Analysis of Indian Union Budget 2010-11

The Union Budget 2010-11 was another remarkable landmark in the long political history of Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee. He has maintained many of the union government’s large fiscal policies and has further provided relief to the rising earning middle class of India. Thus, in a broader sense, a totally consumption-based model for growth has been pursued. In other words, the budget allows both rural and urban populace to have more money to spend and continue this remarkable economic boom we have seen in the last decade.

The Finance Minister is looking to close this economically historical decade, by targeting the high growth rates we have been looking to get from the start of the millennium. The target looks "refractionally" even higher thanks to global recession. But, India has done well to decouple itself from the profligate West and its government’s prudent and somewhat conservative outlook has paid off enormously.  

India’s amazing recovery growth story is not just another milestone, but has many signs to read. 

The first is how India has strong domestic consumption and its economy may not be as dependent on exports, as it first appeared. Second, it places India at the centre of the global economic rebalancing along with China, taking in favour of Asia. Third, it sets a precedent of kinds to other political bigheads who are yet write economic policies, to maintain populist fiscal measures.

The annual budget announcement has become a major part of an ordinary citizen’s life today, with due credit to the Indian press, who seem to forget every other news happening for a week or so. But, why not! People’s budget expectations are so necessary in the spirit of the democracy and are what I believe to be the biggest ‘RTI’ of all. Can you think of any other occasion in a year which allows people to make the government to be more accountable to them? Perhaps not, and so I wish to support the further cause by breaking the budget and to even cover issues not usually spoken about in the media as well. So let us begin this, by having a look at the government’s bottom line first.

Taming the Fiscal Deficit

The most important announcement which was eagerly awaited by all was the call to restraint the growing fiscal deficit. The fiscal deficit was being chiefly blamed for the high levels of inflation India has witnessed over the last 6-8 months. However, I am of the opinion that there were many other serious administrative problems which were major aggravators.

So as expected the finance ministry has simply cut, copied and pasted the 13^th Finance Commission’s recommendations and targets. (See the chart for more clarity). The finance minister has committed to bringing down the fiscal deficit 2009-10 level of 6.7 % of GDP to 5.5% of 2010-11 GDP. Also the government has remembered to realign itself with requirement of the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Act of 2003. The government has announced to bring down the deficit to 3% level by the end of next 4 years. 3% target is under the rules of the Act. Although, I think the Act will give more leeway to the FM to dictate his sudden austerity mood swings!

The Union government was well on track to achieve its FRBM targets till the global financial crisis came about. The government had to quickly change gears and announce huge expansive fiscal policies to maintain growth. 

For the year 2007-2008 the budget deficit was just 2.6% of the GDP. However, going back to such levels will take much longer than what it took to go up.

The foremost reason being, that a calibrated and planned approach will steer clear of the uncertainties over crowding out private investment. Furthermore, the danger of Japanese like bust on pre-mature withdrawal of government support. Second, being the political will required to renounce the populist policies. After all they all stand for re-election.

The budget has done well to quell fears of high fiscal deficit led inflation. We will see the results over the next 2 quarters. I still have my doubts on its inflation tackling effects. Nevertheless, words must be converted into action. Or like Obama says,” Words must mean something!”.

Greece faces a tough year ahead

For those of you who have just joined us and asking what in the world is happening. Here’s the situation: We’ve got in our hands the possibility of the first sovereign debt default by a Euro currency member. Greece has an external debt of 170% of its GDP and is currently running a 13% fiscal deficit. The nation’s problems are increasing day by day. Productivity and employment are at very low and painful levels, for the country to even think of self sufficient recovery.

Much of the panic subsided on Feb 3^rd, as the government’s plan to reduce substantially it’s budget deficit to 3% by 2012, was supported by the EU. The plan proposes up taking very unpopular measures to control spending, like slashing public sector spending, pay freezes and wage cuts and increasing taxes. This hasn’t gone down well with public at all. They have already absorbed the 4% pay cut and are expecting the worst is yet to come. However, fear is again creeping into the minds of investors.

There is no doubt that this year's plan to cut deficit from 12.9% to 8.7% will be very difficult and regaining confidence even more.

