Showing posts with label Healthcare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Healthcare. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 11, 2021

Short-term priorities for the economy

It was published in The Kathmandu Post, 09 August 2021.


The focus now should be on executing the budget and curtailing wasteful spending.

The current coalition government led by Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba has inherited a challenging economic situation that continues to be affected by the Covid-19 pandemic and related lockdowns. Finance Minister Janardan Sharma faces an uphill task to revive economic activities, which remain subdued with little likelihood of a convincing rebound beyond the base effect after a contraction in fiscal 2019-20. Specifically, a short-term economic recovery strategy to reap 'low hanging fruits' has to be rolled out and implemented in such a way that it does not deviate much from the 2021-22 budget ordinance and 15th Five-Year Plan.

The major constraint here is the availability of resources amidst unprecedented expenditure pressure while the country stares at a third wave of the pandemic. The government cannot drastically increase expenditure, both actuals and allocations, due to its implementation capacity and funding constraints. The latest data shows that the government fell short of targets in pretty much all fiscal indicators. In 2020-21, while recurrent spending was about 90 percent of the target, capital spending was just 65 percent. Tax revenue mobilisation was about 95 percent of the target, but foreign grants just 34 percent. A relatively slower pace of spending compared to revenue mobilisation meant that the fiscal deficit decreased to 4.8 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) from 5.5 percent in 2019-20. In the 2021-22 budget, a large increase in expenditure compared to receipts is set to provisionally widen the fiscal deficit to about 6 percent of GDP.

Low-hanging fruits

Against the backdrop of slow economic activities, tight fiscal space, inflationary pressures and deteriorating external sector, the new finance minister faces a challenging task of stimulating broad-based and inclusive economic activity. He perhaps wants to deliver visible results in a short period of time given financing and implementation constraints. Unfortunately, the options are limited.

First, ensuring availability of funds, as and when needed, to respond effectively to the healthcare crisis should be the utmost priority. The most visible outcome for the government right now is an orderly process of testing, tracing and treatment; availability of vital medicines used for the treatment of the coronavirus; and widespread vaccination in the shortest time possible.

Second, the pandemic-hit industry and services sectors need continuous support—be it in the form of tax concessions or utility discounts or direct wage subsidy or social security contribution—until the situation stabilises. A third wave of infections and related mobility restrictions will further affect cash flows. It may actually permanently cut off the struggling small and medium enterprise from production networks. This will have long-term economic consequences as gaps in supply chains cannot be filled immediately. So, the government could prop up aggregate demand not only by increasing public spending, but also by supporting the private sector wade through the crisis so that they can achieve at least pre-pandemic levels of capacity utilisation.

Third, given fiscal and time constraints, a supplementary budget or major amendment to the budget ordinance is not ideal. The focus now should be on executing the budget and, if possible, curtailing some of the wasteful spending and ad hoc projects and programmes included in the budget. With earnest efforts, Sharma could make a difference by prioritising operation and maintenance of dilapidated roads and bridges, water supply and drainage system, electricity distribution lines, school and hospital buildings and other public infrastructure. These initiatives yield quick, visible results, and help to enhance productive efficiency of public spending. Funding for additional operation and maintenance expenses could be arranged through reprioritising and repurposing of existing budget allocations.

The finance minister could also prioritise public investment management by instituting a mechanism whereby only well vetted and prioritised projects are included in the budget and medium-term plan. This means reworking on the existing National Project Bank, which has guidelines for identification, appraisal, selection and prioritisation of projects but are hardly adhered to during implementation. This will aid in allocative efficiency of public spending.

On domestic resource mobilisation, the bulk of the work needs to be in improving revenue administration so that leakages are plugged. Note that new policy measures related to revenue are expected to contribute only 7 percent of the total estimated revenue for this fiscal. The rest 93 percent is planned to be generated from existing measures, which means increasing the taxpayer base and improving compliance. Harmonisation of IT systems of various tax wings, active risk-based audit for taxpayer compliance, and a monetisation strategy for idle public sector assets will be helpful. Furthermore, assisting sub-national governments in revenue administration as well as public investment management will also be important. On deficit financing, since the cost of external borrowing is lower than that of internal borrowing, the former may be prioritised for the interim period. However, this will require sectoral policy and institutional reform commitments, or improved budget execution capacity.

Fourth, fiscal and monetary policies have to be synced with an objective to ensure demand and supply stabilisation, and an eventual economic recovery. Moderate inflationary pressures are okay during the interim period, but a medium-term plan to tame inflationary expectations, which are trending upward, should not be overlooked. There could also be cooperation in ensuring that the existing support measures related to refinancing schemes, subsidised credit and regulatory forbearance are not prematurely withdrawn. That said, the authorities will have to carefully rein in excessive credit growth that is not consistent with indicators such as GDP growth and deposit growth. An unjustifiably bullish stock market and rising real estate and housing prices are not good signs at the moment for the sound health of the financial system.

Minimal physical interface

Fifth, external sector needs to be monitored carefully, especially the direction of remittance inflows amidst a decline in the number of outgoing migrant workers as well as weak demand for them in the destination countries. This, along with widening trade and current account deficits, could put external sector stability at risk. Adjusting import tariffs and tightening bank financing to dissuade demand for expensive foreign vehicles and gold could be considered.

Finally, the finance minister can push for new measures that could have an immediate impact on struggling households and businesses, and aid the recovery process. For instance, a partial credit guarantee scheme with an umbrella framework to cover all guarantees, including credit subsidy to various sectors is helpful. Similarly, digitisation of public services so that there is minimal physical interface between the public and businesses and bureaucrats is another promising area for quick results. Addressing youth unemployment through reskilling, vocational training and temporary employment guarantee schemes is also going to be fruitful.

Tuesday, June 1, 2021

Quick thoughts on Nepal’s FY2022 budget

On 29 May 2021, Finance Minister Bishnu Prasad Paudel presented FY2022 budget (mid-July 2021 to mid-July 2022). The FY2022 budget is introduced through an ordinance since the parliament was dissolved and fresh federal elections were announced for November 2021. The budget focuses on addressing healthcare challenges due to the Covid-19 pandemic— particularly testing, vaccination, and healthcare infrastructure—, social security, elections, infrastructure investment, and pandemic-related relief measures for individuals and businesses. The priority is stabilization and recovery of economic activities by addressing the immediate healthcare challenges, continuation of existing projects, and tax relief for individuals and businesses.

The budget is rolled out when the country at a critical juncture that has widely disrupted lives, livelihoods, and economic activities. In fact, economic activities are estimated to have contracted by 2.1% in FY2020 and will likely grow at around 2% (lower than 4% CBS’s provisional estimate) in FY2021, most of which will be base effect anyway. 

Much of the focus is on stabilization measures, especially for households and businesses. Increase in allowance by 33% including those for 70 and plus years old, allocation for free vaccination, continuation of refinancing facility and business continuity fund for businesses, scrapping of constituency development fund (or local infrastructure partnership program) and poverty alleviation fund, income tax relief for individuals and businesses, and promotion of electrical vehicles are some of the notable features of the budget. Some of these measures are continuation of last year’s budget. However, there are also signs of redistributive nature of the budget, without ascertaining resources, with a view of influencing voter base ahead of the federal parliamentary elections. Resources have also been allocated for preparation of detailed project reviews or feasibility studies of prospective projects such as hydropower projects and river diversion projects. That said, larger increase in federal budget (30.1%) than the increase in federal receipts (14.5%) point to a challenging fiscal management task going forward, especially fiscal consolidation and higher revenue mobilization to lower widening fiscal deficit. 

More on these later. But, let us first look at the macro-fiscal specifics:

Expenditure outlay

The total expenditure outlay for FY2022 is NRs 1647.6 billion, which is 30.1% higher than FY2021 revised estimate and 11.7% higher than FY2021 budget estimate. The government expects to spend 85.9% of NRs 1474.6 billion allocated in FY2021. However, given the expenditure trend so far, it is highly unlikely as public works have also been affected by the pandemic, especially in the last quarter of FY2021—the time when most of the work accelerates. 

FY2022 expenditure outlay comprises of NRs 1004.4 billion as recurrent expenditures (61% of the total outlay), NRs435.2 billion as capital expenditures (26.4%), and NRs208 billion as financial provision. From this year’s budget the government started reporting recurrent and capital grants to subnational governments (SNGs) separately. The earmarked recurrent and capital transfers to SNGs are NRs325.7 billion and NRs 60.9 billion, respectively. If the previous accounting was followed, i.e. all transfers in recurrent heading, then recurrent and capital expenditure in FY2021 are estimated at NRs 867.5 billion and NRs 251.2 billion, respectively. It means recurrent budget is up by 15.8% and capital budget by 73.1% over the revised estimate for FY2021. Without previous accounting (capital transfers being a part of recurrent spending), then recurrent and capital expenditures are estimated to increase by 17.1% and 48.8%, respectively. In any case, there is a large increase in capital budget. However, without a viable implementation plan and the effect of lockdowns on labor mobility and availability of supplies, it is most likely to be underspent as before.

As a share of GDP, total budget amounts to 35.1%, including 21.4% of GDP as recurrent spending and 9.3% of GDP as capital spending. As per FY2020 revised estimates, the government now expects to spend just 81.9% of planned recurrent budget and 71.3% of planned capital budget. 

FY2022 budget overview

GDP growth target (%)

6.5

 

Inflation target (%)

 

 

Budget allocation for FY2022

Rs billion

%

Projected total expenditure

1647.6

Recurrent

1004.4

61.0

Capital

435.2

26.4

Financial provision

208.0

12.6

 

Projected total receipts

1088.3

Revenue

1024.9

94.2

Foreign grants

63.4

5.8

 

Projected budget surplus (+)/deficit (-)

-559.3

 

Projected deficit financing

559.3

Foreign loans

309.3

55.3

Domestic borrowing

250.0

44.7

Receipts

A total revenue target of NRs 1025 billion (21.8% of GDP) has been set for FY2022 (or NRs 1151 billion if revenue sharing with subnational governments is included—24.5% of GDP). Foreign grants are expected to be NRs 63.4 billion (1.4% of GDP). Total federal receipts (total revenue plus foreign grants less sharing of revenue with subnational governments) turns out to be NRs 1088 billion (23.2% of GDP). The central government shares, based on monthly collections, 30% of VAT and internal excise duty, and 50% of royalties from natural resources with subnational governments. The revised estimate for federal revenue mobilization (including grants) in FY2021 is 22.3% of GDP. 

Compared to the revised estimate, revenue growth target for FY2022 is about 20%, which is ambitious in the first place due to the expected low nominal GDP growth. The government missed revenue target in FY2018, FY2019 and FY2020. In FY2021, it is expecting revenue growth of 20.9% as economic activities partially normalized and imports recovered. With an assumption of 10% nominal GDP growth for FY2022, revenue buoyancy comes to be about 2.

Given that the GDP growth target itself is a bit optimistic, and revenue administration reforms along with tinkering of excise duty on tobacco, alcohol, beer, and petroleum fuel has its own limits, it needs to be seen how this government plans to achieve the revenue target. 

Nepal’s revenue mobilization is already one of the highest among low-income countries and about 45% of it comes from taxes on international trade (primarily imports). Tax revenue is projected to be around 22.1% of GDP in FY2022, up from an estimated 20.4% of GDP in FY2021. Non-tax revenue is projected to be 2.4% of GDP. The government expects to mobilize 95% of tax revenue target for FY2021. In FY2020 it was just 75.5%.

Deficit financing

Considering the federal government’s expenditure and its share of revenue in total revenue mobilization, budget deficit turns out to be NRs 559.3 billion, which is to be financed by foreign loans equivalent to NRs 309.3 billion and domestic borrowing of NRs 250 billion. So, government’s projected revenue is able to fund only 66% of its projected expenditure for FY2022. The government expects foreign aid (grants and loans) to cover about a quarter of its expenditure needs. Domestic borrowing will cover 15% of its financing needs. 

Large domestic borrowing tends to affect market liquidity and interest rates if the government borrows aggressively to fund expenditure commitments just when economic activities start to normalize after the ebbing of infections from the second wave. The government had a plan to raise NRs 225 billion internally and NRs 299.5 billion externally in FY2021. The latest estimates show that while the goal of domestic borrowing will be met, only 55.1% of the external borrowing target will likely be realized. 

Compared to the revised estimate for FY2021, the government is planning to double net foreign borrowing (5.8% of GDP) and net domestic borrowing by 27% (4.3% of GDP). Again, without substantial improvement in budget execution capacity, it is unlikely that the government will be able to borrow the targeted amount. 

Overall, fiscal deficit (revenue incl grants minus expenditure incl net lending) is projected to increase to about 7% of GDP in FY2022, up from about 5% in FY2021. Primary deficit (fiscal deficit before interest payments) is projected to about 4% of GDP. The FY2021 budget estimate put fiscal deficit at around 7% of GDP in FY2021, but lower budget execution (both recurrent and capital spending) and near-target revenue mobilization resulted in lower deficit. When actual numbers are reported, it will probably be revised down further.

Where is recurrent budget going?

About 45.1% of planned recurrent budget of NRs 1004.4 billion is going to subnational governments (SNGs) in the form of recurrent fiscal transfer (fiscal equalization, conditional, complementary and special grants) and unconditional recurrent grants. The other big-ticket item is social security, which takes up about a quarter of the recurrent budget. Social security includes allowances, social assistance (scholarship; rescue, relief and rehabilitation, medical); social benefit of employees (pension and disability allowances, retirees related gratuity and medical assistance). The increase in allowances for 70 years and above elderly people by NRs 1000 to NRs 4000 has drastically increased allocation under this heading. Allocations for social security has been increased by 50%. About 15% of recurrent spending is earmarked for compensation of employees. Interest payments on foreign and domestic debt has drastically increased in recent years as borrowings increase to plug in widening fiscal deficit. Allocations for it increased by 27% and is estimated to be about 1% of GDP. Given the high fiscal deficit and accumulation of outstanding public debt due to the 2015 earthquake and fiscal profligacy during elections time, interest payments have been rising fast. Interest payments have more than tripled since FY2015.

The government has earmarked NRs 64.8 billion (1.4% of GDP) for use of goods and services, which also includes some of the pet projects of politicians and government. Use of goods and services consists of (i) rent & services; (ii) operation and maintenance of capital assets; (iii) office materials and services; (iv) consultancy and other services fee;(v) program expenses; (vi) monitoring, evaluation and travel expenses; (vii) recurrent contingencies; and (viii) miscellaneous. 

Where is capital budget going?

Almost 58% of the planned capital budget of NRs 435.2 billion is going for civil works, 14% as capital grants to SNGs, 13.4% for construction or purchase of buildings, and 4.1% for land acquisition. Compared to the FY2020 revised estimate, capital budget has been increased by 48% (including capital grants, it will be about 67%). 


Major takeaways from FY2022 budget

First, the budget has been designed keeping in mind two objectives: (i) addressing the immediate health crisis, particularly testing, treatment and vaccination, and (ii) upcoming parliamentary elections. The validity of the budget itself is contested by other political parties and constitutional experts as it a full-fledged budget was unveiled through an ordinance. If the Supreme Court reinstates the house of representatives again, then the fate of this budget is undecided. The new government could either adopt it or bring out a new budget. But for now, since the budget was announced just before the elections, it includes several pork-and-barrel type projects and programs to woe voters including elderly vote through increase in allowance without ascertaining resources. The budget also has allocation for projects that probably won’t be completed till the medium-term. These include Lumbini development masterplan, industrial zones, smart and mega cities, etc. So, it has both populist as well as distributive flavor. It does not spell out overall governing macroeconomic framework.

