Skip to main content

Govt, Congress united by 'imbecility': Order restricting investments from 'neighbours'

By Mohan Guruswamy*
A couple of days ago Rahul Gandhi demanded that the government "protect" Indian corporations from takeover by cash flush Chinese entities. He was spurred after it was announced that the Peoples Bank of China (PBOC) has increased its shareholding in HDFC from 0.8% to 1.01%. The Chinese Central Bank had bought these 1,74,92,909 crore HDFC shares worth about Rs 2900 crore between January and March 2020. This level of shareholding won’t even give PBOC a stool next to the watchman's at HDFC’s front door.
Yet the government responded to this somewhat immature and kneejerk demand with surprising alacrity. It responded the very next day with a hasty order that entities from countries that share land borders with India -- Pakistan, Afghanistan, China, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh and Myanmar -- have to take permission from the government prior to making investment. In a day when money doesn’t move in chests atop camels, what have land borders got to do with it? This order is just not artful enough to conceal that it is aimed at China.
As before, investors from countries not covered by the new policy only have to inform the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) after a transaction rather than asking for prior permission from the relevant government department. That means investors from Mauritius ($8.1 billion in 2019) and Singapore ($16.2 billion in 2019), from where about 50% of our FDI ($49 billion in 2019) comes and USA, UK, EU and Russia etc. can invest as usual. The first two countries are the more favored conduits for Indian money stashed overseas.
According to the Department for the Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) India received FDI from China worth $2.34 billion (Rs 14.846 crore) between April 2000 and December 2019. This merely rose from $1.4 billion by about $900 million in the Modi era.
During the same period, India has attracted Rs 48 lakh from Bangladesh, Rs 18.18 crore from Nepal, Rs 35.78 crore from Myanmar, and Rs 16.42 crore from Afghanistan. The Chinese portfolio investments in startup companies such as Snapdeal, Ola, Swiggy, Paytm etc. now amount a little over $6 billion. In all this makes overall Chinese investment in India an unthreatening 1.3% of the cumulative FDI ($621 billion) since 2000.
The note specifically aims at curbing “opportunistic takeovers or acquisitions” ignoring the reality that all such buys are just that. And let us not forget that the Jaguar-Land Rover and SsangYong sales to Tata Motors and Mahindra’s were distressed sales. Good times and bad times are equally opportune for corporate buys. Can the government tell us why American or British or Korean FDI are better than Chinese investments in these times?
The governments order is a blanket order that does not distinguish between greenfield or brownfield investments or listed and unlisted companies. For all practical purposes, it just is a case by case handbrake on Chinese investments. Our policy hitherto allowed FDI in particularly distressed sectors like construction and real estate. These sectors were stressed long before the advent of Covid-19.
There are more distressed sectors now, so shouldn’t we be getting the cash flush Chinese to invest in them? It’s not that Indian companies are not flush with cash. We have as many as 52 companies with cash reserves in excess of Rs 25000 each. The problem is that they are not investing in India and have showed a marked preference to invest abroad. In March 2020 alone Indian FDI outflows touched $2.68 billion. It was $2.34 billion in March 2019.
China-made TV and mobile phone kits keep flooding India as do firecrackers, kites, manja, pichkaris, milk-drinking plastic Ganeshas
For over a decade Indian Prime Ministers have been soliciting Chinese investment, partly to mitigate the huge trade deficits we have been posting with it. Last year it was $57.4 billion. Heavens are not going to fall if Chinese companies invest more like when SAIC (MG cars) took over the defunct GM plants. Or if Haier competes more aggressively with the dominant positions of Samsung and LG in white goods. India benefits by this. 
One can understand if we have a policy against Huawei in 5G, but we have welcomed it. Chinese investors have made big bets in India's startups like Flipkart, PayTM, Zomato etc. and driven them up to huge valuations.
Instead of FDI, we should be taking a good look at the growing trade deficit with China and narrowing it down. Yet we have no policy on it. TV and mobile phone kits keep flooding India as do firecrackers, kites and manja, pichkaris and milk drinking plastic Ganeshas. Then we have big retailers like IKEA, which mostly sell Chinese goods.
Finally, we must realize that money doesn’t have any color. The litmus test for FDI should only be whether it adds value to our economy and adds to our employment. Any company, irrespective of the predominant nationality of its shareholding, is an Indian corporate citizen and is bound by Indian laws and policies.
Thus, if the government demands that, say, Nestles and Brooke Bond must export 20% of their instant coffee or face fiscal disincentives, or buy coffee or cocoa beans only from local producers, they have to comply. And contemplate this. Even in a conflict with China, SAIC and Haier will keep producing in India, like Bayer kept producing poison gas for the Allies and Germans during the First World War.
---
*Well-known policy analyst. Source: Author’s Facebook timeline

