The Cash Demonetisation Economy
A year on, the bluff has been called on the
stated objectives of demonetisation, especially tackling black money. A
few grains of positives cannot stand up to the wrecking ball it took to
the Indian economy.

It has been copping much of the blame for the maladies
afflicting the Indian economy, and it is at the fault line of all
economic debates. In many ways, November 8, 2016 would go down as a
watershed day for the economy. In one stroke, the government had
launched a demonetisation of large denomination currency notes of Rs 500
and 1,000 in a bid to counter black money, counterfeit notes and
funding of terror.
One year later, a cross section of the economy is still smarting from
the sharp blows of that exercise: the GDP is severely hit, the
manufacturing sector significantly affected and small and medium sectors
worst hit. Whether demonetisation would achieve its objectives was a
pertinent question from the earliest days; now, with the tenebrous air
about the economy, they have gained a picquancy.
Economists and monetary experts have criticised the move as being
unplanned and badly executed, as people across India had to endure
months-long hardships—serpentine queues for withdrawing cash, sometimes
lasting for days, were the norm, as remonetisation was slow and grossly
inadequate to meet needs. After a year, those pains linger on
obstinately.
With SMEs hit
badly, jobs lost, agricultural output slated to fall, the government’s
assumption that demonetisation would not affect the economy was wrong.
Experts say that much of the reasons for the falling
GDP growth for six consecutive quarters can be attributed to
demonetisation, with crippling effects on cash-based economic activity
that remains partially paralysed. Then also, economic activity like
discretionary buying was postponed, resulting in loss of business.
Assessed in different times, as GDP numbers for 2016-17 as well as
for the first quarter of 2017-18 show, there is a marked adverse impact
on GDP growth, largely due to a broad-based deceleration in aggregate
demand in both the industrial and the services sector.
As the unorganised segment in the services sector is bigger, the
negative impact is larger there (without the government sector). The
informal sector, comprising nearly one-third of the economy and heavily
cash-based, is severely affected, and the future may portend a drop in
employment and loss of person-days. The deleterious impact is further
aggravated due to implementation issues in the GST.
Ajit Ranade, economist, AV Birla Group, says, “It was a drastic reset
to public cynicism about corruption. It was unthinkable that 86 per
cent of the currency could be made illegal overnight. It was an
unthinkably bold move. It was like a jolt to the economy.” Ranade feels
it is difficult to judge if demonetisation was a success or not, as
there was no pre-defined metric to judge its success, as it was
basically a political decision, not an economic one. Yet, he says it
didn’t measure up to its avowed metrics:
a) fighting corruption; b) curbing counterfeit currency;
c) fighting terror-funding; d) improving digital payments;
e) widening the tax net.
a) fighting corruption; b) curbing counterfeit currency;
c) fighting terror-funding; d) improving digital payments;
e) widening the tax net.
The jobs lost in the informal and agricultural economy, where
transactions are mostly in cash, did not come back, just like business
lost by units like restaurants were not recovered, says Ranade. “Then,
the government had to bear a significant cost of demonetisation.
Dividend paid by the RBI to the Central government was just about Rs
30,000 crore, as against Rs 60-65,000 crore last year,” he says.
Let us look at what happened immediately after demonetisation.
Quarterly GDP growth saw a deterioration since the third quarter of FY17
and reached a three-year low of 5.7 per cent in first quarter of FY18.
Demonetisation has to bear the blame for this steep fall in the last
three quarters. Also, agricultural output this year is expected to be
lower. Under the currency ban shock, factory output or IIP growth
declined to 2.6 per cent in December 2016, from 5.7 per cent in
November 2016. Finally, bank credit growth sharply declined shortly
after the fateful deed.
Not just experts, the World Bank too has said that demonetisation and
GST affected India’s GDP growth. While it pegs GDP growth at about 7
per cent in 2017, the IMF estimates it to be a lower 6.7 per cent.
With widespread consensus that demonetisation did not achieve its
stated objectives, there have been spirited debates on its causes and
effects.
Arun Kumar, an authority on black money, says demonetisation did not
tackle black economy, as cash accounts for only 1 per cent of black
wealth while the rest of it is in gold, land and hawala transactions. In
2016, black income generation was of Rs 93 lakh crore, including in
cash, while black wealth generation for that year would be about Rs
300-400 lakh crore, mostly in gold, land and hawala. “With 99 per cent
of the cash coming back to the system, you have affected just 0.0001 per
cent of black wealth in the country,” he says.
