Beyond the inflation-infested real estate markets of the metros, though, there is respite. If you’re a first-time home buyer and borrow Rs 25 lakh, you will get an additional deduction of Rs 1 lakh above the existing deduction of Rs 1.5 lakh. But, a house with a carpet area of over 2,000 sq ft or priced over Rs 1 crore will cost more—that’s nearly every apartment in the metros.
There were no additions to the 80C list of exemptions. That’s good—the simpler the tax code, the easier it is for honest taxpayers to follow. That the know your customer (KYC) process in banks will suffice for insurance policies is a good step. Why it was not extended to all financial products escapes logic. Post-debate, I hope investors can look at a single KYC to mutual funds, stocks, futures and commodities. This would enable a smoother transition to financial products, instead of the default option of real estate and gold.
Robin Hood budgets have been presented over and again. Budget 2013-14 returns to that idea in a second dash to tax the rich. Of course, we hate the rich—till we get there, that is. So, let’s relish the voyeuristic pleasures to be had in watching them squirm. A person with a taxable income of Rs 1.2 crore will have to pay Rs 3,53,290 more in taxes due to a 10 per cent surcharge. That translates into a princely sum of less than Rs 30,000 per month—er, what are they whining about?
Here’s what. The real pinch to the 42,800-strong army of people making more than Rs 1 crore per annum will come from the spending side—from imported cars and yachts (customs duty raised to 100 per cent from 75 per cent) to SUVs (excise duty up by 3 per cent) and cigars (excise duties raised by 18 per cent), the (not so) merry man in whites has increased taxes on all these luxury products—and given us enough to feel good about. But if I were to pick the one thing I like about Chidambaram’s pre-election budget, it is this: a one per cent tax deducted at source (TDS) for all property transactions (minus the holy cow, agricultural land) worth Rs 50 lakh or more. The idea, it appears, is to improve the reporting of such transactions for paying capital gains. And even though the problem of undervaluation remains unaddressed, unclear and open to debate, this is a good first step towards hitting unaccounted-for transactions.
The author is a journalist and policy analyst; gchikermane AT gmail.com
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
'Tax the males to appease the feminists"
This seems to be the established financial mantra of our nation that is doomed.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT