if a company defaults, the PF payment will be a
headache of the
EPFO. Since no one knows how large is the size of the
problem, this
could open up a can of worms bigger than the EPFO can handle.
EPFO has
probably not been consulted before putting this administrative
and
financial burden upon it! With a deficit of Rs.22,000 crores in
its
pension scheme (EPS) and with barely 25 percent of its accounts in
proper
shape, the Finance Minister ought to have serious doubts about
the EPFO's
capacity to handle the implications of the proposal in the
Finance
Bill.
On the other hand, this could be an omission in the Finance Bill
and
would get corrected before the bill is passed. The best way to go
ahead
might be first merely to ask the companies running exempt funds
to register
with the Ministry of Finance. They should be asked to
provide basic
information about the number of employees covered, size
of assets and the
nature of scheme before being eligible for income
tax deductions. This will
give the government a sense of the scale of
the problem. Next comes the
question of how to regulate these
schemes. This question can be tackled by
PFRDA. However, at this stage
even a registration will be a big step ahead
and provide valuable
information before a policy decision is made. If the
FM does not
correct this omission it may prove to be a very costly one for
the
EPFO.
----------------------------