In order to expand the tax base
of personal income tax, Bibek Debroy, a Niti Aayog member, proposed at a press
conference that besides removing tax-exemptions, we can also “tax the rural
sector including agricultural income above a certain threshold.” Incidentally,
even the economic survey report of 2016 opined that by taxing agriculturists
the tax base can be increased significantly.
However, looking at the political
sensitivity of the proposal, the Finance Minister, Arun Jaitley has been quite
quick in categorically stating that the government has no plans to tax farmers.
Intriguingly, he also said, “As per the constitutional allocation of powers,
the central government has no jurisdiction to impose tax on agricultural
income.”
For quite some time, it is being
argued that excluding farm income that accounts for about 15% of India’s GDP of
around $2.2 tn is what indeed compelling the government to keep personal income
tax rates high. That aside, tax department often alleges that agricultural
income is used as a conduit to avoid taxes by the rich, including corporates.
According to the Finance Ministry reports, between 2007-08 and 2015-16, 2,746
entities and individuals declared agricultural income of above Rs. 1 cr. And no
wonder if this led to heart burn among the urban-based salaried class of
tax-payers, for they feel that “a large number of rich farmers, who earn more
than salaried employees, get away with by paying no tax at all.”
Against this backdrop, Debroy’s/Niti
Aayog’s proposal to tax farmers assumes significance, calling for a cautious
examination of the proposal. First things first: Given the intrinsic
vulnerability of agriculture to exogenous shocks, it is a herculean task to
compute the cost of cultivation of different crops, that too, in different
geographies of the country and arrive at the profits. In absence of a set
criteria to define the influence of variables such as rainfall, soil type,
average temperatures, incidence of pests and diseases, means of irrigation,
etc., on the ultimate crop yield, it becomes difficult to arrive at an
objective assessment of costs and profits. Secondly, majority of the farmers use cattle-drawn
agricultural implements in cultivating crops. Provision of depreciation under agricultural
implements and cattle is a tricky proposition. Over it, bulk of the Indian
farmers falling under the category of
small and marginal farmers category are not known to maintain books of accounts,
nor do they carry out their transactions through banking channels.
All this obviously creates an
insurmountable information-vacuum. Collection of information in such a syndrome
becomes costly. And assessing taxable income sans reliable information means
relying on the declarations made by the farmers and this would simply become
arbitrary. This arbitrariness gives ample room for disputes/appeals and
granting discretionary powers to the bureaucracy means affording scope for
corruption.
That aside, farmers in India,
though not taxed directly—except of course, Tea, Coffee and Rubber Plantations
where certain percentage of income generated from these sources are subjected
to income tax—do face many kinds of implicit taxes: Controls on exports, that too, when
international prices are soaring high,
imposition of stock limits by local governments and restrictions on free
movement of agricultural produce across the state boundaries are all known to suppress farm gate prices,
land ceiling, and importantly, the endless exploitation of farmers by greedy
traders and commission agents at the mandis by offering such prices
which do not cover even production costs, are all implicit taxes that the
farming community pays today.
Factors such as highly fragmented
holdings across the nation, which offer little scope for modernization of
agricultural practices, poor irrigational facilities, little or no scope for
capital outlay resulting in stagnation of yields, and the poor bargaining power
of the farmers (for getting better prices) hardly leave much with the farmers
that could be taxed. Against this backdrop, any attempt to tax farm income may
not prove economical vis-a-vis meagre revenue for the exchequer.
To be precise, agriculture is a
hard-to-tax sector, and therefore any move in this direction calls for careful
calibrations.
Land owned by absentee land lords, tilled and cultivated by tenants is to be excluded from the ambit and scope of this discussion as the returns are accounted and taxed against the recipient land owner whose primary income mostly is non-agricultural.
ReplyDelete