Second, since budget deficit is widening, and outstanding public debt and interest payments are increasing, it would have been good to anchor expenditure and revenue to medium-term expenditure and revenue frameworks. It is missing in the budget. Note that outstanding public debt is rising fast in Nepal, especially after FY2015. It reached 37% of GDP in FY2020, up from 23.9% of GDP in FY2015. External debt comprises of 58% of outstanding public debt. Both internal and external debt have been rising rapidly. One also needs to tally how this budget falls in line with the 15th five-year plan and to what extent projects includes in National Project Bank are incorporated. Some projects such as tunnels in highways and industrial parks have been included without much due diligence. There has to be a fiscal consolidation strategy as a part of a medium-term budget framework. 

Third, the plan of large domestic borrowing will have implications in the financial market, and most of the foreign loans may not be realized if project implementation is not drastically overhauled (well, except for policy-based lending, whose disbursement is conditional on fulfilling pre-agreed policy and institutional reforms). Budget execution has to be improved, with limited time and cost overruns, to ensure timely disbursement by multilateral donors. Compared to revised estimate for FY2021, foreign loans are expected to rise by 87% (net foreign loans by almost 100%), which is not realistic given the budget execution capacity and the fact that if elections do happen in November, it will disrupt development activities as most of the resources will be diverted to hold elections. Meanwhile, domestic borrowing is projected to cross 5% of GDP (net domestic borrowing of above 4% of GDP). Large domestic borrowing may sound okay as of now given the ample liquidity in the banking system and lack of investment opportunities for pension funds and institutional investors. However, as situation normalizes and capacity utilization of firms improves along with demand for credit by individuals and businesses, there may be a pressure on the financial market, leading to rise in inter-bank rate and then retail interest rates. 

Fourth, revenue mobilization growth target of 20% compared to FY2021 revised estimate is a bit ambitious at the moment. In fact, revenue growth has been consistently below 20% after FY2016. In FY2021, the revenue target was 22% over FY2020 revised estimate. The government has increased excise duty on sugar-based goods, tobacco, cigarettes, alcohol, beer, and petroleum fuel, among others. Just increasing rates on some non-essential goods without much efforts to reform tax administration for better services delivery and to increase tax base is not going to yield substantive results. The authorities should be thinking of new strategies to boost domestic resources mobilization: simplification of tax code, e-filing of taxes and digitization of services, improved taxpayer compliance to control leakages, proper enforcement of property tax, etc. 

To be fair, there is a sort of growth-enhancing tax policy as the budget commits to tax imported industrial inputs lower than imported final goods. Similarly, customs duty on equipment used by tea, jute, pashmina, and agricultural firms has been waived off. There are income tax exemptions of varying degree for new businesses established after the pandemic, startups, firms operating in special and industrial zones, etc. Similar exemption commitment was made in the past budgets as well, but they hardly get implemented. There are other tax rebates and concessions such as abolition of excise duty on import of electric vehicles and substantial reduction of customs duty (to encourage domestic consumption of electricity and to ensure environment-friendly transport network). Excise duty on electric vehicles ranged from 60% to 120%. 

Fifth, projection of foreign grants seem ambitious as sources of grants are drying up (ADB and WB now provide loans only although TA is principally a grant) and that most bilateral donors may not increase aid allocations given their country’s priority to boost their economies ravaged by the pandemic. The government is projecting to receive foreign grants of about NRs 63.4 billion in FY2022—a growth of 134% over FY2021 revised estimate— which has not happened in the last decade. The largest foreign grant it received was NRs 43 billion in FY2016 after the earthquakes. In FY2021, the government expected to received NRs 60.5 billion but has revised it down to NRs 27 billion. 

Sixth, cash allowance/pension (non-contributory) for 70 years and above and other allowances have been increased by 33%. Allowance to elderly is a part of social protection scheme to support individual or household consumption demand. This is like a guaranteed universal basic income for elderly people. However, it directly increases the government’s liability as well because it needs to be continued for years to come. Normally, such schemes are reasonable when the economic pie is growing and there are enough resources to fund such populist schemes. However, increasing social protection liability by borrowing loans or by cutting down capital spending is not a good policy. Against this backdrop, this tranche of increase in elderly allowance is probably aimed at influencing the voter base for the upcoming elections. In its political manifesto ahead of 2017 elections, the CPN(UML) party committed NRs5000 per month elderly allowance.

Seventh, grants or transfers to local bodies are reported under recurrent and capital grants. Earlier, grants were clubbed under recurrent expenditure only and the government used to argue that real capital spending is much higher than just capital spending because grants or transfers to local bodies under recurrent spending included conditional and unconditional capital grants as well. That said, there are still conditional and unconditional grants to government agencies, committees and boards under recurrent spending, but these are not that large (about 5% of recurrent expenditure). 

Eighth, revised budget estimate for FY2021 is optimistic given the setback in project implementation due to COVID-19 pandemic related restriction on mobility and economic activities after April 2021 (second wave) and in the first quarter of FY2021 (tail end of first wave). So, most of the numbers will be revised downward when the government presents actual numbers in the next budget.  

Ninth, real GDP growth target of 6.5% of GDP may a bit optimistic given that the pandemic will continue to affect lives, livelihoods and economic activities well into the next year. There is no likelihood of sharp V-shaped recovery. Agricultural output growth might be higher than in FY2021 given the forecast of a favorable monsoon and likely availability of inputs such as chemical fertilizers. Industrial output may not fully recover and capacity utilization may also not be drastically higher as both consumption demand and investment remain subdued. Mining and quarrying activities and construction will be slow to pick up, and manufacturing activities will also likely be at a modest pace. New addition of hydroelectricity to the national grid will jack up its growth rate. In the services sectors, travel and tourism activities are unlikely to recover anytime soon as both domestic and foreign visitors remain cautious of travel without adequate vaccination. International travel may continue to get disrupted in countries with less vaccination rates and rising covid-19 infections. Elections-related spending, if it happens, will add to consumption demand. Overall, GDP growth may hover around 4-5% in FY2022.  

Tenth, as in the previous years, the main challenge is budget execution. This will be a bit challenging during an election year, the risk of another wave of infections disrupting labor and capital mobility, slow vacation drive, and the apparent disconnect between MOF’s budget implementation directives to lines ministries and the latter’s pace and nature of work. For instance, several promises made in the previous budget were never realized. One such case is that the government promised a separate 300 bed infectious diseases hospital in Kathmandu, additional 250 intensive care unit beds at government hospitals in Kathmandu and provincial capitals, and separate infectious disease hospital in the provincial capitals. These were promised even before the deadly second wave hit the country. They remained unfulfilled. High staff turnover, political interference at management and operational levels, lack of consultant and contractor management capability, hurdles in inter-ministry and intra-ministry coordination, governance shortcomings, and a lack of project readiness will continue to impact capital spending.

So, a likely scenario at the end of the year will be that recurrent budget will be almost spent (over 90%), and capital budget will be under-spent. The government will try to borrow the full amount domestically. But, both foreign grant and loan will fall short of the target. Revenue mobilization growth will be short of target but still high enough. Eventually, fiscal deficit will be lower than projected and that the government will have treasury savings at the NRB. 

FYI, I have assumed FY2022 nominal GDP growth to be 10% and inflation to remain at around 5-6%.

Sunday, August 23, 2020

Impact of COVID-19 on the external sector

The IMF’s latest external sector report highlights the state current account balance amidst the global trade and supplies disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic has sharply curtailed global trade, lowered commodity prices, and tightened external financing conditions. 

According to the report, the world had a current account surplus of about 2.9% of world GDP in 2019. About 40% of current account surpluses and deficits were excessive in 2019. Euro area had larger-than-warranted current account balances, but the US, the UK and Canada had lower-than-warranted current account balances. China’s external position remained unchanged and they were broadly in line with fundamentals and desirable policies. Currency movements were generally modest, but with preexisting vulnerabilities/fundamentals in EMDEs (large current account deficits, a high share of foreign currency debt, and limited international reserves or reserves adequacy). 


The IMF forecasts current account surplus narrowing by 0.3% of world GDP in 2020, thanks to large fiscal expansion but offsetting increases in private savings and lower investment (precautionary move by household and business sectors). Economies dependent on severely affected sectors such as oil and tourism, and remittances have been hit hard.  There was a sudden capital flow reversal and currency depreciations in EMDEs as financial market sentiment deteriorated during the initial days of the crisis. Unsurprisingly, global reserve currencies appreciated as investors looked for safe haven amidst the financial stress. There is some unwinding now though, reflecting exceptional monetary and fiscal policy support. 

