Present Economic Position of Pakistan
In Pakistan we give undue importance to the annual budget and spend months before and after the announcements on these fruitless matters.
In properly governed economies the annual budget of the government is only a step towards the ultimate economic objective of the state.
The Pakistan economic survey issued yesterday is the document that summarises 75 years of the economic life of this state.
Pakistan, as a state, is facing ‘unusual not normal’ economic and social problems. This has shaken the trust of the people living in the country and abroad. There is no point in blaming political parties or the military, which have remained in power. The suggested approach is recognising the problem and the realities and then having a pragmatic and practical solution for the same.
Reasons for a detailed view
A slightly lengthy discourse in these comments has been made on the current economic issues for the reasons that these are unusual days never faced by this country and there are many misperceptions in the minds of commonmen of the subject. The purpose of this discussion is to provide a realistic perspective as future projections cannot be based on illusions and surmises.
In at least the last two decades the state has lacked behind in all the economic and social indicators when compared with developing countries, especially those in the region. The ground realty is summarily described as under:Rupee Side
The primary problem of Pakistan now is an insurmountable ‘fiscal deficit’ due to debt servicing. Fiscal deficit in simple terms means receipts and expenditures of the Federal Government.
Total debt of Pakistan in rupee terms is now over Rs 59,000 billion. With an average interest rate of 12% (discount rate is 21%) the cost of debt servicing is expected to be around Rs 7,000 billion.
The tax target is being projected at Rs 9,200 billion. Out of this around 54% (Rs 5000) will go to the provinces which will leave Rs 4,200 billion in the kitty of the Federal Government. If another Rs 2,500 billion is added on account of non tax revenue total available receipts will be Rs 6,700 billion being less than the debt servicing cost.
This is the first time in the history of Pakistan that Pakistan will be facing this situation. There are very few developing countries with this level of catastrophe. Economists are well aware of the results which arise for the people at large in this situation.
There is no apparent solution to get the country out of this trap. One of the solutions is to increase the tax collection by another Rs 5,000 billion to arrive at a respectable tax to GDP ratio of 15%. The other solution is debt reprofiling. These two are the solutions to avoid ultimate economic bankruptcy of the state.
Increase in the tax collection in Pakistan is a subject that needs to be understood in its real perspective. In Pakistan, there are four segments of the economy being manufacturing, services, retails and wholesale trade and agriculture. Out of the total direct (and to a large extent indirect) taxes the first two segments contribute around 95% of tax collection. Remaining two segments’ contribution is negligible.
This distortion, inequity, and discrimination should not continue. However, the fabric of statecraft of Pakistan has been so designed that in near future any leap forward is not possible. Manufacturing is shrinking on account of undue burden of undesired taxes that leads to another vicious circle.
No structural change in taxes and debt reprofiling is expected in the near future. In this situation, the country is gradually heading towards local currency default. This is to be avoided. At present over 85% of the government debts are with the local banks. This means that not only the Federal Government’s finances are vulnerable but the banking sector is virtually booking income which may not be realisable. This effectively means misreporting of income by the banks under the accounting standards.
There are few other countries where this situation has arisen. In Ghana the IMF suggested a ‘haircut’ on local debt. We do not see this recourse in Pakistan’s immediate future, however, possibility cannot be totally discounted.
On the expenditure side with over Rs 7,000 billion as expense for debt servicing, other expenditures become practically irrelevant. Nevertheless, major segments of expenses and their estimated outlay is:
===========================================Interest Payment Rs 7303 billionDefence Rs 1804 billionGrants Rs 1464 billionSubsidies Rs 1074 billionPensions Rs 761 billionRunning civil Rs 704 billiongovernmentPSDP Rs 704 billionEmergency Rs 200 billion===========================================There can be discussions on all the aforesaid segments, however, these are the minimum amounts that are expected to be allocated to these heads.
PSDP has been kept unnecessarily high in the present state of affairs of the company, however there is a fundamental question whether or not there is any need for PSDP at the Federal level after the 18th Amendment. The developmental work is not the responsibility of the Federal Government. This is one of the unaddressed questions of Pakistan’s fiscal economy.
