http://scroll.in/article/822132/a-flawed-policy-the-real-problem-with-demonetisation-is-not-just-in-implementation

OPINION

A flawed policy: The real problem with demonetisation is not just in
implementation

It grossly underestimated costs, particularly on people with low
incomes, which should have been given a higher weightage.

8 hours ago
Updated 5 hours ago

Suyash Rai

Two weeks after Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced that Rs 500 and
Rs 1,000 notes would no longer be legal tender, the cash chaos
continues.

This is not surprising, since 86% of currency in circulation and 55%
of liquid money (currency plus demand deposits) were rendered useless,
and the banking system has been over-stretched in disbursing or
exchanging notes.

As of November 18, only Rs. 1.36 lakh crore had been exchanged or
withdrawn – less than 10% of the cash that was made worthless.

After the compliments that were bestowed in the immediate, innocent
aftermath of the announcement, questions are being asked about the
entire project. From a one-way flow of praise, it has become a two-way
exchange of arguments.

Since operational challenges in printing cash, reconfiguring ATMs,
replenishing cash in remote areas, etc, have accentuated the costs of
the decision, a common refrain has been: this was a good decision that
was badly implemented by bureaucrats and bankers.

Disproportionate shock
Was this a good policy decision marred by poor implementation?

There are certain features of this decision that raise questions about
the soundness of the policy itself, irrespective of the quality of its
actual implementation.

This shock therapy is disproportionate to the scale of the problem.

In 2010, the World Bank published a study that estimated the size of
shadow economy as a percentage of the official gross domestic product
of countries. The study estimated India’s shadow economy to be 20.7%
of the official GDP.

This is not a small number. But, to understand, we must compare. There
is another country at 20.7%: Israel.

Countries like Spain, Portugal and Korea rank lower than India. Among
the 98 developing countries included in the study, India is ranked
15th. This is much better than one would expect at India’s level of
development. One would be hard-pressed to name a parameter on which we
rank better.

So, while the black money problem is important, it is not as important
as is often made out to be.

Further, earlier this year, a study by the National Investigation
Agency and the Indian Statistical Institute, estimated that the total
face value of fake currency in circulation is about Rs 400 crore.

Compare this with currency in circulation – more than Rs 17 lakh
crore. This is not to say that we go easy on these problems, but that
we do not panic and accept shock therapies to solve them.

The problem
The decision is not based on evidence and experience about the nature
of the problem.

Black money is accumulated over a period of time, and stored in
various instruments. Evidence shows that only a small portion of it is
stored as cash.

A Ministry of Finance White Paper published in 2012 showed that, for
the years between 2006 and 2012, cash seized during searches and
seizures ranged from 3.75% to 7.3% of total undisclosed income for
those cases. The Hindustan Times has reported that data from searches
and seizures in recent years also attests to this fact.

Much more black money is likely to be stored in real estate, gold,
foreign currency, offshore accounts, shares, etc. This means that
banning notes would make those with black money lose small portions of
their unaccounted wealth, and not lead to any significant punishment.

Black money creation depends on deterrence, which is enhanced when
people think their likelihood of getting caught is higher. This
decision does little to enhance deterrence, and is therefore not
likely to affect black money creation, which is the source of the
problem.

As far as fake currency is concerned, experience shows that
elimination of fake currency does not require a sudden ban. It can be
done through gradual replacement of old currency with new currency.

Image: PTI
Image: PTI
Underestimating costs
The decision has grossly underestimated the expected costs.

Money is a store of value, but it is also a medium of exchange. Most
people in India use cash for transactions, and not just to store
wealth. This, coupled with the fact that 86% of all currency in
circulation is in Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes, means that a sudden ban
would disrupt legitimate economic activity. There are about 1.5 crore
shops, but only 14.6 lakh point of sale devices that can handle credit
or debit cards.

Since about 31% of those employed in India do casual labour (estimated
to be more than 14.5 crore persons), mostly working on a daily wage
for non-contractual employment, their livelihood is being hurt. There
are many reports about manufacturing establishments and construction
sites temporarily shutting down.

Further, this being the time when kharif harvest is brought to market
and rabi sowing begins, the largely cash-based rural economy is paying
a price.