Current account balances in 2020 will be affected by 

  • Contraction in economic activity (lower output/export and import demand)
  • Tightening in global financial conditions
  • Lower commodity prices (oil, metals, food, raw materials)
  • Contraction in tourism
  • Decline in remittances 

The number of export restrictions in 2020 is higher than during the global financial crisis, but the number of import restrictions is lower. Sectors such as pharmaceutical and medical supplies, made-up textile articles, wearing apparel, rubber products, and ethyl alcohol and spirituous beverages faced the most export restrictions.  

Some EMDEs with preexisting vulnerabilities (large current account deficits, a high share of foreign currency debt, and limited international reserves) might face high risk of an external crisis (with capital flow reversals and currency pressures) if risk sentiment deteriorates

A second wave of the pandemic could lead to tightening of global financial conditions, narrow the scope of EMDEs to run current account deficit, further reduce current account balances of commodity exporters, and deepen the decline in global trade. Up to now, swift response of central banks (policy rate cuts, liquidity support, asset purchase programs, and swap lines offered by the US Federal Reserve) and expansionary fiscal policy have contributed to an easing in global financial conditions. EMDEs experienced sudden capital flow reversals in late February and march but then stabilized in most cases with even modest inflows in selected economies. 

Near-term priority

The near-term priority should be to provide relief and promote economic recovery. 

  • Flexible exchange rates should be allowed to adjust as needed to absorb external shocks (especially a fall in commodity prices or tourism). 
  • Official financing to ensure continued healthcare spending is required for those economies experiencing disruptive balance of payments pressures and without access to private external financing. 
  • Tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade, especially on medical equipment and supplies, should be avoided. 
  • Countries with adequate forex reserves could engage in exchange rate intervention to avoid disorderly market conditions and limit financial stress. 
  • Countries with limited reserves and facing reversals of external financing, capital outflows management measures could be useful (but these should be used to substitute the warranted macroeconomic and structural policy actions).

Medium-term priorities

Preexisting economic and policy distortions may persist or worsen over the medium-term.

  • Fiscal consolidation over the medium term would promote debt sustainability, reduce current account gap, and facilitate raising international reserves. Note that excess current account deficits in 2019 partly reflected larger-than-desirable fiscal deficits. 
  • Productivity-enhancing reforms would benefit economies with low export competitiveness. 
  • For countries with large current account surpluses after the COVID-19 pandemic, prioritizing reforms to encourage investment and discourage excessive private savings are warranted. In some instances, economies with large current account surpluses could discourage excessive precautionary savings by expanding the social safety nets. 
  • For economies with some fiscal space, emphasis on greater public sector investment would be helpful to narrow excess surpluses and to stimulate economic activities. 

Outlook for 2021

The outlook for 2021 is highly uncertain. Under a scenario where a second major global outbreak occurs in early 2021 (disruptions to economic activity is assumed to be half the size of the baseline in 2020, financing tightening of about one-half of the increase in sovereign and corporate spreads since the outbreak began in EMDEs, and relatively limited tightening of sovereign premiums for advanced economies),

  • Global trade is projected to decline by an addition 6%, global GDP decline by 5%, and oil prices to be higher by 12% compared to the baseline. 
  • Recovery in global trade will be underpinned by the need to rebuild the capital stock (investment goes up), and higher import intensity of exports. 
  • Emerging market economies will face higher borrowing costs, lower oil prices and subdued domestic demand – it will raise current account balances toward surplus. 
  • Net oil exporters will face lower oil prices, which will reduce their current account balances.
  • Advanced economies will face relatively limited tightening in external financing conditions and greater fiscal policy space will mean lesser import compression than among EMs, leading to lower current account balances. 
  • So, capital will flow from EMs to AEs, highlighting the unequal impact of the crisis and the need for a global policy response. 
  • Under a faster recovery scenario, global trade rises by 4% in 2021 compared to the baseline. 

The report notes that the historical relationship between trade and the components of GDP/aggregate demand (or import-intensity-adjusted measure of aggregate demand, which basically is a weighted average of aggregate demand components in which the weights are the import content of each component computed from national accounts input-output tables) fully explains the expected global decline in trade of goods. A part of the impact of lower economic activity on trade is felt through global value chains. After the global finance crisis circa 2009, residual factors such as rising protectionism explained part of the fall in trade in goods and services as they could not be fully explained by the fall in economic activity alone. Services trade contraction in 2020 is more severe than what could be expected based on the historical relationship between services trade and aggregate demand, suggesting the role of special factors such as travel restrictions. 

The IMF determines excessive current account balances by comparing the actual current account (stripped of cyclical and temporary factors) and the current account balance that is consistent with fundamentals and desirable policies. The resultant gap reflects policy distortions (e.g., higher current account balance than implied by fundamentals and desirable policies correspond to a positive current account gap, whose elimination is desirable over the medium-term). The IMF also considers REER that is normally consistent with the assessed current account gap. A positive REER implies an overvalued exchange rate. Other indicators that are considered are financial account balances, international investment position, reserve adequacy, and other competitiveness measures such as the unit-labor-cost-based REER and staff views on the current account gap using country-specific trade elasticities. 

On economic and financial fundamentals, and desired policies, advanced economies with higher incomes, older population, and lower growth prospects have positive current account norms. EMDEs tend to have negative current account norms because they are expected to import capital to invest and exploit their higher growth potential.

Thursday, July 30, 2020

Reimagining GDP and measures of economic prosperity

Joe Stiglitz on the usefulness of GDP as a measure of wellbeing:

[...]After six years of consultation and deliberation, we reinforced and amplified our earlier conclusion: GDP should be dethroned. In its place, each nation should select a “dashboard”—a limited set of metrics that would help steer it toward the future its citizens desired. In addition to GDP itself, as a measure for market activity (and no more) the dashboard would include metrics for health, sustainability and any other values that the people of a nation aspired to, as well as for inequality, insecurity and other harms that they sought to diminish.
These documents have helped crystallize a global movement toward improved measures of social and economic health. The OECD has adopted the approach in its Better Life Initiative, which recommends 11 indicators—and provides citizens with a way to weigh these for their own country, relative to others, to generate an index that measures their performance on the things they care about. The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), traditionally strong advocates of GDP thinking, are now also paying attention to environment, inequality and sustainability of the economy.

OECD's Better Life Initiative lists 11 indicators to gauge the quality of life: housing, income, jobs, community, education, environment, civic engagement, health, life satisfaction, safety, and work-life balance.

Stiglitz argues that the use of prices as a proxy for value- believing that in a competitive market prices measure relative value of goods and services- is problematic. 

[...]Over time, as economists focused on the intricacies of comparing GDP in different eras and across diverse countries and constructing complex economic models that predicted and explained changes in GDP, they lost sight of the metric's shaky foundations. Students seldom studied the assumptions that went into constructing the measure—and what these assumptions meant for the reliability of any inferences they made. Instead the objective of economic analysis became to explain the movements of this artificial entity. GDP became hegemonic across the globe: good economic policy was taken to be whatever increased GDP the most.
[...]It would have been nice, of course, if we could have come up with a single measure that would summarize how well a society or even an economy is doing—a GDP plus number, say. But as with the GDP itself, too much valuable information is lost when we form an aggregate. Say, you are driving your car. You want to know how fast you are going and glance at the speedometer. It reads 70 miles an hour. And you want to know how far you can go without refilling your tank, which turns out to be 200 miles. Both those numbers are valuable, conveying information that could affect your behavior. But now assume you form a simple aggregate by adding up the two numbers, with or without “weights.” What would a number like 270 tell you? Absolutely nothing. It would not tell you whether you are driving recklessly or how worried you should be about running out of fuel.
That was why we concluded that each nation needs a dashboard—a set of numbers that would convey essential diagnostics of its society and economy and help steer them. Policy makers and civil-society groups should pay attention not only to material wealth but also to health, education, leisure, environment, equality, governance, political voice, social connectedness, physical and economic security, and other indicators of the quality of life. Just as important, societies must ensure that these “goods” are not bought at the expense of the future. To that end, they should focus on maintaining and augmenting, to the extent possible, their stocks of natural, human, social and physical capital. We also laid out a research agenda for exploring links between the different components of well-being and sustainability and developing good ways to measure them.