A constitutional solution other than increasing the tax collection and debt reprofiling is the revision and review of the latest NFC Award. The fundamental question in this regard is whether or not the whole interest charge is to be borne by the Federal Government when the bulk of these loans have been utilised to meet the fiscal deficit arising on account of allocation of revenue to the provinces. There is an accounting error in our financial statements that leads to a vicious circle. There is a fiscal deficit, resulting in loans, then a bigger deficit on account of debt servicing in next year so more loans in the next year. So on so forth.
Now, when debts have become effectively non-repayable the policy makers, who were ignoring this stark reality will have no excuse, other than correction.
The state is not a going concern. This pure accounting term, which is generally not used for a sovereign state, therefore, it is not being digested by many people however this has been coined only to depict that this vicious circle has to be broken otherwise the common man of Pakistan and the state will cripple. A simple equation cannot be disguised in fancy words. A reality check has to be undertaken.
USD ($) Side
The Rupee account can be managed by printing more currency, however, the USD($) account requires a real transaction. In May 2022 the International Monetary Fund (IMF) issued a report on Pakistan. On page 35 of that report IMF as Table (3a) has projected cash flow in USD($) for the years to 2026. If this statement is taken seriously then it means that Pakistan is facing serious current account crises. There is an estimated Foreign Direct Investment averaging around USD($) 10 billion each year with effectively no repayment of existing loans. Both these assertions are alarming and not close to reality. The expected FDI to this tune is possible for the country of our size and population, however the present state of Pakistan economy does not make commercial viability for the foreign investors. Furthermore, there is no sign of apparent rescheduling or reprofiling of the Pakistan foreign currency debt of around USD($) 140 billion. This means that there is a hole in the projection of USD ($).
The IMF representative as late as June 8, 2023 has indicated that they have not been shown the resources of filling the financial gap of USD($) 6 billion by June 30 , 2023. The payments due in the following year are around USD($) 20 billion plus for which there is no apparent commitment. Thus there are serious questions about the measures to fill that hole.
The rupee USD($) parity has deteriorated by over 50% in the last twelve months. This parity is working against the rupee on the basis of realistic projections which take into account the future cash flows and one of the most authentic ones is the IMF report of IMF. In case if the government does not agree with that projection then it has to come up with its schedule in the manner given by the IMF as otherwise the people dealing with exchange have the right to use this as the correct picture.
In the immediate future (2023 to 2026) there is no expectation of any substantial increase in exports from the country for genuine reasons. These will not cross USD($) 45 billion by that time even under a very optimistic estimate. Same is the case with remittances from workers. Thus, if we do not keep, informal ban on imports, the current account deficit per year is not expected to be less than USD($) 10 billion. This is also required to be financed with addition to borrowings.
These facts reveal that there will be a net shortfall of USD($) in the forthcoming period. This appears to be inevitable. The primary question is the timing when it is acknowledged and accepted by the state organs, as otherwise, the people at large and international communities have already taken into account that eventuality which is reflected in the discount on our sovereign bonds. Can there be stabilisation, like Sri Lanka, without this acknowledgement is a million dollar question.
These temporary handicaps have appeared in many developing countries. The latest examples are Sri Lanka, Argentina, Greece and Spain. This is not unusual.
We do not see that Pakistan’s situation and perspectives are similar to Sri Lanka however this is not a matter of ego and sentiment or any political expediency. If a tough decision is to be taken by the state, which should be based on facts, not illusions and unsupported self confidence. At first, in any case people at large should be taken into confidence. At the moment, the trust level is at the bottom edge because rupee parity is nose diving and there appears to be no solid commitment from any lender country.
Pakistan has to walk a very tight rope for international foreign relations between the USA and China. Mr Pompeo, former US Secretary of State, has already said publicly in the past that the west is not going to finance developing countries to repay their Chinese debts. Same sentiments were reinforced in the G20 summit held in Bangalore.
The best sign of hope is the realisation of the gravity of the situation which is the first step for any future correction.
It is, however, shameful for us that despite the aforesaid shortfall in USD($) we have not undertaken any step for its conservation. All our steps, such as restricting payment of L/C etc and piling goods at the port are counter productive. The correct step would have been the energy savings by closing the market by 6 pm using the daylight and getting heavy luxury vehicles out of the road for three to four days in a week and other such steps which are symbolically very important in addition to actual savings.
It is high time to balance our books and prepare a realistic USD($) cash flow for the following decade (2023-2033). If that does not balance in the present ‘framework’ then as a nation we should sit down, accepting the hole in cash flow, with the IMF. In the present world the IMF is the only lender of last resort for countries like us and a constructive ‘Plan A’ is always available. The IMF is not a solution. It is a temporary relief for a patient suffering from serious disease. The west and the world at large cannot afford this situation for a country of 250 million people, a nuclear power with a huge diaspora. Nevertheless illusive statements like ‘Plan B’ etc can be strictly avoided.
Present state of affairs of the country does fulfil the objective economic emancipation of the Muslims majority provinces of undivided India as conceived in 1947. A set back occurred in 1971 which resulted in a better future for those who got out of status quo. Nevertheless the right decision undertaken in 1947 has been overshadowed by other considerations such as the notion of a ‘security state’ with ‘theological’ considerations and hostile neighbours.
On account of our present and foreseeable future economic position it is considered that ‘things as usual’ are no longer workable. Whole structure of the statecraft is to be ‘redesigned’ which may include the constitution and rights of taxation of various components of the Federation.
No society can survive without devolution of powers to local government which has been laid down under Article 140A of the Constitution with adequate resources in the shape of property taxes. We have the lowest rate as there are no effective local governments. The last surveys in cities like Lahore and Karachi were undertaken way back in the 1990’s.
The non serious attitude of the state is evident from the fact that it is not even bothered by the fact that our per capita income has reduced over the last year. Among other factors, one reason is unhindered population growth of plus 2% per annum. We have lower per capita income than India and Bangladesh and our currency is as low as Rs 300 per USD($) with both India and Bangladesh which are below 100. We were almost equal just 25 years ago. In 1947 we were 10% above India. But that was Mr Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s Pakistan.
Future course of action
It is high time to appreciate that the state which was formed for the economic emancipation of Muslims majority provinces of undivided India in 1947 has not been able to provide appropriate food, housing, education, health, security, transportation to the majority of her population. There was no defect in the idea of a separate state however the primary purpose of the state being the welfare of her population has not been given its due priority. A country of 250 million people, being a nuclear state is too important for the region and the world. They may act out of the way to save us from an undesirable end, however, the first step is to be undertaken by us. We, however, do not see any road map from our side on the matter of survival. In India there is a complete set up for economic planning after the closure of respective twelve five year plans from 1951 to 2022 they have formed a high level think tank for economic planning by the name of National Institution for Transforming India (NITI ADYOG). We need that kind of structure and learning from regional countries which have similar economic structures..
Nevertheless it is high time to understand that economic prosperity can only be achieved when people have trust in the state and state organs/ institutions. The manner in which this country has been run at least for the last two decades reflects that our priorities have completely been compromised. Just one indicator is enough to identify the mistakes. We were 160 million in 2000 and now we are 250 million in 2022. An increase of over 50%. India was 1140 million which is now only 1400 million being 25%. Can any country afford an increase of fifty percent in population in just 20 years with scarce resources? Thus the whole socio-economic structure of this state is required to be reconstructed. Do we need three policemen for polio vaccination in the areas? .
Anti-corporatisation measures
Discouragement for big groups:
Pakistan may be one of the few countries in the world where corporatisation and big businesses are discouraged as a tax policy measure.
We admire big MNCs, however, regularly and frequently destroy the big businesses, especially, through tax policies. Taxes on reserves and bonus shares is the best example.
No Pakistani company has a market capitalization above USD($) 1 billion. India has over 400 companies which are over USD($) 1 billion. In Bangladesh The number of billion-dollar market capitalised companies on the country’s stock market have increased to 12 as seven newcompanies have recently reached that level amid a relentless surge in share prices.
Compliance:
All provisions relating to deduction and collection of taxes are applicable on companies whereas a substantial part of these provisions are not applicable on non corporate sectors. Since a very large sum of taxes is collected by collection and deduction of tax source, therefore, these provisions create serious market distortions in case if the businesses are undertaken by way of corporate structure. It is for this reason almost all retail and wholesale trade, distribution etc is undertaken by the non corporate sector.
Rates of tax on the non corporate sector is lower than the corporate sector. This makes corporatization totally non-viable as in this case there is an additional tax on dividend at the rate of 15% plus super tax. An individual undertaking exports is subject to tax at the rate of less than 1%. Whereas a corporate entity, even in the IT sector becomes totally uncompetitive on account of 15% tax on dividend. It is for this reason very few corporate entities are emerging in the IT sector which has a great potential in Pakistan.
The Pakistan government is not clear about the concept of taxation of corporate entities. It has been constantly trying to burden big corporations and holding companies. The taxes on bonus shares is a measure which does not exist anywhere in the world.
Foreign direct investment
Current exchange rate of Rs 300 per USD($) does not provide adequate economic return for foreign investors. For example, banks which were nationalised in the past and were subsequently acquired by foreign investors have a market capitalization which is effectively lower than the price in USD($) at which these were purchased more than a decade ago. This is a very sad state of affairs. The primary question is rate of return in rupees that is enough to provide adequate comptable return to foreign investors in USD($) if the USD($) remains at above Rs 290.
In addition to the same, on account of persistent shortfall of foreign currency there are constant delays in remittance of dividend. This is a big disincentive for the foreign investors. There is no expectation of FDI in the manufacturing sector, however, some avenues like cheap housing schemes can attract foreign investment if land for the same is provided from the government unutilized land pool.
The IMF’s project FDI of USD($) 10 billion is not expected to be met. However, a new paradigm for the same would have to be developed. The status quo system for FDI is no longer workable.
Tax on Bonus Shares
The Finance Bill has proposed a tax on shareholders equal to 10% of the value of bonus shares. This is not a new scene in Pakistan. This party’s government had done so in 2014. For that purpose the definition of income was changed to include ‘bonus shares’ as deemed income. This tax will be payable only on those bonus shares which are issued after the proposals are adopted by the Parliament.
In 2014 the following provisions were introduced as explained by the FBR:
Finance Act, 2014, through legal fiction, has deemed issuance of bonus shares as income of the shareholder of the company, receiving bonus shares, by excluding the words “but does not include, in case of a shareholder of a company, the amount representing the face value of any bonus share or the amount of any bonus declared, issued or paid by the company to the shareholders with a view to increasing its paid up share capital” from section 2(29), the income deemed has been included under the head “Income from other Sources” under section 39(I)(m) of the Ordinance.
In the proposed a separate section 236Z has been inserted and under sub-section (6) of that section the issuance of bonus shares has been treated as income. Accordingly, section 236Z has been included in the definition of income under sub-section 2(29) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001.
In the earlier amendment the word used was ‘face’ value of bonus shares, whereas in the proposed law the word used is ‘value’ of bonus shares issued. It is suggested that in order to avoid any confusion the word ‘face value’ be used.
It is the firm view of tax professionals that the value of bonus shares is not an income. This view has recently been elaborated in India in the case by the Karnataka High Court in the case of PCIT v. Dr. Ranjan Pai
In that Indian case after the above decisions by the tax tribunals, a similar matter was appealed from the Bangalore ITAT to the Karnataka High Court. The ITAT had held that when a shareholder receives the bonus issue there is a depression in the overall value of shares held by him which is counterbalanced by the shares received through the bonus issue. Hence, such issues should not be taxed under the ‘income from other sources’ head. The matter was then appealed by the income tax department.
The High Court held that the allotment of bonus shares made on a pro rata basis could not attract tax liability under Section 56 of the ITA. The Court held that the issue of bonus shares by a company is only a reallocation of funds by the company from its reserves to its capital, and it does not lead to any inflow or outflow of funds for the company. Further, shareholders receiving such allotment on a pro rata basis are not gaining any advantage that can be taxed under Section 56.
Important takeaways from the case:
The case sheds light on the intention behind Section 56 of ITA which is to tax the benefits received by shareholders on allotment of shares.
When a shareholder receives a bonus share, the intrinsic value of the existing shares held by them will go down as the value of the shares is lowered in the market.
The value after the bonus shares are added will be the same as the value held before by the shareholders. Hence, there is no benefit availed by the taxpayer that can be taxed under the ITA.
It is stated that tax on bonus shares is a bad law for the reasons explained as above.
It has been proposed that the company shall deposit tax equal to the 10% of the value of bonus shares. The tax so paid will be the final tax liability of the shareholder with respect to that bonus share.
Tax on Five Preceding Years Income
A novel provision has been proposed whereby the Federal Government can levy tax on any person on any profit on gains due to any economic factor or factors that result in unexpected income, profits and gains.
The maximum rate of tax on that income can not exceed 50%. This 50% is in addition to taxes already paid.
This concept has apparently been adopted from the ‘Excess Profit Tax’ concept used by the IMF. There it has been stated as under:
Excess profits taxes (EPTs) that gained renewed interest following the COVID-19 outbreak and the recent surge in energy prices. EPTs can be designed as an efficient tax only falling on economic rent, like an allowance for corporate capital, and drawing some parallels with current proposals for reforming multinationals’ taxation.
EPTs can be permanent or temporary as an add-on to the corporate income tax to support revenue during an adverse shock episode. The latter reflects experiences with EPTs during and after the World Wars. Different from that era, though, profit shifting is now a challenge. Estimates using firm-level data suggest that, at present, locations of excess profit across countries are consistent with profit shifting practices by multinationals.
Destination-based EPTs can address this concern. Estimates suggest that a 10 percent EPT on the globally consolidated accounts of multinationals (on top of the current corporate income tax), with the EPT base being allocated using sales, raises global revenue by 16 percent of corporate income tax revenues. The analysis suggests that international coordination would be desirable to mitigate the risks of profit shifting and tax competition. Eventually, EPTs could mark an evolution of corporate taxation toward a non-distortionary rent tax.
There was a similar concept in Pakistan also by the name of Excess Profit Tax which had been abolished long ago.
The primary issue with the proposal is its application for the five years preceding the tax year. If this understanding is correct then there are two factors. Firstly the government can at any time decide the factors which they consider extraordinary resulting in extraordinary profit subject to tax and then recover tax from that company. This mechanism is completely incorrect as it is possible that by the time something is decided as extraordinary in a subsequent year the profits or income could have been distributed or utilised in capital expenditure etc.It is thus clear that this uncertainty is not practically possible.
The second issue is the crystallisation of tax liability under the Income Tax Ordinance 2001. This position is stated in Section (4) of the Ordinance as under:
It is our view that this is not the matter of revision or reopening of the tax assessment under Section 122 of the Ordinance. This means that the concept of past and closed transactions is not the subject matter. This proposal effectively states that the Federal Government can at any time during the period of five years levy an additional tax upto 50% on extraordinary profit.
It is our view that this provision is ultra vires and unconstitutional and will be struck by the superior courts on merits.
Furthermore amendment have been made in Fourth, Fifth and Seventh Schedule relating to computation of income for insurance companies, oil exploration companies and banks that provisions of this section can apply on these companies also
Taxes on Banking Companies
Two major amendments have been proposed for banking companies subject to tax under the Seventh Schedule to the Ordinance.
Firstly the Profit on debt and capital gains from Federal Government’s sovereign debt or a sovereign debt instrument shall be exempt from tax chargeable under this Ordinance, derived by any non-resident banking company approved by the Federal Government under a sovereign agreement has been exempted from tax.
Secondly from the next year being Tax Year 2024 the special tax regime as stated below will not be applicable and the income shall be chargeable as the applicable rate.
(6A) For tax year 2022 and onwards, the taxable income attributable to investment in the Federal Government securities shall be taxed at the rate of— (i) 55% instead of rate provided in Division II of Part I of the First schedule if the gross advances to deposit ratio as on last day of the tax year is upto 40%;
(ii) 49% instead of rate provided in Division II of Part I of the First schedule if the gross advances to deposit ratio as on last day of the tax year exceeds 40% but does not exceed 50%;
(iii) at the rates provided in Division II of Part I of the First schedule if gross advances to deposit ratio as on the last day of the tax year exceeds 50%.
Explanation.- For the removal of doubt it is clarified that the tax rate under this sub-rule is applicable to total income attributable to total investment in Federal Government securities.]
Exemptions for Reko-Diq Project
Pakistan introduced a Foreign Investment (Promotion & Protection) Act 2022. This act is effectively exclusively related to the Reko-Diq Project in Balochistan. The exemption provided in that law has not been placed in the tax statute.
