Tax and the macroeconomic situation

23 Apr, 2011

We only raise about 8-9 percent of our GDP as tax. This is definitely not enough for the government, to sustain all the expenditures that we, as a society, want to incur. We need to move to above 15% of GDP or so to ensure adequate coverage of the needed expenditures.
It is true that there is corruption in expenditures, and the priorities set for expenditures, in terms of both larger priorities (defence versus health/education/social sector) and project level priorities (Daanish schools/cadet colleges versus public school reforms, underpasses versus public transport system) are also very problematic. And there is no trust in government and most other state institutions.
It is also the case that the poor and working classes of the country, and those who honestly file taxes are already taxed heavily in Pakistan. Income tax rates are quite in line with international norms, there is a sales tax on most things people consume and then there are taxes and levies of all sorts on a lot of others things. It is difficult to make a strong case for additional taxation for these people. With bulk of our taxes actually coming from sales tax and presumptive forms of income taxation and/or through withholding, the tax system is quite punitive towards those who are already in the net, and does not have significant progressivity too (to address equity concerns), and given the wealth of loopholes/exemptions left in the system for the rich and powerful, it is no wonder that people have little or no trust in credibility of new pronouncements from the government.
The majority of the rich do not pay taxes or do not pay their 'fair' share of taxes in the country. Many businesses are not in the net, are not documented, there is a big informal economy, there is significant underground economy, there are issues of smuggling and there is significant corruption in tax collection. Though the government keeps announcing that it is going to work on widening the tax net, progress in this direction, over the last many decades, has been dismal. In fact, FBR has been going through 'reforms' for that last 20 or more years but we still have a very small tax base and have few clues as to how the tax base is going to be expanded over the next few years.
People also feel, and rightly, that there are significant areas for taxation and ways of taxing the rich that the state, over the years, has surrendered or left unexploited, and due to entrenched interest group activity reasons. Wealth tax, inheritance tax, and gift tax have been removed from the tax toolkit over the last few decades. Capital gains are not taxed properly. Property tax has not been established fully even in old urban areas far less suburban and peri-urban areas. Should there also be a land tax? Agriculture income tax is a major bone of contention. It seems very unfair that income from agricultural activity, if it exceeds the taxable limit imposed on income from other types of activity, should not be in the tax net. The resistance to these taxes, on the part of the elite, erodes the state's case for more taxes with the larger population.
The other side of the coin is that the expenditure of the state is not considered to be efficient, optimal or effective either. People from middleclass who happen to be in the tax net feel that they pay a significant proportion of their incomes to the tax authorities, while richer classes do not, and in return middle class does not get much from the state. Their children do not go to public schools, they do not use public health facilities, the roads and other facilities in most cities are not good enough. The law and order situation, access to justice, the situation of human rights and the imposition of property rights is not too convincing either. So the question, of why people should pay tax or accept the case for higher or more taxes, is not a stupid one.
The rhetoric surrounding the current situation is quite difficult. On the one hand there is no doubt that the macroeconomic situation is tough and needs redress. If we do not raise more money, the deficits will remain high, debt accumulation would be swift, inflation will remain high, growth might not come back and we will have difficulty getting help from the IMF. On the other hand the government and the elite in power have no credibility in asking for higher levels of taxation from the people. And even if more or higher taxes are decided on we need to figure out what options do we have and what would allow us to move to sustainable solutions that eventually address the entrenched taxation issues as well as the lack of trust and credibility issues mentioned above. The government has to also get ready for elections in a year's time. The upcoming budget, from that perspective, will be an important one. What is the way out of this mess, that is the question.
We need to start an informed debate on these issues and as early as possible so that as a society, if possible, we can move towards consensus and/or majoritarian views. Due to ongoing dialogue with the IMF and the upcoming budget, it is a good time to have this debate. Institute for Development and Economic Alternatives (IDEAS) is planning a series of dialogues, over the next week, with various stakeholders, and across the country, to initiate this debate. We hope other stakeholders will also join in. We, as a society, need to work out the imperatives we face and the direction we should move in. Clearly the situation is serious and any direction we decide to move in will have significant consequences for us now as well as in the future. But this just implies that we should definitely and urgently start this debate.

Read Comments