advertisement
Over the past few decades, India has endured a few crises associated with external shocks. The 1991 crisis was triggered by the Iraq war. The currency crisis of 2013 came about after Ben Bernanke, then Chairman of the US Federal Reserve, indicated that the US quantitative easing program was set to taper.
While external events did ignite the fires, India was especially vulnerable during those times by sitting on a proverbial powder keg of accumulated external and fiscal imbalances.
Let’s first get a few of things out of the way.
India is not facing any economic crisis at this stage.
But there are signs of some external and fiscal imbalances that are best recognised and addressed early, before they accumulate.
For any household, having to borrow just to fund regular expenses is an uneasy proposition. Such a household will ponder the following:
The answers determine the sustainability of the household budget. Let’s ask these same questions of our fiscal and external situations.
Our government borrows each year to fund a part of its current expenses such as salaries and interest costs – and this is traditionally measured as the revenue deficit.
On the other side there is capital expenditure, which measures investments for our future.
FY18, however, saw fiscal deterioration.
For FY19, the revenue deficit is forecast at 2.2 percent of GDP and capital expenditure at 1.6 percent. This looks tough to meet.
The average FY19 (to-date) crude oil price is 32 percent higher than average FY18 levels. The low oil price dividend that the country enjoyed is receding. That, together with the somewhat ambitious targets for Goods and Services Tax collections, the promise of higher minimum support prices and other expenditures could put the revenue deficit targets at risk.
This, in turn, could push the government to reduce capital expenditure if it has to meet its fiscal deficit target of 3.3 percent of GDP.
As an aside, its worth remembering that the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Act no longer sets a path towards lower revenue deficits. The justification offered is that revenue expenditure items such as salaries for school teachers, are actually critical investments for the future. Fair enough. An alternative “effective revenue deficit” was mooted – which incidentally also deteriorated by 0.6 percent in FY18. But even this does not form part of FRBM.
In summary, the quality of our fiscal deficit has deteriorated in FY18, and FY19 looks tough as well. In the medium run, GST and formalisation will improve our tax-to-GDP ratios further. In the short run though, the current nature of imbalance leaves us vulnerable to an oil price shock.
On the external side, we run a current account deficit, dominated by current expenditures such as oil, gold and smartphone imports, which needs to be funded by capital flows.
To sustain this, we ideally need permanent capital inflows that are deployed into productive investments, such as foreign direct investment. Such flows channel external savings into our country, and increase output and employment. To the extent FDI does not cover our CAD, we need to rely on other borrowings.
Despite the core balance turning negative in FY18, the Indian rupee did not depreciate. This is because we saw $60 billion in non-FDI inflows. These included portfolio flows into debt, non-resident deposits, dollar sales by exporters, and speculative positions taken in the expectation of rupee stability.
That brings us to the impossible trinity.
The RBI governor clarified this week that domestic monetary policy is driven by the inflation targeting mandate and does not target any currency levels. Be that as it may, the ‘impossible trinity’ construct tells us that monetary policy will impact capital flows and/or currency levels. We saw this even in FY18, as shown above.
Our monetary policy framework has brought in large non-permanent inflows now, and led to an appreciation in the rupee. During testing times, we may have to continue to keep interest rates high and the currency stable just to ensure the flows don’t reverse.
There are ways out.
First, we have to let the rupee weaken, as a reaction to the deteriorating core balance. Second, we have to explore ways to make at least some of the carry-seeking flows, such as FPI in debt, more long-term and dependable. Third, the issues facing exporters need to be addressed and we have to find ways of producing smartphones at home rather than importing them from China. Lastly, our monetary policy framework has to be cognisant of the impossible trinity, and we should debate an appropriate currency policy.
We could well get by despite these imbalances. For one, if our prayers are answered and crude oil prices drop back below $60 a barrel, there will be no spark to light up any powder keg. Or our next generations may live up to our faith in them, produce the economic miracle that we have always been capable of and easily repay every debt that we take up now.
Faith and prayer are our core strengths but we should do better than make them a cornerstone of our economic strategy.
(Ananth Narayan is Associate Professor-Finance at SPJIMR. He was previously Standard Chartered Bank’s Regional Head of Financial Markets for ASEAN and South Asia.)
(This article was first published on BloombergQuint and has been republished here.)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)