financial expenditureImpact of Lockdown on Government RevenueSuyash Tiwari- April 19, 2020To mitigate the spread of coronavirus in India, the central government imposed a nation-wide lockdown on March 25, 2020.  The lockdown necessitated the suspension of all economic activities, except the ones classified as ‘essential’ from time to time, and the ones that can be carried out from home.  As a result, all economic activities which require persons to travel or work outside home, such as manufacturing of non-essential goods and construction, have stopped since then.  While this has resulted in a loss of income for many individuals and businesses, the ongoing 40-day lockdown is also going to severely impact the revenue of the central and state governments, primarily the tax revenue that they would have generated from all such economic activities.This note discusses the possible effect of the lockdown on the revenue of the central and state governments in 2020-21.  At this stage, the effect of the pandemic and the lockdown are difficult to estimate.  We do not know whether there will be partial restrictions when the current lockdown ends on 3rdMay or the possibility of further action during the year.  Therefore, this note can be used as a first estimate to compute the impact under various scenarios.  For example, a reader who believes that the effect on GDP growth would be different than the IMF’s estimate used below can extrapolate the numbers to fit his assumptions.The central government and most of the state governments passed their budget for the financial year 2020-21 during February-March 2020, before the lockdown.  The central government estimated a 10% growth in the country’s nominal GDP in 2020-21, and more than half of the states estimate their nominal GSDP growth rate in the range of 8%-13%.  Due to the unforeseen impact of the lockdown on the economy, the 2020-21 GDP growth rates are expected to be lower than these estimates.  As a result, the tax revenue that the central and state governments will be able to generate are expected to be much lower than the budgeted estimates, during the period of lockdown.Centre’s revenueTable 1 shows the revenue expected by the central government from various sources in 2020-21.  73% of the revenue (Rs 16.36 lakh crore) is expected to come through taxes.   Because of the impact of lockdown, the actual tax revenue realised at the end of the year could be much lower, depending on how much the nominal GDP growth in 2020-21 gets affected.  To estimate the impact on tax revenue, we assume that the tax-GDP ratio (i.e. an estimate of the tax generated out of each unit of economic activity) in 2020-21 will remain the same as the budget estimate.   This may be a conservative estimate of loss of revenue due to lockdown as many permitted activities such as agriculture, government services and essential services have zero or lower-than-average taxes.Based on this assumption, a 1%-point fall in the nominal GDP growth rate could decrease centre’s net tax revenue by about Rs 15,000 crore in 2020-21, i.e. 0.7% of its total revenue.  The IMF has projected GDP growth for 2020-21 at 1.9%; given the inflation target of 4%, nominal GDP growth could be about 6%.  In that scenario where the nominal GDP growth falls by 4% point from 10% to 6% in 2020-21, net tax revenue loss could be about Rs 60,000 crore (2.7% of total revenue).  As mentioned above, the tax-GDP ratio would likely be lower than the budget estimate because of the type of activities permitted during the lockdown.   This would increase the adverse impact on tax revenue.There is a further assumption being made above regarding tax-GDP.  While GST tends to move with overall GDP, direct taxes would depend on income growth of individuals and profit growth of companies.  In a lower GDP growth environment, the effect on these two items may be higher than the deceleration of nominal GDP, bringing down the tax-GDP ratio.  Further, customs duties depend on the value of imports, which may have a lower growth.   This would, to some extent, be mitigated by the increase in the rate of excise duty on petroleum products.These computations have been made considering the 2019-20 revised estimate as the base and the 2020-21 budget estimate as being realistic when it was made.  