This is also peak season for weddings, which are cash-intensive events.

Even before implementation began, one could have predicted the
enormous costs it would impose. To make things worse, many of the
costs are being imposed on people with low incomes. In any analysis of
benefits and costs, such costs must be given a higher weight.

Expensive option
The government chose to adopt a very expensive course before
exhausting much less disruptive options.

The prime minister has announced that the next policy step would be to
go after unaccounted wealth stored in real estate. Given the
cost-benefit considerations, perhaps that should have been the first
step.

Often, we cannot just come up with a good solution; we discover it
through a sound process of listing and evaluating alternatives in
terms of their benefits and costs. I have blogged about this issue,
and tentatively concluded that even before we knew about the delays in
remonetisation, the costs were likely to outweigh the benefits, and
less disruptive options should have been explored.

There are many far less expensive way of solving the problems of
corruption. This article by Dr Vijay Kelkar and Dr Ajay Shah lists six
of them.

Operational constraints
The decision did not take into account the constraints within which it
would be implemented. Constraints are real, and no policymaker can
afford to ignore them.

There are key operational constraints that government should have paid
attention to – the capacity to print currency, the pace of ATM
recalibration, the logistical limitations of high frequency
replenishment of cash in remote areas, and the capacity of bank and
postal offices.

For the first nine days after branches reopened, the exchanges and
withdrawals amounted to Rs 15,000 crore per day. Even assuming that
this pace improves by 50 percent, and if there is no constraint on
supply of cash, it would take about a month more to re-monetise even
half of the value of discontinued notes.

This constraint is most felt in small towns and rural areas, because
of low density of branches and ATMs and bigger logistical problems.

However, the critical constraint is turning out to be the capacity to
print notes. Due to the printing constraint, even if the branches and
ATMs function perfectly, it may take more than three months to print
enough cash to re-monetise half of the value of discontinued notes.

So, perhaps the banking system constraint may be smaller than the cash
printing constraint.

There are other constraints as well. Even after the financial
inclusion drives, crores of households are not banked, and many who
have bank accounts do not have convenient and continuous access to
banking establishments.

Since government has allowed exchange of old notes only once, the
unbanked must take losses or try to open a bank account, which is very
difficult under the present circumstances of capacity constraint in
branches.

All these constraints were known well in advance, but were probably
not given proper importance.

Image: PTI
Image: PTI
Inflexible policy
A policy may face unforeseen problems and – especially one causing
such large-scale disruption – must come with enough flexibility to
allow government to change course.

On November 8, the prime minister said that ATMs would be functioning
from November 11. It became almost immediately clear that this was not
going to happen.

What was Plan B? None, it seems.

Since November 10, the day the branches opened, we have seen a series
of inexplicable changes to limits and processes of exchange and
withdrawal.

The policy is such that it inherently does not allow much flexibility,
because its founding assumption is that any flexibility would lead to
manipulation. The only escape clause is a rollback, which might be
politically expensive.

So, the decision has placed the government in a tough spot.

Risks and uncertainty
No major policy decision comes with completely predictable benefits
and costs. There are risks that can increase the costs or reduce the
benefits. However, as long as the policymakers know the risks, they
can put in place systems to manage them. For example, it was known
that those with black money will try to launder their cash. This is a
risk that the government is trying to manage.

While risks can be managed, uncertainty cannot be managed. This
currency ban decision leads to a great deal of uncertainty. For
example, conspiracy theories and frauds are thriving due to this
large-scale disruption. Policy decisions should always try to minimise
uncertainty, especially in decisions implemented on a large scale.
This decision fails this test.

This is not hindsight. Even before implementation began, one could
have foretold most of these problems. Poor implementation might be
making things worse, but the policy itself is deeply flawed.

It appears that the policy was not informed by the kind of analysis
that should go into such decisions. The real fight against black money
creation or fake currency circulation involves slow, quiet and perhaps
boring efforts to improve the administrative capacity of the
government. And changes in policies that encourage people to create
black money.

Suyash Rai is a senior consultant with National Institute of Public
Finance and Policy. Views expressed here are personal.


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to