Unlike the past the exemption relates to:
• All investors and shareholders and their associates and companies;
• Third party lenders;
• Anti-Avoidance, transfer pricing and thin capitalization provisions; and
• Depreciation etc
On account of the special circumstances which Pakistan had faced on account of an unjustified order for the earlier decision of the Supreme Court for the earlier contract Pakistan had to concede on many matters which are not generally applicable. These are special circumstances however it is to be noted that such kind and form of incentives and concessions cannot be given to any concern in Pakistan and this should not be treated as the norm.
Super Tax under Section 4C
Super tax at the rate of 4% for higher income was levied by the Finance Act 2022. The tax was declared as ultra vires for the Tax year 2022 by the Sindh High Court. Nevertheless on account of the appeal filed by the department, for those particular taxpayers who were in appeal, the Supreme Court of Pakistan asked the companies to pay 50% of that super tax levied.
Through the Finance Bill 2023 Super Tax has been increased to 10% percent in the cases where income exceeds Rs 500 million. Now this super tax is for the Tax Year 2023 and for years onward.
The question that will now arise is whether the increased rate of 10% can be applied retrospectively for the Tax Year 2023. As per the order of the Sindh High Court this cannot be done. Thus there is a reasonable case that enhanced super tax will not be applicable for Tax year 2023.
Advance tax provisions under Section 147 of the Ordinance have also been made applicable on the amount related to super tax.
Perpetual Tax Amnesty
Under the provisions of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 no proceeding on account of unexplained assets or investment and concealed income if it is stated by the taxpayer that the amount under consideration has been received in foreign exchange through normal banking channels abroad.
On account of the prevalent ‘hawala’ system this provision is used as perpetual amnesty to hide untaxed income in Pakistan. In the past this provision had no time limit. Over the period after a lot of persuasion this was limited to Rs 5,000,000. This amount was enough to cater to regular remittances. In the proposed Finance Bill this amount has been increased to USD($) 100,000. This means that an amount upto around Rs 30,000,000 whitened using this undesirable mean. It is suggested that measure which is non documentation per se should be deleted.
Transaction with a resident of an exempt jurisdiction
Section 85 of the Ordinance defines an ‘associate’. This term is relevant for the purposes of section 108 of the Ordinance ‘Transaction with Associates’. Under the proposed amendment the meaning of the term associates has been extended to any transaction, though not being an associate under any other provision of the Ordinance, if the said person is a resident of a jurisdiction which has a zero tax regime. Which jurisdiction will be treated as zero tax regime will be decided by the Board.
Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)
Under clause (99A) of Part 1 of the Second Schedule any gain on disposal of an immovable property or shares of a Special Purpose Vehicle under the REIT Regulations to a REIT scheme is exempt from tax upto June 30, 2023. This exemption is proposed to be extended to June 30, 2024.
International Centre of Tax Excellence
An an Institute to be known as International Centre of Tax Excellence is proposed to be established
The functions of the Institute shall be to help contribute to the development of tax policy, prepare model national tax policy, deliver interdisciplinary research in tax administration and policy, international tax cooperation, revenue forecasting, conduct international seminars, workshops and conferences on the current issues faced by tax authorities in the field of international taxation, capacity building of Inland Revenue Officers, tax analysis, improve the design and delivery of tax administration for maximising revenue within existing provisions to close the tax gap or any other function as directed by the Board or the Federal Government.
Small and Medium Enterprise
A new term “small and medium enterprise” has been inserted in the Ordinance. It means a person whose business turnover in a tax year does not exceed eight hundred million rupees and who is engaged in –
(i) manufacturing as defined in clause (iv) of sub-section (7) of section 153 of the Ordinance; or
(ii) providing or rendering IT services or IT enabled services as defined in clauses (30AD) and (30AE) of section 2:
Provided that if annual business turnover of a small and medium enterprise exceeds eight hundred million rupees, it shall not qualify as small and medium enterprise in the tax year in which annual turnover exceeds that turnover or any subsequent tax year;
These enterprises are required to be registered as provided under the Fourteenth Schedule there it is stated:
Registration. – (1) Small and medium enterprises shall be required to register with FBR on its Iris web portal or Small and Medium Enterprises Development Authority on its SME registration portal (SMERP).
(2) Small and medium enterprises engaged in IT s
Copyright Business Recorder, 2023