However, these numbers may also be lower.  For instance, if we extrapolate the net tax revenue growth rate of April 2019 to February 2020 (as released by the Controller General of Accounts) to March 2020, the shortfall is of the order of Rs 1,62,000 crore or 11% of the revised estimate.  Thus, the shortfall in tax collections in 2020-21 may be significantly higher.Table1:  Central government's revenue in 2020-21 (Rs crore)SourceRevenueShare in Total RevenueNet Tax Revenue16,35,90973%Non-Tax Revenue3,85,01717%Dividends and Profits1,55,3956.9%Capital Receipts2,24,96710%Disinvestment2,10,0009.4%Total Revenue22,45,893-Note:   Capital receipts and total revenue do not include borrowings.Sources:  Union Budget Documents; PRS.Other than taxes, the centre’s receipts consist of non-tax revenue and capital receipts.  A significant part of non-tax revenue is from dividends and profits of public sector enterprises (PSEs) and the RBI (Rs 1.55 lakh crore).  If profitability gets impacted, then there could be an adverse impact in these figures.  The major chunk of capital receipts is budgeted from disinvestment of PSEs (Rs 2.1 lakh crore).  Equity markets have declined sharply over the last month.  If equity markets remain volatile, the disinvestment process and consequently the disinvestment receipts could get affected.  Note that disinvestment receipts were targeted at Rs 2,10,000 crore, significantly higher than theRs 50,299 crore raised in 2019-20.Devolution to StatesLike the centre, states also rely on taxes for most of their revenue.  As per their 2020-21 budget, on an average, nearly 70% of their revenue is estimated to come from taxes (45% from their own taxes and 25% from their share of centre’s taxes).  Lower collections in centre’s taxes because of the lockdown will also impact states’ share in them (also known as devolution).  Table 2 shows the share of states in centre’s tax revenue and how they could get impacted by a lower economic growth rate due to the lockdown.Table2:  Impact of lower economic growth during the lockdown on devolution in 2020-21 (Rs crore)State/ UTShare in divisible pool (%)DevolutionImpact of 1% point drop in national nominal GDP growth rate on DevolutionRevenue impact as a percentage of state’s revenue receiptsAndhra Pradesh4.1132,238*293NAArunachal Pradesh1.7613,8021250.61%Assam3.1326,7762430.26%Bihar10.0691,1818290.45%Chhattisgarh3.4226,8032440.29%Delhi----Goa0.393,027280.21%Gujarat3.426,6462420.15%Haryana1.088,485770.09%Himachal Pradesh0.86,266570.15%Jammu and Kashmir-15,2001380.16%Jharkhand3.3125,9802360.31%Karnataka3.6528,5912600.14%Kerala1.9420,9351900.17%Madhya Pradesh7.8961,841*562NAMaharashtra6.1448,1094370.13%Manipur0.725,630510.28%Meghalaya0.775,999*55NAMizoram0.513,968360.37%Nagaland0.574,493410.28%Odisha4.6336,3003300.27%Punjab1.7914,0211270.14%Rajasthan5.9846,8864260.25%Sikkim0.393,043280.35%Tamil Nadu4.1932,8492990.14%Telangana2.1316,7271520.11%Tripura0.715,560510.30%Uttar Pradesh17.931,52,8631,3890.33%Uttarakhand1.18,657790.19%West Bengal7.5265,8355980.33%Total1008,38,7107,6240.22%Note:  *Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Meghalaya passed a vote on account, so their devolution data has been computed as the total devolution to states provided in the union budget multiplied by their share.  The devolution data for all other states has been taken from the state budget documents, which may not match with the union budget data in case of a few states.  Revenue receipts data not available for Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Meghalaya.   The total for revenue receipt share has been computed excluding these three states.Sources:  Union and State Budget Documents; 15thFinance Commission Report for 2020-21; PRS.State GSTOut of the 45% revenue coming from state’s own taxes, 35% revenue is estimated to come from three taxes – state GST (19%), sales tax/ VAT (10%), and state excise (6%).  State GST is levied on the consumption of most goods and services within the state.  While state GST is the largest component of states’ own tax revenue, states do not have the autonomy to change tax rates on their own as the rates are decided by the GST Council.  