Indian Economy : News,Discussions & Updates
- Thread starter Butter Chicken
- Start date
-
- Tags
- indian defence forum
Banks technically write off loans worth over Rs68,000 crore, Mehul Choksi among 50 top wilful defaulters: RTI
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has admitted to writing off a staggering amount of Rs 68,607-crores due from 50 Top Wilful Defaulters, including absconding diamantaire Mehul Choksi, according to a reply under RTI.www.moneylife.in
RBI declines to disclose names even under RTI.
While tax payer pay for their thousands of crores of default government don't find them "worthy enough" to know whom they are paying for. Scared that election funding friends will get exposed?
These names were denied even in a parliamentary question when finance minister shamelessly engaged into jugglery of words instead of providing information.
Government used "international treaty" as cover when asked for swiss account holders. When it comes to corruption government is as hollow as Congress if not a step ahead.
Difference between write-off and waive-off
Explained: Loan write-off is not the same as loan waiver; what you should know
Loan waiver is quite different from writing off a loan as it is the cancellation of recovery or refraining from claiming the dues. In simpler terms, banks will completely give up on such loans and no recovery will be made.
www.financialexpress.com
Sure.Difference between write-off and waive-off
Explained: Loan write-off is not the same as loan waiver; what you should know
Loan waiver is quite different from writing off a loan as it is the cancellation of recovery or refraining from claiming the dues. In simpler terms, banks will completely give up on such loans and no recovery will be made.
Someone here was also teaching me that taxes goes to "consolidated fund of India" so public money is not used to bail out banks. Plenty of online hakeems with google around.
Yet, here you are failing to explain anything with logic. As if quoting google results is a sin.
I was explaining the difference of putting money in a PSU (equity) vs tax money.
And top it all, you believe we live in a socialist country !
Your lack of basic economic understanding explains the overblown pessimism.
Nope it's not, selective picking something from an article or concept and deliberately ignoring thing that exposes your clarity of "basic economic understanding" is laughable (still not sin).
Sure you were.
CBDT takes action against three IRS officers for controversial tax report
'The report created panic and tax policy uncertainty in the already stressed economic conditions in the country,' said a govt official.They have been divested of their current responsibilities
www.livemint.com
Lol, I did not see this coming
does the write off mean there will be no cases against these folks?
Vijay Mallya lost extradition case in UK. the petitioner to extradite him was India right?
I think you are misunderstanding the term "renewable". trains running on electrified lines do not need batteries- they need the electrical lines. no battery.
there are some excellent battery powered 2 wheeler companies coming up and some very good 4 wheeler alternatives. India should invest in those.
the amortization cost of future technologies is more worthy than oil based energy.
by reducing the need for import we only make ourselves independent.
do you know the cost benefit analysis of the SPRs? in fact, with the price of crude oil so low now, it makes less sense to create more SPRs since the commodity is cheap and does not need storage. can you please let us know if you know the cost of building the SPRs? then we can perhaps do a decision point analysis and figure out at what point this becomes feasible?
mind you the cost of land acquisition closer to ports as well as the security needed to keep it safe are also costs to consider.
Write off roughly means that loan is now bad and banks will stop counting it as assets and may start recovery.
That recovery can be partial, full (very very rare) or nothing at all. Banks losses significant amount on write offs, sometimes the recovery proceedings cost more than amount recovered, litigation costs are high too if other party contest and by the time you win a case whatever you have for recovery may not be worth for even scrap.
That loss is than either recovered by offering lower interest rates on deposits (again taking depositors for ride) or by GoI funding them directly by tax payers money under fancy names like recapitalization and bla bla bla.
Ultimately it's the common man who pays for the loss while these fancy terms are used to fool public. To add insult to injury every government proudly claims we didn't waived off any loans and their slaves do their best to put up with this buffoonery as if everyone is dumb like them.
When loan turns bad bank serve notices, contact the borrower and try to settle with personal effort and when nothing works they send legal notices. Civil cases as we know are endless and mostly directed towards company where director can walk free, getting bail is not that problematic either and in case of loss you will lose the assets associated with company, even if you put criminal charges it's whole another thing to prove them.