Comments

TRENDING

Top upper caste judges 'biased' towards Dalit colleagues: US Bar Association report

By Rajiv Shah  A high profile report prepared by the influential  American Bar Association (ABA) Center for Human Rights , taking note of the fact that “in the 70-year history of the Indian Republic, only six Dalit judges have been appointed to the Supreme Court”, has taken strong exception to what it calls “lack of representation of Dalits” in the legal profession and the judiciary.

Savarkar 'criminally betrayed' Netaji and his INA by siding with the British rulers

By Shamsul Islam* RSS-BJP rulers of India have been trying to show off as great fans of Netaji. But Indians must know what role ideological parents of today's RSS/BJP played against Netaji and Indian National Army (INA). The Hindu Mahasabha and RSS which always had prominent lawyers on their rolls made no attempt to defend the INA accused at Red Fort trials.

Billion vaccine doses? Devil is in details: 70% haven't got 2nd jab; numbers jacked up

By Prof Ujjwal K Chowdhury*  India has reached the one billion Covid-19 vaccinations milestone. It is indeed a great news and a big salute to the less paid ordinary health-workers in interiors of India for this feat. The government wants all of India's 944 million adults to get vaccinated this year. Around three-quarters of adults in the country of 1.3 billion people have had one shot and around 30 percent are fully vaccinated, the government says.

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Our Representative Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Failure of 'trickle down theory' behind India's poor Global Hunger Index rating

By Dr Gian Singh*  On October 14, 2021, two organisations, Concern Worldwide (An Irish aid agency) and WeltHungerHilfe (a German organization that researches the problem of global hunger), jointly published the Global Hunger Index (GHI) for 2021. These organizations have included 116 countries in the world hunger rankings.

Global Hunger Index: Govt of India response pathetic, 'lacks' scientific empirical evidence

By Fr Cedric Prakash SJ* Come 16 October – and the world once again focused on the most basic need for a person’s survival: food! The first World Food Day was observed in 1994, to mark the launch of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. Ever since, the day is marked to highlight the need and importance of food security across the world. The significance is accentuated especially in these difficult times like the C-19 povidandemic. The theme for 2021 is ‘Safe Food Now for a Healthier Tomorrow’, emphasising on the various immediate and long-term benefits of consuming safe and healthy food.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Fresh efforts to subsume Buddhism within Hindu fold 'undermining' Ambedkar

By Aviral Anand*  From Yeola in 1935, when Dr Ambedkar announced that he would not die a Hindu, to Nagpur in 1956 when he converted to Buddhism, is a considerable distance in time. But, there was in him a need to make a public announcement in 1935 about moving away from Hinduism. 

March opposes Sabarmati Ashram renovation: 'Mahatmaji had kept open for access to all'

Counterview Desk A Sevagram to Sabarmati march, which began on October 17 from Wardha (Maharashtra) and will end on October 24 in Ahmedabad (Gujarat), has demanded that the Sabarmati Ashram, the government should not impose "the fashion and glitz of a shallow modernity" at the cost of Rs 1,200 crore, in the name of renovating the Ashram founded by Gandhiji.

Nehru legacy? GDP-centric growth has had 'no positive impact' on people's livelihood

By Dr Kamal Nayan Kabra*  Experience has shown that many counties adopt measures to go in for the growth of their GDP, basically in the existing framework, though also going in for, at the same time, new products and technologies and similar other changes. It is believed that by means of this process enough new job opportunities would emerge to meet the economy’s needs both in terms of numbers as also in terms of the requisite remuneration (wages) as also the supplies of the goods and services to maintain the economy on an even keel.