Thus, due to lower GST revenue during the lockdown period, if a state wishes to increase GST rates for the remaining part of the year, it cannot do this on its own.Table 3 shows the possible impact of a 1%-point decrease in the growth rates of nominal GSDP (GDP of the state) and its impact on state GST revenue in the year 2020-21.  These estimates are based on the assumption that the tax-GSDP ratio during the lockdown remains same as estimated for the 2020-21 budget.  However, as discussed earlier, the tax-GDP ratio for taxes such as GST is likely to decline.  The analysis estimates the minimum impact on states’ GST revenue and does not captures its full extent.Table 3:  Impact of lower GSDP growth during the lockdown on state GST revenue in 2020-21 (Rs crore)State/ UTState GST revenueImpact of 1% point drop in nominal GSDP growth rate on State GST revenueRevenue impact as a percentage of state’s revenue receiptsAndhra PradeshNANANAArunachal Pradesh32430.01%Assam13,9351280.14%Bihar20,8001870.10%Chhattisgarh10,701970.12%Delhi23,8002150.39%Goa2,772260.19%Gujarat33,0502920.18%Haryana22,3501980.22%Himachal Pradesh3,855350.09%Jammu and Kashmir6,065550.06%Jharkhand9,450850.11%Karnataka47,3194450.25%Kerala32,3882890.25%Madhya PradeshNANANAMaharashtra1,07,1469570.28%Manipur91480.05%MeghalayaNANANAMizoram50440.04%Nagaland54150.04%Odisha15,4691390.11%Punjab15,8591410.16%Rajasthan28,2502550.15%Sikkim65050.07%Tamil Nadu46,1964100.19%Telangana27,6002420.17%Tripura1,311120.07%Uttar Pradesh55,6735250.12%Uttarakhand5,386490.12%West Bengal33,1532980.17%Total5,65,4615,1040.17%Note:  Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Meghalaya passed a vote on account, so data not available.  2020-21 GSDP data for Delhi was not available, so the GSDP growth rate in 2020-21 has been assumed to be the same as the growth rate in 2019-20 (10.5%).Sources:  State Budget Documents; PRS.Sales tax/ VAT and State ExciseThese two taxes have been major sources of revenue for states, estimated to contribute 16% of states’ revenue in 2020-21.  With implementation of GST, states can now levy sales tax only on petroleum products (petrol, diesel, crude oil, natural gas, and aviation turbine fuel) and alcohol for human consumption.  However, the lockdown has severely impacted the consumption, and thus sale, of all of these goods as most of the transportation is prohibited and businesses selling alcohol are also shut.  As a result, the revenue coming from these taxes is likely to see a much larger impact as compared to the other taxes.In addition, alcohol is also subject to state excise.   Table 4 shows the average monthly impact of the lockdown on revenue from state excise.  That is, this estimates the loss of revenue for each month of lockdown, with the assumption that there is no production of alcohol for human consumption during such periods.Table4:  Average monthly impact of the lockdown on state excise revenue in 2020-21 (Rs crore)State/ UTState excise revenueAverage monthly impact on state excise revenueMonthly revenue impact as a percentage of state’s revenue receiptsAndhra PradeshNANANAArunachal Pradesh157130.06%Assam1,7501460.16%Bihar000.00%Chhattisgarh5,2004330.52%Delhi6,3005250.95%Goa548460.34%Gujarat144120.01%Haryana7,5006250.69%Himachal Pradesh1,7881490.39%Jammu and Kashmir1,4501210.14%Jharkhand2,3011920.25%Karnataka22,7001,8921.05%Kerala2,8012330.20%Madhya PradeshNANANAMaharashtra19,2251,6020.46%Manipur1510.01%MeghalayaNANANAMizoram100.00%Nagaland600.00%Odisha5,2504380.35%Punjab6,2505210.59%Rajasthan12,5001,0420.60%Sikkim248210.26%Tamil Nadu8,1346780.31%Telangana16,0001,3330.93%Tripura266220.13%Uttar Pradesh37,5003,1250.74%Uttarakhand3,4002830.67%West Bengal12,7321,0610.59%Total1,74,16414,5140.48%Note:  Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Meghalaya passed a vote on account, so data not available.Sources:  State Budget Documents; PRS.Sales tax/VAT is collected from sale of alcohol and petroleum products.  We do not have any data on the reduction of sale of these items -- news reports indicating sale of alcohol in some states while petroleum products would be used by providers of essential services.  For estimating the impact on sales tax/ VAT revenue, we have assumed the following three scenarios: (i) 40% shortfall in tax collections, (ii) 60% shortfall in tax collections, and (iii) 80% shortfall in tax collections in any month of lockdown.   