Friday, June 5, 2020

Nepal's FY2021 budget at a critical juncture

It was published in The Kathmandu Post, 03 June 2020. An earlier blog post is here (in Nepali language here).



The government has, once again, not been able to enact structural change when afforded an opportunity by the extraordinary circumstances.

The federal government’s budget for the fiscal year 2020-21, presented by Finance Minister Yubaraj Khatiwada, prioritises short-term measures to respond to health, economic and employment crises caused by the novel coronavirus disease, Covid-19. The unique nature of concurrent health, demand and supply shocks due to the pandemic and the consequent lockdowns to contain its spread, meant that the government had no option but to increase spending in healthcare and social protection, even if it increased fiscal deficit sharply.

That said, this critical juncture is also an opportune moment to not only craft a short-term response to deal with the effect of Covid-19 on lives, livelihoods and the economy, but also to overhaul the existing inefficient systems and rectify long-running economic ills that are holding back inclusive economic growth and prosperity. Unfortunately, the budget loses sight of this opportunity at this critical juncture. Similarly, the budget is not clear about the medium-term strategy for economic recovery, growth-enhancing revenue policy and a consolidation plan to narrow the widening fiscal deficit.

The federal government’s total budget for the next fiscal year is Rs1.47 trillion, which is lower than the Rs1.53 trillion budget estimate for 2019-20, but 37.4 percent higher than the revised estimate. It comprises Rs948.9 billion as recurrent expenditures (64.4 percent of the total outlay), Rs352.9 billion as capital expenditures, and Rs172.8 billion as a financial provision. Note that fiscal transfers and conditional grants to subnational governments are also included in recurrent spending of the federal government. So, the capital spending allocation of all tiers of government is a bit higher than the one indicated in the centre’s budget.

Total central receipts (revenue and foreign grants) are expected to cover 65 percent of the budget. The government is planning to cover the budget gap by borrowing internally and externally. The fiscal deficit is expected to increase to about 8 percent of the gross domestic product.

Underwhelming response

The budget also includes a Covid-19 economic recovery package, but it is not really an additional fiscal package that is going to prop up subdued demand and business activities. Nor is it likely to restore the severely disrupted supply networks and output. Most of the already announced incentives and initiatives are subsumed in the budget, including a Rs100 billion refinancing facility by the central bank. The government is planning to set up a separate Rs50 billion fund to provide subsidised loans, at 5 percent interest, to sectors badly affected by the Covid-19. The government has not committed a full amount to the fund as it expects contributions from public enterprises and development partners. The operationalisation and effectiveness of this fund is uncertain, as there is no standard operating procedure that outlines eligibility and bureaucratic prerequisites.

Furthermore, the government argues that there is about NRs 60 billion worth of interest and utility subsidies, and tax concessions. There is also a plan to employ 700,000 people through direct employment, and provide training related to skills upgradation and technical education.

Besides these mundane, halfhearted measures to deal with the immediate effect of the crisis, the government had an opportunity to overhaul long-running economic ills and rigid systems that have fostered extractive economic and political institutions. It is easier to do when an economy reaches a critical juncture, which according to economists Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson are ‘major events that disrupt the existing political and economic balance’. In their book Why Nations Fail, they argue that at critical junctures a country can transform its extractive political and economic institutions into inclusive ones, resulting in meaningful socioeconomic changes and acceleration on the path to prosperity. Nepal reached this kind of critical juncture in the 1950s (end of Rana rule), 1990s (restoration of democracy), 2006 (end of Maoist insurgency and monarchy) and 2015 (catastrophic earthquakes). Unfortunately, we have missed opportunities to reorient economic and political institutions during these times for greater good. Instead, we have let the prevailing political-business nexus to capture land, labour, capital and product markets.

At the critical juncture created by the pandemic, we are once again missing a chance to roll out transformative reforms to create inclusive political and economic institutions. These include agricultural transformation; consolidation of social protection schemes with a unified digital registry of all beneficiaries (including the Prime Minister Employment Programme and cash allowances); rationalisation of ballooning recurrent spending; freeing markets from the clutches of cartels; changing revenue policy to support growth and innovation; nixing politically-oriented distributive spending; harmonising planning and financial reporting standards across all tiers of governments; prioritising projects strictly based on implementation readiness; sound governance framework to curb misappropriation of public funds, and, lastly, changes to legal, policy and institutional frameworks to increase private sector participation.

Most of these are transformative in nature and growth-enhancing structural changes that are relatively easy to roll out during critical junctures. They set in motion a process of creative destruction and creative creation processes, which are vital for enhancing private investment, innovation, and public services delivery. They also boost the entrepreneurial spirit and incentivise saving, investment and innovation.

Budget takeaways

Besides this missed opportunity, there are three particular macroeconomic takeaways. First, there is no medium-term recovery plan for a sustained recovery. The focus is on immediate-term only with increased funding for the healthcare sector and state-led employment creation. Propping up demand (through additional cash transfers, subsidy and income tax concessions) and maintaining supplies of essential goods and services (including through graded easing of the lockdown), even during the immediate-term, are pretty much ignored. A medium-term recovery strategy could at least include assistance for preventing layoffs in both organised and unorganised sectors, and saving struggling micro, small and medium enterprises from collapsing. The private sector has been largely left to fend the crisis for themselves.

Second, with declining revenue and increasing spending needs, the fiscal deficit is expected to be around 8 percent of GDP. Besides some discretionary spending—such as insurance cover for frontline staff and social security fund payments—other increased recurrent spending may not be easy to rollback. It will keep recurrent spending at a high level even after the crisis subsides. With consistently lower than expected revenue mobilisation since 2017-18 and an increase in recurrent spending, narrowing down the widening fiscal deficit will require a credible medium-term fiscal consolidation plan. A drastic increase in domestic borrowing to fund the deficit will likely squeeze liquidity and raise interest rates, thus crowding-out private investment.

Third, revenue and foreign aid budget estimates and growth targets are too ambitious. For instance, given the past trend, tinkering import duties alone will not be helpful to achieve revenue mobilisation target of 22 percent. Likewise, foreign grant and loans targets are 89 percent and 147 percent respectively—higher than the revised estimate for 2019-20. Note that even after the 2015 earthquakes, the government was able to mobilise less than 50 percent of foreign grants and loans estimated during the budget speech. Similarly, even with a favourable base effect, a GDP growth target of 7 percent is unrealistic, particularly given the prospect of a continued slowdown in agriculture (thanks to a shortage of chemical fertilisers and workers), subdued industrial activities (especially manufacturing and construction), and uncertainty over the recovery of services—especially in travel and tourism, wholesale and retail trade, transportation, real estate, and education.

