In our country during the independence struggle, provincial autonomy was regarded as an integral part of the freedom movement. However, after Independence, several compulsions, which included defence and internal security, led to a scheme of federalism in which the Centre assumed greater importance.
Fiscal federalism –
- Fiscal federalism is the economic counterpart to political federalism. Fiscal federalism is concerned with the assignment on the one hand of functions to different levels of government, and with appropriate fiscal instruments for carrying out these functions on the other.
- It is generally believed that the Central government must provide national public goods that render services to the entire population. A typical example cited is defence.
- Sub-national governments are expected to provide goods and services whose consumption is limited to their own jurisdictions.
Constitutional provisions –
- The Indian Constitution lays down the functions as well as taxing powers of the Centre and States to resolve the issues relating to the correction of vertical and horizontal imbalances through the Finance Commission. It takes into account the prevailing set of circumstances.
- However, Central transfers to States are not confined to the recommendations of the Finance Commissions. There are other channels such as those through the Planning Commission until recently as well the discretionary grants of the Central government.
The share in resource pool –
- In 2010-11, in the combined revenue receipts of the Centre and States, the share of the Centre was 64.68%.
- In 2016-17, the share of the Centre after transfers was 33.37% and that of the States was 66.63%.
- In the case of total expenditures, the share of the Centre in 2014-15 was 41.14% and that of the States was 58.86%. The ultimate position appears reasonable. The question may be on the mode of transfers.
New developments –
- One of the major recommendations of the Fourteenth Finance Commission is to increase the share of tax devolution to 42% of the divisible pool. This is a substantial increase by almost 10 percentage points.
- The commission has argued that this does not necessarily affect the overall transfers but only enhances the share of unconditional transfers.
- It is true that Centrally sponsored schemes, which have ballooned in recent years, may have ‘encroached’ on the territory of States. Today, the Central government is held responsible for everything that happens, including, for example, agrarian distress. In viewing the responsibilities of the Centre and States we must take a broader view than what is stipulated in the Constitution.
What should be done?
- Perhaps the time has come for the Constitution to be amended and the proportion of shareable taxes that should go to the States fixed at the desired level. The shareable tax pool must also include cesses and surcharges as these have sharply increased in recent years. Fixing the ratio at 42% of shareable taxes, including cesses and surcharges, seems appropriate.
- Another possible route is to follow the practice in the U.S. and Canada: of allowing the States to levy tax on personal income, with some limitations. Since one of the concerns is that resources do not match functions, this may be a way out. But, as in the U.S., the scheme should be simple and ride on federal income tax, that is, just a levy on the income assessed by federal authorities. The freedom given to the States must be limited. It is important to note that the levy by the Centre and States together should be reasonable.
Once this power is given to the States, the transfers from the Centre need adjustment. As far as India is concerned, this is an area which needs a fuller study. Adoption of any one of these alternatives will avoid friction between the Centre and the States. Perhaps the first alternative of constitutionally fixing the ratio is the easiest.
Source – The Hindu
Also Read: India’s tryst with 5G