Trends in Public Debt in India: Lessons from Greek Crisis?

S. Bhattacharjee, Dakshita Das
{"title":"Trends in Public Debt in India: Lessons from Greek Crisis?","authors":"S. Bhattacharjee, Dakshita Das","doi":"10.1177/2455133316676418","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract There is not much new in the divide in economic literature between fiscal and monetary policy; what is new post-2008 is the emergence of the role of money supply and that of public debt to prominence as the instrument of choice for central banks and the government treasury. To a large degree, money supply and public debt now eclipsed the central role variables such as tax and interest rates had played in the setting of economic policies in countries both developed and developing. While literature is evaluating how the change in the role of these stock parameters to that of policy variables will play out, this article takes up the more mundane task of examining only one of them, which is public debt in the context of India. We believe that there is a key reason to do so. The Indian government has not used public debt as an active policy tool, so far, even as several countries have begun to do so (Mohanty, 2012). Instead, it has held on to a general desideratum of the need to reduce it; borne out of the scare of the balance of payments crisis of 1991. But 25 years after the crisis, it is important to examine if there is a conscious understanding within the government for the need to measure and deploy public debt especially as the room for active deployment of other fiscal tools, namely taxation is circumscribed. By FY14 India’s public debt (centre and states combined), as percentage of GDP, stood at 66.7 per cent; it was 70.6 per cent in FY09. For the sake of comparison, the world’s most indebted countries include Greece, of course, with its general government net debt at 173 per cent of its GDP. Others in the top 20 include Italy, Egypt, Portugal, Spain, France, the United Kingdom, Japan and the United States of America. By current estimates, India does not rank amongst the most indebted countries of the world. But is the position, one of strength or of a passive arrival that offers little or no policy direction to the government? Moreover, this article also argues that in the absence of such direction, there has been a build-up of debt in the economy instead of a reduction. Most of that build-up has been sought to be balanced by recourse to non-tax revenue. As fresh options to tap non-tax revenue dry up, public debt could emerge as the new pressure point for the economy.","PeriodicalId":243965,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Development Policy and Practice","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Development Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2455133316676418","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract There is not much new in the divide in economic literature between fiscal and monetary policy; what is new post-2008 is the emergence of the role of money supply and that of public debt to prominence as the instrument of choice for central banks and the government treasury. To a large degree, money supply and public debt now eclipsed the central role variables such as tax and interest rates had played in the setting of economic policies in countries both developed and developing. While literature is evaluating how the change in the role of these stock parameters to that of policy variables will play out, this article takes up the more mundane task of examining only one of them, which is public debt in the context of India. We believe that there is a key reason to do so. The Indian government has not used public debt as an active policy tool, so far, even as several countries have begun to do so (Mohanty, 2012). Instead, it has held on to a general desideratum of the need to reduce it; borne out of the scare of the balance of payments crisis of 1991. But 25 years after the crisis, it is important to examine if there is a conscious understanding within the government for the need to measure and deploy public debt especially as the room for active deployment of other fiscal tools, namely taxation is circumscribed. By FY14 India’s public debt (centre and states combined), as percentage of GDP, stood at 66.7 per cent; it was 70.6 per cent in FY09. For the sake of comparison, the world’s most indebted countries include Greece, of course, with its general government net debt at 173 per cent of its GDP. Others in the top 20 include Italy, Egypt, Portugal, Spain, France, the United Kingdom, Japan and the United States of America. By current estimates, India does not rank amongst the most indebted countries of the world. But is the position, one of strength or of a passive arrival that offers little or no policy direction to the government? Moreover, this article also argues that in the absence of such direction, there has been a build-up of debt in the economy instead of a reduction. Most of that build-up has been sought to be balanced by recourse to non-tax revenue. As fresh options to tap non-tax revenue dry up, public debt could emerge as the new pressure point for the economy.
印度公共债务趋势:从希腊危机中吸取教训?
在经济学文献中,财政政策和货币政策之间的分歧并不是什么新鲜事;2008年后的新情况是,货币供应和公共债务的作用逐渐凸显,成为各国央行和政府财政部的首选工具。在很大程度上,货币供应和公共债务现在使诸如税收和利率等变量在发达国家和发展中国家制定经济政策方面所起的核心作用黯然失色。虽然文献正在评估这些股票参数对政策变量的作用的变化将如何发挥作用,但本文承担了更平凡的任务,仅检查其中一个,即印度背景下的公共债务。我们认为这样做有一个关键原因。到目前为止,印度政府还没有将公共债务作为一种积极的政策工具,尽管有几个国家已经开始这样做(Mohanty, 2012)。相反,它一直坚持一种普遍的愿望,即需要减少碳排放;源于1991年国际收支危机的恐慌。但在危机爆发25年后,重要的是要审视政府内部是否有意识地认识到衡量和部署公共债务的必要性,尤其是在积极部署其他财政工具(即税收)的空间有限的情况下。到2014财年,印度的公共债务(中央和各邦加起来)占GDP的比例为66.7%;2009财年为70.6%。为了便于比较,世界上负债最重的国家当然包括希腊,其政府总净债务相当于GDP的173%。其他进入前20名的国家还包括意大利、埃及、葡萄牙、西班牙、法国、英国、日本和美国。根据目前的估计,印度并不是世界上负债最多的国家之一。但这个职位是强势的还是被动的,给政府提供很少或根本没有政策方向?此外,本文还认为,在缺乏这种方向的情况下,经济中的债务一直在累积,而不是减少。中国政府一直在寻求通过非税收入来平衡这一增长。随着利用非税收入的新选择枯竭,公共债务可能成为经济的新压力点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信