["(A) closer look at the Budget documents suggests that the impressive
jump may be largely a case of smokes and mirrors.
"Here's what the numbers show. The 25.4% rise is actually over the
Budget estimates (BE) for 2016-17, while the increase over this year's
revised estimates (RE) is a much more modest 10.7%. Even more
significantly, a considerable chunk of it may be just a
reclassification of some spending from revenue expenditure seen
broadly as non-asset creating to capital expenditure."
(The above quote is taken from the ET report/analysis reproduced
below, and highlighted therein.)

"Capital expenditure" is supposed to be the amount spent on new asset
creation - and thereby an indicator of "development", while "revenue
expenditure" relates to the expenditure incurred in maintaining the
system. (And a cut in "revenue expenditure" is often projected as a
rise in "efficiency".)
Hence, the temptation to show a higher figure for "capital expenditure".]

Budget 2017: Why 25% hike in capital spend is actually only 11%
By TNN | Updated: Feb 03, 2017, 01.06 PM ISTPost a Comment

During his Budget speech on Wednesday finance minister Arun Jaitley
said he had stepped up, capital expenditure broadly spending on
creating assets by 25.4% in 2017-18 over the previous year. He went on
to add that "this will have multiplier effects and lead to higher
growth". But ***a closer look at the Budget documents suggests that
the impressive jump may be largely a case of smokes and mirrors.***
[Emphasis added.]

***Here's what the numbers show. The 25.4% rise is actually over the
Budget estimates (BE) for 2016-17, while the increase over this year's
revised estimates (RE) is a much more modest 10.7%. Even more
significantly, a considerable chunk of it may be just a
reclassification of some spending from revenue expenditure seen
broadly as non-asset creating to capital expenditure.*** [Emphasis
added.] That is why an apples to apples comparison in this case must
be between the RE for the current year and the budgeted amount for
next year.

The BE for 2016-17 pegged total capital spending at Rs 2.47 lakh
crore. In the RE for the year, the figure has risen to Rs 2.8 lakh
crore, an increase of about Rs 33,000 crore. It's not often that the
government ends up spending more than it budgeted on the capital
account, so how did this happen?

The single largest jump in capex between the BE and RE for the current
year is in the road transport and highways ministry. Capex for this
ministry, the Budget document entitled "expenditure profile" shows,
was budgeted at just Rs 17,453 crore, but has shot up to Rs 41,103 in
the RE. Interestingly, the revenue expenditure figures dropped even
more sharply from Rs 40,523 crore in the BE to Rs 11,344 crore in the
RE. As a result, total spending actually was lower in the revised
estimates, but capex looked far more impressive.

Digging deeper into the "demands for grants" shows that this flip
between revenue expenditure and capex figures was concentrated in the
allocation for roads and bridges. In the BE, this had a revenue
expenditure of almost Rs 42,000 crore, but in the RE this was down
below Rs 7,000 crore. In contrast, the capex figure was up from just
under Rs 50,000 crore in the BE to nearly Rs 72,300 crore in the RE.

Sources TOI spoke to confirmed that this was essentially a
reclassification issue stemming from the move to do away with Plan and
nonPlan categorisation.

What does this mean for the larger Budget numbers?
If we were to add around Rs 20-25,000 crore to the revenue deficit for
RE 2016-17 and about Rs 25-30,000 crore to that for BE 2017-18, the
revenue deficit would go up from 2.1% and 1.9% respectively of GDP to
2.2 and 2.1%.


-- 
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