Mallyas case is different and complex, it's not just limited to recovery of loan, GoI has used most instruments at their disposal to hunt him down and yet he is in UK. Even if they extradite him how many can we manage to extradite in this manner? He will be at max 1 name in list of top 50 if he can make the cut.
so what should be the approach to penalize defaulters? why should there be state owned banks that do not have any incentive to recover any loans in the first place
the common man pays for this? how? dis the govt pay for the loans of these defaulters?
they are also still going after nirav modi and Mehul choksi.
also. at what time were these loans given? on what basis were they given? what was the collateral? can we collect that collateral?
Why taxing the rich is not always a good idea
Over the past decade, the inequality debate in the West has led to a surge of “tax the rich” proposals, and every new development — from financial crises, election results, corruption scandals, artificial intelligence, robotics and now, the pandemic — have been occasions to renew the calls for raising taxes and income redistribution. Whether these proposals make sense at all depends on the particular circumstances of the country concerned, but ideas cross national boundaries in the form of intellectual fashions, and many of us Indians are seduced by them too. Few bother to work out the numbers. If they do they will find that many of these fashions don’t make a lot of sense in our context.
“Tax the rich” is a particularly bad idea at this time. What Mark K Perry wrote in Seeking Alpha during the 2008 Global Financial Crisis applies even more to the situation today: “If you want to turn an economic slowdown into a recession, or an average recession into a severe recession, or a severe recession into a depression, raising taxes would surely help make that happen. It surely helped turned the recession of 1929-1933 into the Great Depression.” The Hoover and the Roosevelt administrations raised a number of taxes after the economic crisis of 1929, which made the problem worse and more prolonged than it might otherwise have been. The peak tax rate went up from 25 per cent in the early 1930s to 79 per cent in 1936, exacerbating the crisis until World War II came along and post-war economics turned things around.
Many people casually argue that taxing the wealthiest people won’t hurt the rest of us. But it does. When rich people spend less, when they invest less, or invest in assets to avoid tax, the multiplier effects are smaller. Our own experience shows that taxing the rich 97.75 per cent of their income in the early 1970s gave the poor only the slogan of “roti, kapda aur makan.” We started making a dent in alleviating poverty only after the tax rates were lowered to a maximum of 40 per cent in 1992, creating a growth spurt that we have been riding on ever since.
That’s not all. Quite often “tax the rich” ends up taxing the middle class. Let’s not forget that the really wealthy have access to better tax planning, better chartered accountants and a variety of ways to legally reduce their tax exposure. They can also relocate to a lower-tax jurisdiction with relative ease. The salaried middle-classes do not have such options and end up in higher tax slab. This further depresses demand as middle-class households cut back on discretionary expenditure. So as much as “tax the rich” has a folksy good feeling to it, it hurts the poor in normal times and will hurt them even more during a recession
theprint.in
Over the past decade, the inequality debate in the West has led to a surge of “tax the rich” proposals, and every new development — from financial crises, election results, corruption scandals, artificial intelligence, robotics and now, the pandemic — have been occasions to renew the calls for raising taxes and income redistribution. Whether these proposals make sense at all depends on the particular circumstances of the country concerned, but ideas cross national boundaries in the form of intellectual fashions, and many of us Indians are seduced by them too. Few bother to work out the numbers. If they do they will find that many of these fashions don’t make a lot of sense in our context.
“Tax the rich” is a particularly bad idea at this time. What Mark K Perry wrote in Seeking Alpha during the 2008 Global Financial Crisis applies even more to the situation today: “If you want to turn an economic slowdown into a recession, or an average recession into a severe recession, or a severe recession into a depression, raising taxes would surely help make that happen. It surely helped turned the recession of 1929-1933 into the Great Depression.” The Hoover and the Roosevelt administrations raised a number of taxes after the economic crisis of 1929, which made the problem worse and more prolonged than it might otherwise have been. The peak tax rate went up from 25 per cent in the early 1930s to 79 per cent in 1936, exacerbating the crisis until World War II came along and post-war economics turned things around.
Many people casually argue that taxing the wealthiest people won’t hurt the rest of us. But it does. When rich people spend less, when they invest less, or invest in assets to avoid tax, the multiplier effects are smaller. Our own experience shows that taxing the rich 97.75 per cent of their income in the early 1970s gave the poor only the slogan of “roti, kapda aur makan.” We started making a dent in alleviating poverty only after the tax rates were lowered to a maximum of 40 per cent in 1992, creating a growth spurt that we have been riding on ever since.
