Ask any average middle class person what they want from the Budget and the answer is lower prices and less tax. In a way these are contradictory goals because lower tax rates could mean a revenue shortfall. A tax revenue shortfall can cause a government to borrow more, causing the deficit to increase and that could cause a price rise. Didn’t make the link? Let me try and unpack this. The annual budget presentation is a financial statement of the central government where the collection of revenues and its spending is laid out. The government gets most of its revenue from taxes (both direct and indirect) and about one-fifth from non-tax sources. Direct taxes are paid by companies and individuals under various heads (income tax, tax on house property, tax on profits and so on). Of the total revenue, income tax on non corporates (that means us) is about one-fifth of the total revenue for the year. Corporations pay a bit more than we pay. Almost half of the revenue comes from indirect taxes—it used to be excise and sales tax, but now this revenue comes through goods and services tax (GST). The shortfall in revenue over what has to be spent is called a “deficit”. This deficit gets funded largely through the money the government borrows.
Two and a half months after T.S. Vijayan retired, the insurance regulatory body, the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (Irdai), has got its 5th chairman, Subhash Chandra Khuntia. A former chief secretary to the Karnataka government, he has his desk overloaded as he takes over the wheel of a body that regulates firms managing over Rs28 trillion of household savings through life insurance and another Rs2.2 trillion in the non-life insurance space.
The insurance regulator has been an outlier in the financial regulatory space. While disagreements with the government by independent regulators are well reported, the conduct of the insurance regulator has left policy makers, the financial sector and analysts open mouthed. Many decisions over the past few years have been in the face of global moves by regulators on issues of costs and transparency. Raising front commissions in life insurance products, repackaging what were illegal payouts as “rewards”, doing away with a persistency target to ensure that agents don’t churn policyholders and continuing with fuzzy disclosures in both life and general insurance products are just some of the actions that have left households even more vulnerable to mis-selling and outright fraud by banks and agents.