Ten years after he was first elected India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi might finally have diagnosed why India’s growth, while better than in many countries, has not taken off the way his supporters expected in 2014.
However, he still needs to prove he is willing to do what it takes to fix the problem.
The federal budget that Indian Minister of Finance Nirmala Sitharaman announced earlier this week is to serve as the major economic policy road map for the year. It wisely focused on three issues: debt, factor markets such as land and labor, and jobs. All are drags on growth.
Modi has credibility on the first. His governments have unquestionably been fiscally conservative. Even in this budget, released in an election year when most politicians would have turned on the spending taps, Sitharaman reduced the fiscal deficit target by 0.2 percentage points from earlier projections, to 4.9 percent of GDP.
Deficits have been high enough and growth low enough for long enough that India’s public debt has reached worrisome proportions, topping 80 percent of GDP earlier this year. Nevertheless, when Sitharaman said that “central government debt will be on a declining path as a percentage of GDP,” most investors likely believed her.
That is emphatically not the case for the government’s other pledges. Even if debt is lowered, thereby making more funds available for the private sector, investors are not going to put that money to work until they see the sort of efficient and predictable business environment that makes it easy to raise credit, build companies and hire people.
They also need markets: either enough consumers in the country with wages high enough to create demand or thriving export markets. The past decade has instead seen underwhelming job growth and stagnant wages. Domestic consumption has stuttered as a result.
Meanwhile, tariffs are too high and unpredictable for domestic producers to easily participate in global value chains.
For the first time, Modi’s government has promised to address both problems. The budget pledged a new “economic policy framework” that would guide sweeping reforms, particularly of the factors of production: land, labor and credit.
This comes as a surprise. Modi had to roll back an earlier attempt to change land acquisition rules in the face of sustained protests. After that, the fundamental reforms that economists champion seemed to be off the table. Sitharaman also promised to spend the next six months reviewing tariffs with an eye to lowering them.
The pledges sound great on paper. If the government follows through by deregulating factor markets, lowering tariff barriers and spurring domestic demand, Indian growth should indeed take off.
However, while Modi has stored up credibility as a fiscal hawk, he has none left as a reformer. Ten years ago, when he swept India’s right-wing into office alongside hopeful, and fanciful, comparisons to former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher and former US president Ronald Reagan, many observers imagined him to be a classic economic liberal. Had he proposed a similar policy framework in his first budget, economists would have swooned.
Today, expectations are far more muted. Modi has governed as a statist, not a reformer. He has demonstrated a marked preference for publicly run companies and a disdain for independent regulators.
That none of this comes naturally to him can be seen in the budget’s employment policies, which are mostly a rehash of opposition ideas — and not very good ones. Both the “employment-linked incentives” for corporations to hire and subsidies for India’s top 500 companies to take on thousands of interns transfer the job of preparing the workforce for formal employment onto the private sector. They give politicians a reason to meddle in the hiring practices of private companies — the last thing an already sclerotic job market needs.
Modi’s diagnosis of what has gone wrong with India’s growth has come 10 years too late. Few investors are likely believe his promises of reform. Meanwhile, problems with productivity, regulation and skills have deepened.
Modi would have to work even harder to convince investors he is serious, and there is little reason to think he would try that hard.
Mihir Sharma is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist, a senior fellow at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi and author of Restart: The Last Chance for the Indian Economy.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then