Table 5 shows the average monthly impact of the lockdown on sales tax/ VAT revenue under the three scenarios.Table5:  Impact of lockdown on sales tax/ VAT revenue in 2020-21 (Rs crore)State/ UTLoss of sales tax/ VAT revenue per lockdown monthAs a percentage of state’s revenue receipts40% shortfall60% shortfall80% shortfall40% shortfall60% shortfall80% shortfallAndhra PradeshNANANANANANAArunachal Pradesh914180.04%0.07%0.09%Assam1782673560.19%0.29%0.39%Bihar1942923890.11%0.16%0.21%Chhattisgarh1382072760.16%0.25%0.33%Delhi2073104130.37%0.56%0.75%Goa4162830.31%0.47%0.62%Gujarat7741,1621,5490.48%0.72%0.95%Haryana3575357130.40%0.59%0.79%Himachal Pradesh56841120.15%0.22%0.29%Jammu and Kashmir50751000.06%0.09%0.11%Jharkhand1952933910.26%0.39%0.52%Karnataka5938891,1860.33%0.49%0.66%Kerala7751,1631,5510.68%1.01%1.35%Madhya PradeshNANANANANANAMaharashtra1,3332,0002,6670.38%0.58%0.77%Manipur914180.05%0.08%0.10%MeghalayaNANANANANANAMizoram3450.03%0.04%0.06%Nagaland913180.06%0.09%0.12%Odisha2924385830.23%0.35%0.47%Punjab1862793720.21%0.32%0.42%Rajasthan7001,0501,4000.40%0.61%0.81%Sikkim711150.09%0.14%0.18%Tamil Nadu1,8682,8023,7360.85%1.28%1.70%Telangana8801,3201,7600.61%0.92%1.23%Tripura1522300.09%0.13%0.17%Uttar Pradesh9431,4141,8860.22%0.33%0.45%Uttarakhand66981310.15%0.23%0.31%West Bengal2513775030.14%0.21%0.28%Total10,13015,19520,2600.34%0.51%0.67%Note:   Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Meghalaya passed a vote on account, so data not available.Sources:  State Budget Documents; PRS.How much can GST compensation help?The shortfall in state GST revenue could get offset by the GST compensation provided to states by the central government.   The GST (Compensation to States) Act, 2017, requires the central government to provide compensation to states for loss of revenue arising due to GST implementation until 2022.  For this purpose, the Act guarantees a 14% annual growth rate in state GST revenue, which is much higher than the growth likely in the year 2020-21.  As a result, the central government would be required to provide states a compensation equivalent to the shortfall in growth in their state GST revenue, in comparison to the 14% growth.However, it is likely that there may not be sufficient funds to provide compensation to states in 2020-21.  Compensation to states is given out of the GST Compensation Fund, which consists of collections of a cess levied specifically to generate funds for this purpose.  The cess is levied on coal, tobacco and its products, pan masala, automobiles, and aerated drinks.  The cess collections may see a shortfall as the sale of many of these goods is likely to be affected this year.  Note thatdomestic automobile sales declined 18%in 2019-20 over the previous year whilecoal production stayed constant.In the 2020-21 budget, the central government estimated to provide Rs 1,35,368 crore as compensation to states, which is close to the total compensation estimated by states in their budgets.  However, due to the lockdown, the cess collections financing these grants are estimated to decrease, whereas the compensation requirement of states is estimated to increase due to lower GST collections.   While there is a risk that any incremental requirement may not be met, states’ revenue can see a much larger impact if cess collections are not even sufficient to meet their existing amounts as per the 2020-21 budgets (Table 6).  States, on an average, depend on GST compensation grants for 4.4% of their revenue in 2020-21.  However, states such as Gujarat, Punjab, and Delhi expect almost 14-15% of their revenue in 2020-21 to come in the form of GST compensation grants.Table6:   GST compensation grants estimated by states in 2020-21 (Rs crore)State/ UTGST CompensationGST compensation as a percentage of state’s revenue receiptsAndhra PradeshNANAArunachal Pradesh00.0%Assam1,0001.1%Bihar3,5001.9%Chhattisgarh2,9383.5%Delhi7,80014.1%Goa1,35810.2%Gujarat22,51013.9%Haryana7,0007.8%Himachal Pradesh3,3388.7%Jammu and Kashmir3,1773.6%Jharkhand1,5682.1%Karnataka16,1169.0%Kerala00.0%Madhya PradeshNANAMaharashtra10,0002.9%Manipur00.0%MeghalayaNANAMizoram00.0%Nagaland00.0%Odisha6,2005.0%Punjab12,97514.7%Rajasthan4,8002.8%Sikkim00.0%Tamil Nadu10,3004.7%Telangana00.0%Tripura2081.2%Uttar Pradesh7,6081.8%Uttarakhand3,5718.4%West Bengal4,9282.7%Total1,30,8944.4%Note:   Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Meghalaya passed a vote on account, so data not available.Sources:  State Budget Documents; PRS.A similar scenario played out last year when due to the economic slowdown, the cess collections were not sufficient to meet states’ compensation requirements.  