That’s not all. Quite often “tax the rich” ends up taxing the middle class. Let’s not forget that the really wealthy have access to better tax planning, better chartered accountants and a variety of ways to legally reduce their tax exposure. They can also relocate to a lower-tax jurisdiction with relative ease. The salaried middle-classes do not have such options and end up in higher tax slab. This further depresses demand as middle-class households cut back on discretionary expenditure. So as much as “tax the rich” has a folksy good feeling to it, it hurts the poor in normal times and will hurt them even more during a recession
Dear young IRS officers, taxing the rich in Covid times is bad economics
Accusations of ‘tax terrorism’ predate the pandemic. It should have rightly caused the IRS leadership to reflect on their own set performance metrics.
theprint.in
Prevention is better than cure, after the loan turned bad what will public achive by putting Director in jail except some sense of revenge but ultimately monetary damage is done.
Big loans are mostly given by political approval, without following standard norms. Managers are corrupt, evaluations are trumped up and without proper security loans are disbursed, later with political approval those loans are written off. It's great scheme to make good money, all you need is capital upfront to fund election, party will take care of your investment when in power.
Replied before, please read.
Ok if you say so
are they also going after Subhash Chandra whose Essel group owned 8400crore to Yes Bank, a bank recently tanked?Nirav Modi one? Good part was during present government tenure.
The way you framed your reply seems like your interest is more in defending current dispensation instead of issue. Anyway good day.
Electric vehicles can not replace heavy duty vehicles like JCB, cranes , military vehicles, jet fuel , of road driving etc etc right now. Power is not enough period.
as I said before oil has wider application not just transport alone so it is here to stay for long.
Oil price won't stay low for ever... it will go up again in future than what ? If you have bigger SPR you can use them when prices are high on market forcing producer to lower the price and you can fill those SPR again.
Typical caverns in US are cylindrical in shape with diameter of 61 meter and average height or depth of 762 meter holding around 10 million barrels. India consumption is about 5 million barrels a day...with 10 year worth of SPR in mind we need at least 1825 such facilities.
Before anyone go into cost BS these structures cost 10 time less to build than above ground tanks and 20 time less than hard rock mines. Such depth for storage oil in salt caverns also help keep oil quality good even after long period of storage.
Before anyone go into cost BS these structures cost 10 time less to build than above ground tanks and 20 time less than hard rock mines. Such depth for storage oil in salt caverns also help keep oil quality good even after long period of storage.
Around slightly more than a decade & a half ago the organization I had just joined fresh as a rookie from college also had a division which represented Terex among other mining & material handling companies from Europe & the US in India looking after liasing , after sales service, etc. They then happened to bag an order for 1000 crores ( this was the second such order, if I'm not mistaken in 4 years) from CIL on behalf of Terex to supply mine shovels & transport equipment like the kind we see above.
I remember dining with the GM of this division , a few months later who happened to be seated with us during lunch hour as the company mess was packed. The conversation veered around this order & we congratulated him. Towards the end of the conversation, I asked him if it were possible for India to build these equipments indigenously out here. Not in my lifetime, he said. He himself was in his late 50's & an alumnus of IIT Kharagpur & IIM Ahmedabad, serving his entire career in one organization.
I've no clue if he's alive today but the fact that we've taken some steps towards indigestion of such products where the entry barrier is unbelievably high & competition limited but fierce requiring deep pockets, tells me we've come some way but have a long way ahead.
it looks like you are only after present dispensation. I only wanted to know when were the loans given and what was the collateral at the time. if its during the past dispensation, or present dispensation thats up to the reader to decide.
Should it matter that someone is against or for any party? it should only matter that what is the truth, when did it happen and how can this be not repeated.
on what basis are you saying it costs 10 times less and 20 times less?
buying a rafale is much cheaper than buying f35 but we did not buy 200 of them. we only bought 36.
cost benefit is not done on the basis of "low cost with respect to competitors". it is done on the basis of "return on investment".
You said the cost of oil is eventually going to go up - by how much? by when?
on what basis are you saying we need 10 years worth of reserves? mind you, the demand to create these reserves itself will increase the cost of oil by a little margin. the cost of oil is low now because there is no place to store it.
our import bill right now is very high due to oil, gold. can we afford to import 10 years worth of oil right now even with reduced costs? can our ports handle the additional capacity? the mangalore port cannot pull oil containers during the monsoon and time is running out to fill even that to capacity.
