Part of: Mains GS Paper 3 – Defence
Key pointers:
Defence Acquisition Council – is often in news.
Do you know?
About Defence Acquisition Council
Article Link: Click here
Introduction:
Medium, Small and Micro Enterprises (MSMEs) are a major engine of growth and employment in the country.
Formalisation and mainstreaming of MSMEs has been taking place at a rapid place since demonetisation and the introduction of the Goods and Services Tax.
Union Budget 2018 will look to accelerate this process by incentivising formalisation in such a way that it sets off a cycle of easing access to finance, lowering tax incidence, and encouraging job creation.
Big Reforms:
Budget pronouncements seek to change the landscape by triggering three effects:
How it will help MSMEs?
Since, large corporates borrow from corporate bond market, there will be enough money left in the banks and with recapitalization – it is expected that banks will start increasing their exposure to the MSME sector.
How this will help MSMEs?
Access to relevant financial data on MSMEs has been a challenge for banks, particularly when funding their working capital requirements. Therefore, with the TReDS -GSTN linkage and by onboarding Public Sector Banks and corporates on to the TReDS platform – the above issue will be solved.
So, gradual adoption of TReDs has the potential to significantly ease the liquidity woes of MSMEs.
How?
Technology allows aggregation and analysis of bank statements of MSMEs and helps in analysing cash flows.
Incentivising sound legal constitution through tax cut:
Reduction will benefit macro, small and medium enterprises which account for 99% of companies filing their tax returns.
It is expected that it will incentivise informal firms (partnerships and proprietorships) to adopt a more sound legal constitution — and that’s positive for formalisation.
Incentivising formal enterprises would create new jobs:
All the above three segments have high labour intensity and therefore, these steps will be beneficial to promoting new jobs.
Conclusion:
In sum, using digital trails to improve access to funds, lowering tax rates to increase the investible surplus in the hands of MSMEs, and incentives to employ are just what are needed to ensure faster growth of the formal economy.
Connecting the dots:
TOPIC:
General Studies 3:
General Studies 2:
Background:
The issue of minimum support price has been mired in controversy. Recently the government has announced a hike in the MSPs. In the latest budget the government has announced to increase the minimum support price of crops to 50% over the cost of production.
What is MSP?
Minimum Support Price is the price at which government purchases crops from the farmers, whatever may be the market price for the crops.
It is set by the CACP (Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices) and is normally active for rice and wheat at all times. The Food Corporation of India is the procuring agency.
For other crops, while MSP is announced, it becomes active when there are cooperatives or state agencies procuring the product based on circumstances.
This is because market prices would normally be higher than MSP and the machinery for procurement, storage and disposal is weak.
What necessitates price intervention?
Ideally, the market should be setting the price with all checks at manipulation being in place.
Therefore, price intervention is required.
A2+FL and C2 concept:
The Government’s announcement to increase the MSP to 1.5 times the cost is laudable as it ensures that the farmers get a higher price and income.
It has, however, not been clarified whether the cost being referred to is the A2+FL concept which is actual cost plus farm labour or the C2 concept which is comprehensive and includes interest paid, rent, etc.
The Government needs to make clear what is being referred to when we speak of 1.5 times the cost — A2+RL or C2?
Making the hike meaningful:
Pricing is one part of the story but delivery is more important. Higher prices would mean a radical change in the way in which farm products are marketed.
Volumes would be large as almost all the kharif crops now rule below the MSP since production has been very good.
Organisations for procurement have to be identified; these will have collection centres across all the markets. Ideally, they should be located at all mandis where the crops are sold.
In the case of rice and wheat, there is direct linkage with PDS and buffer stock, and hence a system has been established. The same has to be done for other crops.
Issue:
Rural distress continues to exists despite many crops and many states already having provided for MSP, which is 50% above the cost of production.
Merely announcing MSPs may not make a material difference unless all the accompanying factors are addressed. At present, for many of the crops the market price is lower than the MSP, yet farmers are not able to get the MSP as there are no channels existing for them.
Price Deficiency Payment System:
A way out of the issues related to MSPs is to not procure but to compensate the farmer with the difference between the price received at the mandi and the MSP. Thus, the option of price deficiency payment system should be explored.
Challenge:
Given that there are intermediaries along the way, the farmer may get bypassed in such a transaction. Besides, mandis are opaque and records are not maintained.
Conclusion:
Hike in MSP without plans of implementation won't help farmers. To make the higher MSPs meaningful it has to be ensured that all the systems are in place to procure and then dispose of the same. Pricing is one part of the story; delivery is more important. A radical change is needed in farm products marketing.
Connecting the dots:
How to handle big data
Woods and trees
Best foot forward
Budget's 2018 pivot to agriculture- What will it cost?
Zero-sum thinking makes our fight worse