The bond markets are increasingly skeptical about the government’s plan as the spreads on Greek bonds are rising. What Greece needs foremost is quick cash to refinance it debt which becomes due in a few months. The debt is estimated to the tune of €20 billion. It has been successful to raise €8 billion on Jan 25^th through the sale of 5 year bonds. However the rate of interest was very high at 6.2%. With more speculation on Greece’s future going rounds, picking up further debt from markets will become next to impossible for the government at prevailing interest rates.

The government has tried to blame the speculators who have bought credit default swaps (CDS) to insure themselves against a Greek refusal to oblige on the debt. They have alleged that buyers of CDSs are driving up the spreads on bonds and have made borrowing more difficult. That in turn has made the Greek government helpless and led to its current state of affairs. While there have been some officials and economists in Europe who have sympathised on these grounds. But I have two words for them.

Shut up!

The Greeks have no one to blame than themselves. Markets don't show sympathy, they respect discipline and trust. Years of profligacy and dodgy accounting practices in an  attempt to fool the EU and the investors, has left them in a terrible position. There is increasing furore in France and Germany on why it should bail out a cheater. Their displeasure is completely understandable and rightly so.

Its time Greece did the right thing and took some excruciating steps to control the budget and announce some real cuts and meaningful trust-building measures. Passing the buck around, will neither impress the EU nor the investors holding Greek bonds. Its time it pressed the button of urgency and did things swiftly and not smirk around looking for easy deals with the EU or the big members. The more it waits. The more the threat grows, specially for the other European economies, which also have high debts to service, namely Portugal, Spain and Italy. Its time it pleaded guilty. 

Evaluating Crisis Management Options

Now as we know in a recession, typically the economy slows down, credit becomes expensive and exclusive, industrial output is negative or roundabout zilch, consumer confidence takes a toll and route to other cyclic gloomy events. In financial terms to sum it up; the investment dries up as private participants register heavy losses and stay bearish for a while.

Thus it is obvious that the emptiness in economy and even the financial markets have to be filled in by someone. That someone has to pump blood (that is money in this case) into the economy, in order to maintain life. That someone has to mend the loopholes, revise regulations and show sympathy to regain both public and private confidence in the system it governs. That someone has to wait for businesses to digest the losses, consumers to get more optimistic and investors to feel safe again. I hope you have realised by now that our ‘someone’ is none other than the government itself.

So now we know that it is the government only which is the final responsibility and authority to step in. The next thing to question is what all options it has to choose from:

1)      Spending large amounts of money or reducing taxes to increase money supply.

2)      Using central bank reserve and lending rates to boost money supply.

3)      Or do nothing and let the market and economy correct itself; as the classicalists suggested a century ago.

What is usually seen, is a combination of both the fiscal policy (first) and monetary policy (second). Moreover, what constraints the government to go the whole mile is the presence of the third option. Invariably it exists in the back of the mind of policy makers. It is brought to public domain in business journals and newspapers by some economists who remind about the benefits of perfect competition and warn about crowding out private investment. Sociologists will hark back to the founding principles of capitalism. In addition we are also alarmed by opposition political parties, who suddenly become more concerned about the tax payer’s “hard earned money”, raising slogans about their management (probably motivated as their own pockets get thinner too).

Thus a balance is maintained wherein prudent policy makers are stopped from overspending and crowding out private investment. So the government has to be very careful in order to not fuel a bubble in the economy which bursts as soon as it exits. Thus another major aspect is the timing of withdrawal of economic relief policy in both monetary and fiscal fronts. I will discus this in detail in my later posts.

It is also of course implied that a fiscal or monetary policy cannot be implemented in isolation. They both are interdependent on each other. The leakages in a policy can be countered by the other. For instance the concept of Quantitative Easing which is being adopted by central banks all over the world involves the central bank buying government securities in order to facilitate the fiscal expenditure. However if this was not done, the excess supply of treasuries would have pushed up interest rates and choked off investor confidence and credit flow in the economy.

Thus, we have seen what are the alternatives to be considered, which are evaluated on the basis of market and economic conditions. Now let us see what has really happened this time.