As a result,states have received the GST compensation only till November 2019.  Note that the GST (Compensation to States) Act, 2017 provides that the GST Council can recommend other funding mechanisms for the Compensation Fund.  For instance, this can be done when there is a shortfall of money in the Fund for providing compensation to states.Impact on State FinancesIn light of such severe stress on the revenue side, states will have to either cut their budgeted expenditure or increase their borrowings to meet the budget targets.  Note that because of the coronavirus pandemic and the lockdown, states are also making unforeseen expenditure in the health sector and for providing relief from the lockdown.  As a result, many states have already started working on the former by drawing up plans to defer or cut their planned expenditure, or divert funds for planned expenditure towards these immediate requirements.  With relatively less flexibility on the side of revenue expenditure, capital expenditure could see a larger cut in many states.  For instance, revenue expenditure includes expenditure committed towards payment of interest, salaries, and pension.On average, this committed expenditure uses up 50% of states’ revenue.  However,some states have already gone ahead and deferred or cut the expenditure towards payment of salaries.  Also, with private consumption and investment expected to remain sluggish, reduction of government expenditure could lead to a further decline in GDP.The other option for states is to increase their borrowings.  However, states’ borrowings are limited by their FRBM laws at 3% of their GSDP (with a further 0.5% of GSDP if they fulfil some conditions).  States also need the consent of the central government to borrow money.  While most states had already budgeted their fiscal deficit for 2020-21 near the upper limit, it seems some states do have some fiscal space to borrow more (Table 7).   However, with GSDP expected to take a hit because of the lockdown, fiscal deficit as a percentage of GSDP for all states could be higher than budgeted targets, even if they do not make any additional borrowings.Table7:  Fiscal deficit estimates for 2020-21 as a percentage of GSDPState/ UT2019-20 (Revised)2020-21 (Budgeted)Andhra PradeshNANAArunachal Pradesh3.1%2.4%Assam5.7%2.3%Bihar9.5%3.0%Chhattisgarh6.4%3.2%Delhi-0.1%0.5%Goa4.7%5.0%Gujarat1.6%1.8%Haryana2.8%2.7%Himachal Pradesh6.4%4.0%Jammu and KashmirNA5.0%Jharkhand2.3%2.1%Karnataka2.3%2.6%Kerala3.0%3.0%Madhya PradeshNANAMaharashtra2.7%1.7%Manipur8.9%4.1%MeghalayaNANAMizoram8.3%1.7%Nagaland9.0%4.8%Odisha3.4%3.0%Punjab3.0%2.9%Rajasthan3.2%3.0%Sikkim4.3%3.0%Tamil Nadu3.0%2.8%Telangana2.3%3.0%Tripura6.2%3.5%Uttar Pradesh3.0%3.0%Uttarakhand2.5%2.6%West Bengal2.6%2.2%Centre3.8%3.5%Note:   Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Meghalaya passed a vote on account, so data not available.Sources:  Union and State Budget Documents; PRS.ParliamentFirst no-confidence motion of the 17th Lok Sabha discussed todayNiranjana Menon- August 8, 2023Discussion on the first no-confidence motion of the 17thLok Sabha began today.  No-confidence motions and confidence motions are trust votes, used to test or demonstrate the support of Lok Sabha for the government in power.  Article 75(3) of the Constitution states that the government is collectively responsible to Lok Sabha.  This means that the government must always enjoy the support of a majority of the members of Lok Sabha.  Trust votes are used to examine this support.  The government resigns if a majority of members support a no-confidence motion, or reject a confidence motion.So far, 28 no-confidence motions (including the one being discussed today) and 11 confidence motions have beendiscussed.  Over the years, the number of such motions has reduced.  