|
GST: A
clutter-free regime ahead?
The finance ministry’s comments on the first discussion
paper of the empowered committee of state finance
ministers on goods and services tax (GST) reveal that it
wants an uncluttered tax regime, with a wide tax base
and exemptions that are few and common across the states
and the Centre. In saying so, it has signalled that it
is in favour of a low revenue-neutral rate that would
apply uniformly across all taxable goods and services,
without making a distinction between goods or services,
or various goods and services. |
|
|
One can expect this
intent to be reflected in Budget 2010 if the Centre is serious about moving
towards a clean tax regime — goods that are taxed at lower rate of 4% should be
moved to the standard rate of 8%, or 10% if the fiscal stimulus is partly
withdrawn. Also, there could be an alignment of central excise duty (Cenvat) and
service tax, which currently is fixed at 8% and 10%, respectively.
The finance ministry’s argument for a single rate of tax at the state level as
well as the central level is sound. The question is: will the states buy
Centre’s reason? States are bound to resist a single rate and, eventually, the
Centre and states would compromise to a dual rate, with a plan to move towards a
single rate. Centre’s reservation with the dual-rate tax structure as proposed
by the empowered committee of state finance ministers is that it could lead to
worsening of the inverted duty structure — raw materials and intermediaries may
be taxed at a higher rate and finished goods at a lower rate, on the pretext of
taxing essentials at a lower rate.
Besides, a dual structure would essentially mean a revenue-neutral rate higher
than would be the case with a single rate. Equally dangerous, and that would go
against the grain of simplification of tax regime, is that a dual rate structure
for goods can lead to demands from service providers for concessional rate for
certain services.
The finance ministry has proposed to allow states to maintain exemptions for 99
items, as is the case under VAT, and it does not want that list to be expanded
to include more items that are of local importance. At the central level, the
ministry has proposed to substantially reduce the 330 exemptions allowed under
Cenvat. The intention to have a common list of exemption under central GST and
state GST means that Centre will need to trim its list to 99 before GST is
implemented.
Reducing exemptions requires political will to withstand pressures from lobbies
at both the central and state levels. And, that is a tough task. More likely, we
will see a gradual reduction in the number of exemptions.
Critical issues over which GST implementation would face problems include
threshold for exemption and compensation. In the case of threshold, the
opposition would come primarily from the traders. Although they are subject to
state value-added tax (VAT), the implementation of GST will mean that they would
have to pay the central levy in addition to the state GST. Also, they would be
required to invest in information technology to maintain records as also with
compliance. Although the Centre has proposed lighter regulation for smaller
dealers, it may not be enough to bring them around.
The empowered committee had proposed a threshold of gross annual turnover of Rs
10 lakh for goods and services, with compensation for north-eastern and special
category states where the current threshold is lower at Rs 5 lakh. It had
suggested a higher threshold at the Centre for goods and services. The finance
ministry has over-ruled the states on this matter. It favours a common threshold
at the Centre and at the states for both goods and services, of Rs 10 lakh or
more — implying larger tax base and more revenues for the Centre.
On compensation for tax losses upon migrating from state VAT to state GST, the
Centre is keeping its cards close to chest. Indirect tax consultants reckon,
compensation would be a bargaining chip between the Centre and the states,
although the finance ministry appears to be inclined to accept recommendations
of a task force of the Thirteenth Finance Commission on this.
The task force had said the Centre may create a corpus of Rs 30,000 crore over a
five-year period — transferring Rs 6,000 crore annually — to compensate the
states if they were to adopt a flawless GST. A flawless GST, as envisaged by the
commission, is impossible as neither states nor the Centre would agree to scrap
all exemptions (as suggested by the task force), subsume all local levies, and
include property transactions into GST.
At the end of the day, the level of compensation would depend of the agreed
revenue-neutral rate. Indications are that the rate would be much higher than
the one recommended by the Thirteenth Finance Commission — combined rate of 12%,
with Centre rate at 5% and state rate at 7%. Most likely, the combined rate
would be 16-18%.
Source:
Economic Times, India, dated
28/01/2010
|