Business consultant Adrian Mutton says it takes courage for a foreign corporation to make a big-ticket investment in India given the uncertainties thrown up by capricious twists in government policy.
Companies have long griped about India’s byzantine rules and suffocating bureaucracy, but recent policy flip-flops have further soured the investor mood.
“You have got to be a pretty brave CEO to gamble on a major investment decision in India, especially if you think that decision may be overturned,” said Mutton, who heads India-based Sannam S4, a consultancy which helps firms enter India.
The latest, and for many investors most egregious government measure, was announced in last month’s budget which included provisions allowing India to tax foreign takeovers retroactively to 1962.
The measure seeks to override an Indian Supreme Court judgement in January that rejected a US$2.2-billion tax bill slapped on British phone giant Vodafone over its 2007 purchase of a local operator.
“The Indian government is perhaps hoping the country’s economic growth potential will retain companies like Vodafone,” said Deepak Lalwani, chief of India-focused investment consultancy Lalcap.
“However, fresh capital will be fearful of the business and investment climate and will be hesitant to come,” he said, cautioning that poor investor sentiment “might dramatically slow future foreign capital.”
Already, gross foreign direct investment in India has fallen by a quarter to US$20.3 billion in the fiscal year that ended last month, down from US$27.1 billion the previous year, according to official figures.
In a letter to India Prime Minister Manmohan Singh earlier this month, seven global business groups, including the Confederation of British Industry and the US Business Roundtable, warned of a “widespread reconsideration of the costs and benefits of investing in India.”
The investment slowdown comes as India urgently needs foreign funds to upgrade its dilapidated airports, roads, ports and other infrastructure in order to ease bottlenecks and spur growth.
Economic expansion for the last fiscal year is estimated to have been about 6.9 percent, the -second-slowest rate in a decade.
The retroactive change to India’s tax code was only the latest piece of news to dismay foreign investors, already preoccupied by policy paralysis on reforms to liberalize the economy and corruption.
The investment plans of Norwegian telecom giant Telenor and other foreign firms who had jumped into the world’s second-largest mobile market were left in tatters earlier this year when the Supreme Court of India canceled their licenses.
The court’s move stemmed from a scandal in which the government had issued mobile licenses in 2008 at throw-away prices, costing the public treasury up to US$39 billion, in what is believed to be India’s biggest graft case.
The license cancelation “was a shock for the foreign operators, especially as this was a ruling on a government policy decision,” said Kamlesh Bhatia, India research director at global consultancy Gartner.
In December last year, in a major U-turn, the government reversed a decision to allow foreign supermarkets into India after a key ruling coalition ally said the move could hurt millions of small shopkeepers in the country.
“The reform process has really just fallen apart,” Indian Council on Global Relations head Manjeet Kripalani said.
Further discouragement has come from a slew of stalled projects, including South Korean steelmaker POSCO’s plans to build a US$12-billion steel mill — first announced in 2005 and trumpeted as India’s biggest foreign investment deal.
Late last month, an Indian tribunal suspended environmental clearance for the plant, keeping the project in limbo.
However, many global companies have little choice but to enter the increasingly affluent country of 1.2 billion people if they want to boost revenues in light of the slowdown in developed economies, Mutton said.
“You cannot afford not to be in India as a marketplace when you look at the huge population,” says Mutton, whose India advisory business has tripled in size over the past few years.
“In boardrooms around the world, people are saying if we are going to deliver growth, where do we go? India inevitably comes up. They may know it will be a pain in the backside, but they have to make the best of the situation,” he said.
GEOPOLITICAL ISSUES? The economics ministry said that political factors should not affect supply chains linking global satellite firms and Taiwanese manufacturers Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies Corp (SpaceX) asked Taiwanese suppliers to transfer manufacturing out of Taiwan, leading to some relocating portions of their supply chain, according to sources employed by and close to the equipment makers and corporate documents. A source at a company that is one of the numerous subcontractors that provide components for SpaceX’s Starlink satellite Internet products said that SpaceX asked their manufacturers to produce outside of Taiwan because of geopolitical risks, pushing at least one to move production to Vietnam. A second source who collaborates with Taiwanese satellite component makers in the nation said that suppliers were directly
Top Taiwanese officials yesterday moved to ease concern about the potential fallout of Donald Trump’s return to the White House, making a case that the technology restrictions promised by the former US president against China would outweigh the risks to the island. The prospect of Trump’s victory in this week’s election is a worry for Taipei given the Republican nominee in the past cast doubt over the US commitment to defend it from Beijing. But other policies championed by Trump toward China hold some appeal for Taiwan. National Development Council Minister Paul Liu (劉鏡清) described the proposed technology curbs as potentially having
Taiwan’s technology protection rules prohibits Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC, 台積電) from producing 2-nanometer chips abroad, so the company must keep its most cutting-edge technology at home, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) said yesterday. Kuo made the remarks in response to concerns that TSMC might be forced to produce advanced 2-nanometer chips at its fabs in Arizona ahead of schedule after former US president Donald Trump was re-elected as the next US president on Tuesday. “Since Taiwan has related regulations to protect its own technologies, TSMC cannot produce 2-nanometer chips overseas currently,” Kuo said at a meeting of the legislature’s
EXPORT CONTROLS: US lawmakers have grown more concerned that the US Department of Commerce might not be aggressively enforcing its chip restrictions The US on Friday said it imposed a US$500,000 penalty on New York-based GlobalFoundries Inc, the world’s third-largest contract chipmaker, for shipping chips without authorization to an affiliate of blacklisted Chinese chipmaker Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp (SMIC, 中芯). The US Department of Commerce in a statement said GlobalFoundries sent 74 shipments worth US$17.1 million to SJ Semiconductor Corp (盛合晶微半導體), an affiliate of SMIC, without seeking a license. Both SMIC and SJ Semiconductor were added to the department’s trade restriction Entity List in 2020 over SMIC’s alleged ties to the Chinese military-industrial complex. SMIC has denied wrongdoing. Exports to firms on the list