The mid-1960s and mid-1970s saw more no-confidence motions, whereas the 1990s saw more confidence motions.Figure1: Trust votes in ParliamentNote: *Term shorter than 5 years; **6-year term.Source: Statistical Handbook 2021, Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs; PRS.The no-confidence motion being discussed today wasmovedon July 26, 2023.  A motion of no-confidence is moved with the support of at least 50 members.   The Speaker has the discretion to allot time for discussion of the motion.  TheRules of Procedurestate that the motion must be discussed within 10 days of being introduced.  This year, the no-confidence motion wasdiscussed13 calendar days after introduction.  Since the introduction of the no-confidence motion on July 26, 12 Bills have been introduced and 18 Bills have been passed by Lok Sabha.  In the past, on four occasions, the discussion on no-confidence motions began seven days after their introduction.  On these occasions, Bills and other important issues were debated before the discussion on the no-confidence motion began.Figure2: Members rise in support of the motion of no-confidence in Lok SabhaSource: Sansad TV, Lok Sabha, July 26, 2023; PRS.Figure3: Number of days from introduction to discussion on no-confidence motionsNote: Number of days implies calendar days.Source: Statistical Handbook 2021, Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs; PRS.On average, no-confidence motions (excluding the one being discussed today) have been discussed for 13 hours over three days.  Discussions have lasted longer than 20 hours on four instances, most recently in 2003.  Today’s no-confidence motion was allotted 12 hours discussion time by theBusiness Advisory Committee.Following the discussion, the motion is put to vote.  26 out of 27 no-confidence motions (excluding the one being discussed today) have been voted upon and rejected.  This means that no government has ever had to resign following a vote of no-confidence.   On one occasion, in 1979, the discussion on a no-confidence motion against the Morarji Desai government remained inconclusive.  He resigned before the motion was put to vote.  50% of all no-confidence motions (14 out of 28) were discussed between 1965 and 1975.  Of these, 12 were against governments headed by Indira Gandhi.Figure4: Duration of discussion on no-confidence motionsNote: This graph excludes the no confidence motion moved on July 26, 2023.Source: Statistical Handbook 2021, Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs; PRS.In comparison, confidence motions have a more varied history.  The first motion, brought in 1979 to demonstrate confidence in Charan Singh’s government, was not discussed at all.  The Prime Minister resigned before the discussion could take place.  Since then, 11 confidence motions have been discussed in Lok Sabha, with nine occurring in the 1990s.  During this period, several coalition governments were formed, and Prime Ministers sought to prove their majority throughconfidence motions.   These motions have been discussed, on average, for 12 hours over two days.Figure5: Duration of discussion of confidence motionsSource: Statistical Handbook 2021, Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs; PRS.Of the 11 confidence motions discussed in Lok Sabha, seven were accepted.  On three instances, governments had to resign as they could not prove that they had the support of the majority.  On one instance in 1996, the motion was not put to vote.  Following an eleven-hour discussion on this confidence motion, Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee announced his intention to resign on the floor of the House.  He resigned 16 days into his term.Vajpayee became Prime Minister again in 1999, and faced another confidence motion.   This time, it was put to vote.   The motion was defeated by a margin of one vote.  This has been the closest result on a trust vote in the history of Lok Sabha.  The next closest result was when a motion of no-confidence against P V Narasimha Rao’s government was defeated by 14 votes in 1993.  In most cases, results have been in favour of the government by a large margin.«12345678910»
financial expenditureImpact of Lockdown on Government RevenueSuyash Tiwari- April 19, 2020