Tuesday, June 2, 2020

महाव्याधिमा रूपान्तरणको अवसर गुमाएको बजेट

यो विचार गते जेठ १९, २०७७ नयाँ पत्रिका दैनिकमा प्रकाशीत भएको थियो।  Related blog here



यो महत्वपूर्ण मोडमा हामी फेरि एकपटक समावेशी राजनीतिक एवं आर्थिक संस्थाहरू जन्माउने रूपान्तरणकारी सुधारको अवसरबाट चुकेका छौँ

आर्थिक वर्ष ०७७-७८ को बजेटमा कोभिड-१९ महाव्याधिले निम्त्याएको स्वास्थ्य, आर्थिक एवं रोजगारीको संकटसँग जुझ्ने अल्पकालीन उपायलाई प्राथमिकता दिइएको छ । यद्यपि, बजेट आर्थिक वृद्धि उकास्ने राजस्व नीति निर्माण गर्न, आर्थिक पुनर्बहालीको मध्यकालीन रणनीति बनाउन र फराकिँदै गएको वित्तीय घाटालाई कम गर्ने मध्यम अवधिको ठोस वित्तीय योजना ल्याउनमा भने चुकेको छ।

०७७-७८ को बजेट

संघीय सरकारको बजेट १४ खर्ब ७४ अर्ब ६० करोड रुपैयाँको छ, जुन ०७६-७७ को अनुमानित बजेट १५ खर्ब ३२ अर्ब ९० करोड रुपैयाँभन्दा कम तर संशोधित बजेटभन्दा चाहिँ ३७ दशमलव ४ प्रतिशत उच्च हो । बजेटमा चालू खर्चतर्फ नौ खर्ब ४८ अर्ब ९० करोड (कुल विनियोजनको ६४ दशमलव ४ प्रतिशत), पुँजीगतमा तीन खर्ब ५२ अर्ब ९० करोड (२३ दशमलव ९ प्रतिशत) र वित्तीय व्यवस्थापनमा एक खर्ब ७२ अर्ब ८० करोड रुपैयाँ विनियोजन गरिएको छ।

कुल गार्हस्थ्य उत्पादन (जिडिपी)को ३५ दशमलव ९ प्रतिशतको यो बजेटमा पुँजीगततर्फ केवल ८ दशमलव ६ प्रतिशत छुट्याइएको छ । सरकारको कुल आय (राजस्व तथा वैदेशिक अनुदान)ले यो बजेटको ६५ प्रतिशत धान्ने अपेक्षा छ । नपुग स्रोत आन्तरिक एवं बाह्य ऋण उठाएर पूरा गर्ने लक्ष्य लिइएको छ । वित्तीय घाटा जिडिपीको करिब लगभग ८ प्रतिशतले बढ्ने अनुमान छ ।

०७६-७७ को संशोधित अनुमानको तुलनामा यो बजेट ३५ दशमलव २ प्रतिशत र पुँजीगत खर्चका हिसाबले ४७ दशमलव ६ प्रतिशत ठूलो छ । यसैगरी, राजस्व वृद्धिमा २२ प्रतिशतको लक्ष्य राखिएको छ । विनियोजित चालू बजेटको ५२ दशमलव ७ प्रतिशतजति प्रदेश र स्थानीय सरकारका लागि वित्तीय हस्तान्तरण (वित्तीय समानीकरण, ससर्त, पूरक एवं विशेष अनुदान) र निःसर्त अनुदानको रूपमा दिएको छ । यी अनुदान तल्ला तहको पुँजीगत एवंं चालू खर्च दुवैका लागि हुन् । यसैगरी, विनियोजित पुँजीगत बजेटको पनि लगभग ६४ प्रतिशत भौतिक निर्माणतर्फ, १८ दशमलव ७ प्रतिशत भवन निर्माण एवं खरिदमा र ५ दशमलव २ प्रतिशत भूमि अधिग्रहणका लागि छुट्याइएको छ । 

अवसरको क्षण 

कोभिड–१९ को प्रभाव एकदमै मौलिक छ । सरकारसँग स्वास्थ्य र सामाजिक सुरक्षा खर्च बढाउनुको विकल्प थिएन, भलै वित्तीय घाटा अकासियोस् । महामारी सिर्जित अवरोधले आर्थिक गतिविधि, जीवनशैली र जनजीविकामा नै गम्भीर प्रभाव पारिरहेको छ । यो यति व्यापक बनेको छ कि वास्तविक जिडिपी वृद्धि केन्द्रीय तथ्यांक विभागद्वारा प्रक्षेपित २ दशमलव ३ प्रतिशतभन्दा पनि तल झर्ने प्रक्षेपण छ । ०७७-७८ को बजेट महामारीको प्रभावप्रति प्रतिक्रिया जनाउने आर्थिक नीति कुद्ने एवं लामो समयदेखि थाती रहेको आर्थिक सुधारलाई अनुमोदन गर्ने स्वर्णिम अवसर थियो ।

कृषिको रूपान्तरण गर्ने, सबै लाभग्राही (प्रधानमन्त्री रोजगार कार्यक्रमलगायत)लाई एकीकृत डिजिटल रजिस्ट्रीमा ल्याएर सामाजिक सुरक्षाका योजनालाई सुदृढ बनाउने, बजारलाई कार्टेल र सिन्डिकेटको चंगुलबाट मुक्त बनाउने, अकासिँदो चालू खर्च औचित्यपूर्ण बनाउने, नवप्रवर्तन एवं आर्थिक वृद्धिलाई सघाउने गरी राजस्व नीतिमा परिवर्तन गर्ने, राजनीतिक अभीष्टले जथाभावी राज्यकोष बाँड्ने वितरणमुखी योजनामा रोक लगाउने, सबै तहका सरकारको वित्तीय रिपोर्टिङको मापदण्डमा एकरूपता ल्याउने, परियोजनाहरूलाई कार्यान्वयन तत्परताका आधारमा प्राथमिकीकरण गर्ने, सरकारी कोषको दुरुपयोग रोक्न गतिलो सुशासनको संरचना तयार गर्ने र निजी क्षेत्रको सहभागिता बढाउने गरी कानुन, अनुगमन, नीतिगत एवं संस्थागत संरचनामा परिवर्तन गर्ने सुअवसर थियो । यीमध्ये अधिकांश रूपान्तरणकारी छन् र संरचनात्मक परिवर्तन गरी वृद्धि उकास्ने खालका छन् ।

महामारीले सिर्जना गरेको संगीन घडीमा यस्ता सुधार तुलनात्मक रूपले सजिलो पनि हुन्छ । यसबाट सिर्जनात्मक विनाश र रचनात्मक सिर्जना तय हुनेछ, जुन निजी लगानी, नवप्रवर्तन र सार्वजनिक सेवा प्रवाहको अभिवृद्धिका लागि महत्वपूर्ण छन् । यिनले उद्यमशील भावनाका साथै बचत लगानी र नवप्रवर्तनलाई पनि प्रोत्साहित गराउँछन् ।

अमेरिकी अर्थशास्त्री डारोन एसिमोग्लु र जेम्स रोबिन्सनले आफ्नो पुस्तक ‘ह्वाई नेसन्स फेल’मा यसखाले ‘ठूला घटनाक्रमले मौजुदा राजनीतिक एवं आर्थिक सन्तुलनलाई खलबल्याउँछ’ भनेका छन् । यस्तो विशेष परिस्थितिमा राष्ट्रले समयमै लिने बाटोले सो मुलुकको समृद्धितर्फको मार्ग निर्धारण गर्छ । यस घडी हाम्रो सरकारसँग आर्थिक वृद्धि, रोजगारी, आय एवं जीवनस्तर उकास्ने दीर्घकालीन नीति बनाउन आवश्यक सहयोग र सहजता दुवै छ । हाम्रा निकम्मा राजनीतिक एवं आर्थिक संस्थाहरूलाई समावेशी वृद्धि अभिवृद्धि गर्ने व्यवस्थामा परिवर्तन गर्नु अपरिहार्य छ भन्ने नै हो ।

नेपाल यस्तो महत्वपूर्ण मोडमा सन् १९५० (राणाशाहीको अन्त्यसँगै)मा, सन् १९९० (प्रजातन्त्रको पुनर्बहालीसँगै) र सन् २००६ मा माओवादी द्वन्द्वको अन्त्य र  सन् २०१५ (भूकम्पपछि)मा पुगेको थियो । दुर्भाग्यवश, हामीले आर्थिक एवं राजनीतिक संस्थाहरूलाई सबैंको सर्वाेत्तम हितका खातिर परिवर्तन गर्ने सबै अवसर गुमायौँ । बरु, राजनीति र व्यवसायको अपवित्र साँठगाँठलाई जमिन, श्रम, पुँजी र बजारमाथि कब्जा जमाउन दियौँ । भाइरस सिर्जित यो महत्वपूर्ण मोडमा हामी फेरि एकपटक समावेशी राजनीतिक एवं आर्थिक संस्थाहरू जन्माउने रूपान्तरणकारी सुधारको अवसरबाट चुकेका छौँ ।