According to RBI, 99 per cent of the Rs 15.44 lakh crore of currency
has been deposited. So, only one per cent, or Rs 15,000 crore is left.
Of this, Rs 8,000 crore was with corporate banks, which leaves just Rs
7,000 crore. “In effect, demonetisation of black money has not taken
place with demonetisation,” says Kumar.
Ranade agrees. “Black money has two components—stock, which is in the
form of gold, land and non-cash forms; and flow, which is cash. Through
demonetisation, only the flow part of black money has been attacked.”
Says Abheek Barua, economist with HDFC Bank, “There was expectation
that black money would not come back and RBI’s liability would be
reduced. It would have happened if a lower percentage of the notes came
back. The assumption that the economy would be unaffected by the
monetary shock was wrong...the government was wrong on that. The
refuelling process has its own problems and notes took longer to get
back into the system.”
Experts are still
trying to figure out the reasons of such a drastic, hasty and
ill-prepared step. The two gains are a wider tax base and a better
digital
payments system.
Kumar contests the GDP figures given out by the
government. “The unorganised sector, which is 45 per cent of the GDP,
took a 50 per cent hit because of demonetisation. Surveys by SBI and
PHDCCI show the blow was more, at 60-80 per cent. This leads to a -20
per cent rate of growth. With the organised sector growing by five per
cent the net growth would still be negative in November-December 2016.
So, for the entire year, growth should have been zero per cent, as
against the 7 per cent being stated. Even though note shortage has
declined, there would be a long-term slowdown of the economy and growth
should be about 0-1 per cent only, as post June, GST had also started
affecting the economy.”
Demonetisation touches a raw nerve within the industry too. Anil
Khaitan, president of PHD Chamber of Commerce and Industry, which has
several small and medium enterprises (SMEs) as its members, says,
“Demonetisation was a good step but wrongly done. When you demonetise
currency, you should have 1.5 times the stock of alternative currency.
We did not have that. Apart from the UP elections, there was no benefit
of demonetisation. But small and medium industry was badly hit as they
operated in cash. Such firms have not been able to recover losses and
thousands of SSI units had to close down.”
Barua echoes this. “The problem is with the unorganised and SME
sector, a large part of which operated in cash. But there was
operational unpreparedness and little clarity of communication on the
government’s part. The RBI kept mum as all the instructions and
communication came from New Delhi.”
Ranen Banerjee, partner, PwC India, agrees: “The spillover impact of
DeMo is more in the urban informal and construction sector. In turn,
slowdown in urban and informal economy has had some impact on the rural
economy.”
Experts are still trying to figure out why the government took such a
massive step, then executed it in a hurry. Economist N.R. Bhanumurthy
says, “Even after a year, the main reasons behind such a drastic step
still appear ambiguous. Firstly, this should have not happened as it
dealt a huge shock to a relatively stable and fast-growing economy. One
could not rule out political economy considerations behind this shock.
And preparedness was sorely lacking. The RBI, the only authorised
institution to deal with currency, was kept out of the decision-making
process. While the purpose was to reduce black money, introduction of Rs
2,000 notes was unconvincing. Overall, the whole remonetisation
process was haphazard.”
While the industry and the economy have been gravely affected, there
is a definite, adverse impact on money supply. “RBI data shows that
although most demonetised currency is exchanged, there is a decline of
nearly 15 per cent of money supply (reserve money) even after over 99
per cent of old currency is remonetised. This should have led to
increase in velocity of circulation of money, as well as money
multiplier. As money is neutral, decline in reserve money should have
contributed to reduction in inflation until August,” says Bhanumurthy.
What are the positives, if any, then? The gain from demonetisation is
that we now have a potentially wider tax base and a better digital
payments system. But does it set off the monstrous hash that was the
whole exercise, leading to hardship, unemployment, even pitiable
deaths, amongst the most vulnerable? The final word on demonetisation
is yet to emerge. As the government loudly parrots its piddly gains,
hoping to hide its failure to rein in black money, India Inc and the
millions who eke out a living bore the burden. Their backs are bent
still.
Comments
Post a Comment