Do or Di(v)e for Euro

The response to the trillion dollar support package announced by EU for Greece has mostly been negative. The investors feel that it is still not enough to save the sinking European pride. The pride and unwavering faith in the euro was mistaken to be the absolute truth. With pacts and regulatory bodies in place, the Europeans thought their model was unique in economics and finance; just as their political clout was.

The Eurozone countries' average fiscal deficit as a percentage of GDP is a around 7 % which is well over the limit of 3% as per the above pact.

However, today for most, including me, the Euro has failed in this present set up and so has the European Union. It is quite shocking to see that none of the Eurozone countries are within the fiscal deficit limit set by the Growth and Stability Pact. Their average fiscal deficit as a percentage of GDP is a around 7 % which is well over the limit of 3% as per the above pact.

The reason for this as mentioned by me before (http://finmadeasy.blogspot.com/2010/02/euro-has-its-inherent-risks.html) rests in the clash between the two roles played by Euro member nations. Firstly, all members maintain sovereignty in their political, economic and foreign affairs which in many ways lead to many voices and adversely makes Europe sound like one noisy and divided entity. The EU in simple terms was designed to make their voices coherent as one and a collective European opinion which the world would respect. Sadly, today the collective consensus reached in Brussels is not respected by fellow member states themselves. So what we have seen till date is that member states have put national issues before their European obligations.

Their second role is to work together as a united region and uphold the European legacy, to command respect in a multi-polar world of today. Often egos are bruised, like Angela Merkel’s in the run-up to the stimulus decision, and often issues are dealt with a strong hand in unison. But rest (or most) of the times, members go around trying to show their might, trying to not let the EU take the stage lights off them.

Held at ransom

The message markets have sent is clear. The market is no longer going to be fooled by smart talking and insubstantial measures. They want to see the real deal. Some legally bound promises and structural changes to the Euro system are essential to placate market sentiments. After the Greek catastrophe, Euro bonds are already on a thin line.

Eurozone member states need to come up with concrete plans to limit their fiscal negligence and until then no sums of money promised will be adequate enough to win back confidence. They have to act fast or otherwise, a second dip is not far away.

Deciphering the Fiscal Policy

The biggest fiscal expenditure programme in the history of the world is underway. Sweeping across 4 continents and pulling down political barriers, this swift, responsive and coordinated effort by governments around the world have led us to diverge away from what could have been the ‘greatest’ depression. Internationally coordinated efforts of governments have defended us from fallacies of the past; having taken lessens from Dr Keynes whose medicine of rapid and expansive fiscal expenditure has indeed worked again.

Even after the death of Keynes his legacy continues, along with it the debate surrounding his bequest. Many economists still doubt till date his policy of high government expenditure and especially in light of today’s already inflated fiscal deficits. Keynes had suggested that the government should take charge of the expenditure in times of collapse and forget the increasing deficit, which will take care on its own, once the economy is back on track.

The situation which government’s face today is indeed unprecedented. 

The success of the fiscal stimulus in the past is a motivation to spend, but the danger of over burdening itself with debt is more real and feasible this time around. 

Rather then bringing in investments, it might just scare away private investment by increasing interest rates and a subsequent lower sovereign credit rating. Currently it is expected that the stimulus package would run the economy and sustain markets till the end of next year. Governments are prudent to early withdrawal calls, with the Japanese crisis still in fresh memory.

Here is an idea of how much governments need to watch out next year as well, in the recovery stage.

Country	Fiscal Deficit (as % of GDP)
USA	9.70%
UK	13.30%
Japan	10.50%
India	8.40%
China	4.30%
Brazil	1.30%
Russia	5%

          Source: IMF Estimates for 2010

Thus it would make a good case to explain that why on earth, governments are willing to take so much of risk and are pumping in so much of money and if it would ever reach the desired targets.

For me an easy way to understand this would be to break down the decision making involving fiscal stimulus and focussing on different regions and nations to derive more sense from their decisions. Thus in simple lay man terms, I breakdown to what are the options available to the governments, why the fiscal stimulus has been so dominant this time, why some economists are sceptical about it and the dilemma of timing of withdrawal of taxpayers support.