आर्थिक प्याकेज

कोभिड–१९ को आर्थिक पुनर्बहालीको प्याकेज वास्तवमा कुनै अतिरिक्त वित्तीय प्याकेज होेइन । यो प्याकेजमा पहिले नै घोषणा गरिएका राहत एवं पहलकदमीलाई बजेटमा समावेश गरिएको हो । जसमा राष्ट्र बैंकमार्फतको एक खर्बको पुनर्कर्जा सुविधा (सुरुमा यो ६० अर्बको थियो, जसलाई सरकारले एक खर्ब रुपैयाँ पु-याउने घोषणा गरेको छ) र महाव्याधि प्रभावित क्षेत्रलाई सहुलियतपूर्ण ऋण उपलब्ध गराउने भनिएको ५० अर्ब रुपैयाँको छुट्टै कोष नै बजेटमा आएको हो । पुनर्कर्जाको यो सुविधा एक वर्षका लागि हो, तर त्यसलाई अर्काे वर्षका लागि पनि विस्तार गर्न सकिनेछ ।

कामदारको तलब र व्यवसायलाई निरन्तरता दिन सञ्चालन पुँजीको अभावमा परेका व्यवसायलाई यो ५० अर्बको छुट्टै कोषबाट पाँच प्रतिशत ब्याजमा ऋण उपलब्ध गराइनेछ । सरकारले यो कोषमा सार्वजनिक क्षेत्र र विकास साझेदारहरूबाट पनि योगदानको अपेक्षा गरेको छ । यसको सञ्चालनको विस्तृत कार्यविधि आउनै बाँकी छ । यसैले हाललाई यो पुनर्कर्जाको सुविधाको प्रभावकारिता अन्योलग्रस्त छ । 

पुनर्कर्जा र नयाँ राहत कोषबाहेक ब्याज एवं युटिलिटी अनुदान र कर छुटमार्फत ६० अर्ब रुपैयाँको सहुलियत दिएकोे तर्क गरिएको छ । यसैगरी, सात लाख नागरिकलाई रोजगारी दिने योजनाको कुरा पनि छ । जसअन्तर्गत पुग–नपुग ३० प्रतिशत अर्थात् दुई लाखजतिले प्रधानमन्त्री रोजगार कार्यक्रममार्फत प्रत्यक्ष रोजगारी पाउनेछन् । बाँकीलाई सीप अभिवृद्धि तथा प्राविधिक तालिममार्फत रोजगार बनाउने योजना छ ।

लकडाउन अवधिको संगठित क्षेत्रका कामदार एवं रोजगारदाता दुवैले अनिवार्य समाजिक सुरक्षा कोषमा जम्मा गर्नुपर्ने रकम (आधारभूत तलबको ३१ प्रतिशत) सरकारले तिरिदिने भएको छ । बैंक ग्यारेन्टी र करारको अवधि पनि लकडाउन अवधिभरका लागि विस्तार गरिदिने भएको छ । फर्महरूको नवीकरण दस्तुरमा छुट दिइएको छ । सञ्चालन पुँजीका लागि सहुलियतपूर्ण ऋणको व्यवस्था गरेको छ भने स्वास्थ्यकर्मीको बिमालाई विस्तार गरिएको छ ।

तर, व्यवसायीले लिन चाहेनन् भने विशेष पुनर्कर्जा सुविधा र उद्धार कोष प्रभावकारी हुनेछैनन् । बैंकहरूले पनि आफ्ना विश्वसनीय ग्राहकलाई मात्रै थप कर्जा दिन खोज्नेछन् । संकटग्रस्त लघु, साना एवं मझौला उद्यमलाई पुनर्कर्जा दिन इच्छुक नहुन सक्छन् । यसैले पुनर्कर्जाको अवधि र ब्याजदर सामान्य पुनर्कर्जाको दरभन्दा कम नहुँदासम्म राष्ट्र बैंकबाट प्राप्त हुने पुनर्कर्जाको उपयोग थोरैले गर्ने सम्भावना रहन्छ । यसैगरी, अधिकांश लघु एवं मझौला उद्यम चुलिँदो ऋणको किस्ता र व्यवसाय सञ्चालनको अनिश्चिततासँग जुझिरहेका छन् ।

यस्तोमा कामदारलाई तलब दिन नयाँ ऋण लिन सायदै कुनै व्यवसायी इच्छुक हुन सक्लान् । भविष्यमा व्यवसायले अपेक्षित गति लिएन भने के गर्ने भन्ने डरले थप ऋण लिन रोक्नेछ । यसखालका व्यवसायलाई आफ्नो व्यवसाय टिकाउन अतिरिक्त सञ्चालन पुँजीका लागि अझै सहुलियतमा ऋण उपलब्ध गराउनुपर्ने थियो । 

बजेटमा लघु तथा साना उद्योगका लागि आयकरमा २५ देखि ७५ प्रतिशतसम्म छुटको व्यवस्था छ । तर, अधिकांश उद्यम अनौपचारिक क्षेत्रमा सञ्चालित छन् भन्ने कुरालाई हेक्का राखिएन । यसबाहेक यस्तो छुट पहिलेदेखि नै छ । अलिक धेरै समयका लागि विस्तार मात्रै गरिएको हो । यसैले यो उपाय पनि सहयोगीसिद्ध नहुन सक्छ । किनकि, यस्ता छुटको उपयोगिता अघिबाटै न्यून छ । असंगठित क्षेत्रका फर्म र कामदारलाई सम्बोधन गर्न समयानुकूल अपरम्परागत नीति उपाय चाहिन्छ । छुट छोटो अवधि होइन, मध्यम अवधिसम्म दिनुपर्छ । किनकि, तिनको आयमा छिटै सुधार हुनेवाला छैन, बरु सम्भव छ भने आयकर सधै“का लागि घटाइदिनुपर्छ ।

बृहत् अर्थशास्त्रीय परिदृश्य

पहिलो कुरा, स्वास्थ्य क्षेत्रको बजेट र रोजगारीका अस्थायी योजना केन्द्रमा राखेर केवल तत्कालको आवश्यकतामाथि ध्यान केन्द्रित भएर यो बजेट आएको छ । नगद प्रवाह, अनुदान र कर छुटमार्फत माग बढाउनु र अत्यावश्यक वस्तु तथा सेवाको आपूर्ति सहज बनाइराख्नु पनि अल्पकालीन चुनौती हुन् । दिगो पुनर्बहाली मध्यम अवधिको चुनौती हो ।

यसका लागि संगठित एवं असंगठित (ज्यालामा अनुदान वा कामदारलाई काममा रहन प्रोत्साहन दिएर) दुवै क्षेत्रका कामदारलाई बेतलबी बिदा हुनबाट जोगाउनुपर्छ । र, वित्तीय संकटसँग जुझिरहेका साना तथा मझौला उद्यमलाई न्यून दरमा सहुलियतपूर्ण कर्जा, लामो अवधिको पुनर्कर्जा योजना, सञ्चालन पुँजीको र ऋण ग्यारेन्टीका योजना सिर्जना गरेर धराशायी हुनबाट बचाउनुपर्छ ।

संकटमा निजी क्षेत्रलाई सरकारले उसकै बुतामा छोडिदिएको छ । धेरै व्यवसायसँग सञ्चालन बैंक खाता छैन, केही व्यवसाय बैंकका नजरमा पहिलेबाटै ऋणयोग्य छैनन् । यसैले पुनर्कर्जा र सहुलियतपूर्ण कर्जा योजनाले अपेक्षित गति लिन सक्दैन । प्रत्यक्ष वित्तीय प्रोत्साहन अवश्यक थियो, जुन बारेमा बजेट अस्पष्ट छ । राजस्व नीतिले पनि बाटो बिराएको छ, सन्दिग्ध तरिकाले विद्युतीय सवारीसाधन, मल र पेट्रोलियम पदार्थको कर बढेको छ ।

