Taxing IT to Avoid Financial Trouble

Satyam fiasco has brought out a big question on how to check the business models and financial reporting of the Information Technology companies. Most of the technology companies in India have been enjoying tax exemptions over a decade and have also got exemption for a few years more.

As these companies are not taxed, their financial reporting can easily be fudged by anyone. Any IT company, which does not pay any tax on its revenues, can overstate it to mind boggling proportion without even being worried about the consequences. A simple and symbolic tax could be answer to all such malicious activity as ones these companies would be forced to pay tax on revenue and disclose their financial statement it would become tough for companies to continuously over state their revenues for more than a year.

There is also need to check on the business models of the companies, most of them are under tax exemptions and are now pulling themselves under SEZ status, it has become difficult to keep a tab on their functioning. Government needs to bring in regulation for disclosure of forex revenue generated from such units and the banks where they are parked. This measure will effectively keep a check on the financial activities of such IT firms and will also discourage many fly-by-night operators from posing as Information Technology firms to manipulate their IT SEZ status for retail purposes.

Plebiscite to solve farmer’s plight and land acquisition for industrialisation?

Maharashtra’s decision to hold plebiscite for MahaSEZ is radically different from WBengal’s decision on land allotment for Tata. This is evolutionary attempt in land acquisition policy for industrialisation. The news of plebiscite is bound to give sleepless nights for corporate, who will find it difficult to deal with the new situation. The new arrangement brings in a new party into the process.

The process gives farmers/land owners right to decide whether they would like to part of an industrial project or not. This is a good step in reducing the backlash over industrialisation in rural areas. It would also give farmers better say in rejecting any proposal to acquire land without a good and sustainable package.

However, there are also chances of manipulation of farmer’s interest as any misinformation would jeopardise interest of both stakeholders. Also unclear is what would happen when a minority of farmers oppose the project. The present policy provides that government will buy only 30% of total land for the project. Will government buy that small portion of land in case of opposition by farmers? This would add more uncertainty.

Government needs to bring in more clarity to the acquisition process, it should take notice of the new experiments and concepts, but until and unless government brings in new measures and rationalise the land acquisition, it will remain contentious issue.