दोस्रो कुरा, महाव्याधिले सरकारको ०७६-७७ को बजेट कार्यान्वयन गर्ने सामर्थ्यमा गम्भीर प्रभाव पारेको छ । यो आर्थिक वर्षमा सरकारले कुल विनियोजित बजेटको केवल ७० प्रतिशत मात्रै उपयोग गर्न सकिने अनुमान छ । चालू, पुँजीगत एवं वित्तीय व्यवस्थापनतर्फ क्रमशः ७३ दशमलव ३ प्रतिशत, ५८ दशमलव ६ प्रतिशत र ७८ दशमलव ९ प्रतिशत खर्च हुने सरकारी अनुमान छ । राजस्व परिचालन पनि प्रभावित भएको छ । सरकारको राजस्व आम्दानी ०७६-७७ को अनुमानित बजेटको ७३ प्रतिशत मात्रै हुने आकलन छ । वैदेशिक अनुदान पनि केवल ५५ दशमलव २ प्रतिशत मात्रै प्राप्त हुने देखिँदै छ । वैदेशिक ऋण पनि ०७६-७७ को बजेटको अनुमानको केवल ३५ प्रतिशत मात्रै उठ्दै छ ।

तेस्रो, वित्तीय संयम राख्नु पनि छ । बजेटमा केही स्वविवेकीय खर्च पनि समावेश छन्, जस्तो कि अग्रमोर्चामा खटिएका कर्मचारीको बिमा, सामाजिक सुरक्षा कोषको भुक्तानी एवं सीप विकासका तालिम आदि । जुन केही समयका लागि हुन सक्छन् । तर, केही खर्च राजनीतिक विचारधाराका कारण पनि आएका छन्, महाव्याधिपछिसमेत कायम रहन सक्छन् । यसले चालू खर्च उच्च बनाउनेछ । यसैले उच्च खर्च र न्यून राजस्वका कारण वित्तीय घाटा जिडिपीको लगभग ८ प्रतिशत हुने प्रक्षेपण छ । यसकारण, मध्यम अवधिको वास्तविक आर्थिक योजना ल्याउनु जरुरी छ ।

चौथो, राजस्व परिचालन वृद्धिको लक्ष्य ०७६-७७ को संशोधित अनुमानभन्दा लगभग २२ प्रतिशत बढी छ । जुन अलि बढी नै महत्वाकांक्षी भयो । यसका दुइटा कारण छन् : पहिलो, लकडाउनपछि भोलि के हुन्छ भन्ने अनिश्चितताका कारण आर्थिक क्रियाकलाप नराम्ररी प्रभावित हुँदै छन्, दोस्रो, आयात र आन्तरिक व्यवसाय तत्कालै तंग्रिहाल्ने अपेक्षा गर्न सकिन्न । यसबाट राजस्व परिचालन प्रभावित हुनेछ ।

वास्वतमा निजी क्षेत्रका खासगरी पर्यटन क्षेत्रका थुप्रै लघु तथा साना एवं मझौला व्यवसाय धराशायी छन् । ०७६-७७ को संशोधित अनुमानको तुलनामा वैदेशिक अनुदान सहयोग ९० प्रतिशतले वृद्धिको अपेक्षा पनि वस्तुगत छैन । भूकम्पपछिसमेत यति धेरै वैदेशिक अनुदान आएको थिएन । त्यसयता कुनै पनि वर्ष सरकारले जति अनुदान सहयोगको अनुमान गरेको छ, त्यसको आधा पनि प्राप्त गर्न सकेको छैन। 

पाँचौँ, वैदेशिक सहयोगको अपेक्षा पनि अलि बढी नै महत्वाकांक्षी छ । वैदेशिक ऋण तथा अनुदान सहयोग तीन खर्ब ६० अर्ब रुपैयाँजति हुने अपेक्षा छ । आपत्कालीन बजेट सहयोगबाहेक, अन्य अधिकांश ऋण परियोजनाको प्रगतिमा भर पर्छन् । पुँजीगत खर्चको क्षमता न्यून भएका कारण अपेक्षित सबै ऋण प्राप्त गर्नु चुनौतीपूर्ण हुनेछ । अहिलेसम्म सरकारले बजेटमा उल्लेख गरिएको ४० प्रतिशत वैदेशिक ऋण मात्रै प्राप्त गर्न सकेको छ । 

छैटौँ, आन्तरिक ऋणमा धेरै ठूलो वृद्धिले तरलता अभाव सिर्जना गर्नेछ । घट्दो विप्रेषण, न्यून पुँजीगत खर्च, उच्च ऋण वृद्धि आदिबाट तरलतामा दबाब छ । साथै, धेरैजसो साना एवं मझौला व्यवसाय नगद प्रवाहको समस्यामा पुगेका कारण तिनले समयमै कर्जाको साँवा–ब्याज भुक्तानी गर्न नसक्दा पनि तरलताको अभाव छ । यसले ब्याजदरलाई उकालो लगाएर निजी लगानी थप निरुत्साहित गर्न सक्छ । यो वर्ष खुद आन्तरिक ऋण सापटी जिडिपीको लगभग ६ प्रतिशत हुने अनुमान छ, जुन ०७२-७३ भन्दा पहिले जिडिपीको शून्य दशमलव २ प्रतिशत मात्रै थियो ।

सातौँ, जिडिपीमा ७ प्रतिशतको वृद्धि लक्ष्यमा थप स्पष्टीकरण आवश्यक छ । लकडाउन अवधिको विस्तार, महाव्याधिको उत्कर्षको अनिश्चितता, माग एवं आपूर्तिको गिरावट आदिका कारण छिटै ‘भी सेप’को पुनर्बहाली अपेक्षा गर्न सकिँदैन । तथ्यांक विभागले जेठबाट आर्थिक गतिविधि बढ्दै जाने अनुमानका आधारमा गरेको ०७६-७७ मा २ दशमलव ३ प्रतिशतको वृद्धि हुने प्रक्षेपणभन्दा पनि वृद्धि खुम्चिने देखिँदै छ । श्रम, पुँजी र आपूर्तिका शृंखलामा पुगेको अवरोधले वृद्धिमा निरन्तर प्रभाव पारिरहनेछ ।

मौसम अनुकूलै रहे पनि श्रम र मलखादको अभावमा कृषि उत्पादन प्रभावित हुनेछ । विद्युत्, ग्यास र जलविद्युत्मा अपेक्षित वृद्धिका बाबजुद औद्योगिक गतिविधि दबाबमै रहनेछन् । भलै, माथिल्लो तामाकोसी र मेलम्ची सम्पन्न भएर थपिऊन् । निर्माणका गतिविधि पनि औसतभन्दा तलै रहनेछन् । खानी एवं उत्खननका गतिविधिमा पनि यस्तै हुनेछ । केही उत्पादनमूलक कम्पनी उठ्नै नसक्ने अवस्थामा पुग्न सक्छन् ।

उत्पादन थाल्न सक्षम कम्पनीले पनि पूर्ण क्षमताको उपयोग गर्न पाउनेछैनन् र उल्लेख्य कमीको साक्षात्कार गर्नेछन् । सेवा क्षेत्रको अवस्था पनि फरक छैन । आयातमा अवरोध कायमै रहने हुनाले थोक तथा खुद्रा व्यापारमा प्रभाव कायमै रहनेछ । नेपालको कृषि एवं उत्पादनमूलक उद्योगको पूर्ण क्षमता प्रदर्शन हुनेछैन । पर्यटन एवं ट्राभल क्षेत्र कहिलेसम्ममा सामान्य अवस्थामा फर्किएला, त्यो अनिश्चित छ । त्यसैगरी, हवाई र शिक्षा क्षेत्र पनि प्रभावित नै रहनेछन् । त्यसैले कुनै पनि क्षेत्रको परिदृश्य उत्साहजनक छैन । यस्तो विषय परिदृश्य नभोगेको ०७६-७७ को वास्तविक जिडिपी वृद्धिसमेत संकुचित हुने देखिएको सन्दर्भमा ०७७-७८ को यो ७ प्रतिशत वृद्धिको लक्ष्य ज्यादै महत्वाकांक्षी हो ।