India’s e-commerce sector to see $120 billion revenue by 2020: Assocham-Forrester report

The country’s e-commerce sector is expected to see revenues of USD 120 billion by 2020 from USD 30 billion at the end of last fiscal, a report said.

The increase would be mainly on the back of young demographic profile, rising Internet penetration and relatively better economic performance, the Assocham-Forrester study said.

India’s e-commerce sector saw revenues of USD 30 billion at the end of the financial year 2015-16. It is expected to reach USD 120 billion by 2020, it said.

“While in terms of base, India may be lower than China and other giants like Japan, the Indian rate of growth is way ahead of others. Against India’s annual expansion of 51 per cent, China’s e-commerce is growing at 18 per cent, Japan 11 per cent and South Korea 10 per cent,” the study noted.

The report further said that India has an Internet user base of 400 million in 2016 whereas Brazil has 210 million Internet users and Russia 130 million, among the BRICS nations.

About 75 per cent of the country’s online users are in the age group of 15-34 years since India is one of the youngest demographies globally and one out of every 5 (online user) visits the Indian Railways site, the report said.

In India, about 60-65 per cent of the total e-commerce sales are being generated through smart phones. Branded apparel, accessories, jewellery, gifts, footwear are among the major hits on the e-commerce platforms, it added.

Source:http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/52172120.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

 

RBI may allow you to be a lender (P2P)

The RBI’s move to regulate the peer-to-peer (P2P) lending business has evoked good response with most participants saying that it could provide greater confidence to lenders and borrowers, as also to venture capitalists. The space has some 35 startups now and more than 20 of them were founded just last year, according to data from startup tracking platform Tracxn. They have collectively attracted only $7.5 million in venture funds, and the ones that have received the most funds include Faircent, Milaap, iLend, RangDe, LendenClub and LoanCircle.

“VCs have so far shied away from the industry due to lack of recognition and regulation of the segment,” says IDG Ventures partner Karan Mohla, adding that the proposed regulation will help the sector grow the way microfinance did.

P2P lending typically involves a technology platform that brings together borrowers and lenders, often individuals. The borrower can place his/her requirements,  and lenders can bid to service that borrower. Normally, the platforms insist on more than one lender servicing a single borrowing requirement to reduce risks. The interest rate may be set by the platform or by mutual agreement between the borrower and lender, or through an auction where lenders place bids. The platform does a preliminary assessment of the borrower’s creditworthiness, and they also collect the loan repayments. Over time, the platforms could automatically develop creditworthiness scores. Borrowers and lenders both pay a fee to the platform for these services. The average interest rates on these platforms tend to be high at 20% and the loan amount is an average of around Rs 1 lakh. Most borrowers are self-employed or those with salaries above Rs 6 lakh per annum. Most platforms charge around 2.5% of the loan amount as commission, from both parties.

The RBI is looking at factors such as what should constitute P2P lending, the legal framework, whether to set a maximum interest rate, and how to differentiate it with crowd-funding. It is, for now, looking to categorize them as non-banking financial companies (NBFCs).

“The potential benefits that P2P lending promises to various stakeholders (to borrowers, lenders, agencies, etc) and its associated risks to the financial system are too important to be ignored,” says the RBI consultation paper. The UK-based Peer-to-Peer Finance Association (P2PFA) estimates that lending through the channel globally has grown dramatically from 0.2 billion pounds in the first quarter of 2012 to 5.1 billion pounds in the first quarter of 2016.

Apoorv Sharma, founder of Venture Catalyst and an investor in LenDen, says P2P in India is still in its early stages but the government’s involvement could drive rapid growth.

Faircent, one of the largest platforms in the country, believes that the new norms will accelerate the growth in the sector – similar to how RBI regulations helped the e-wallet sector. The company has raised funding from Aarin Capital, M & S Partners and others. It has disbursed more than Rs 4.5 crore to beneficiaries so far and it is looking at loans of more than Rs 60 crore this fiscal.

Abhishek Periwal, founder of P2P platform KountMoney, said that regular banking channels don’t cater to lots of self-employed people. “P2P lending platforms come into play here, as they are faster than banks and NBFCs,” he said. Bhavin Patel, founder of LenDen Club, which started in 2015, believes the RBI regulation will be a confidence booster but has reservations about the regulator’s proposal that payment should happen directly between the borrower and the lender and that P2P platforms should have brick-and-mortar offices. He thinks the former will make monitoring and control difficult, and the latter is unnecessary. “A lot of our plans have been put on hold due to these uncertainties,” said Patel, whose platform has more than 2,000 borrowers and 900 lenders.

Source: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/52183326.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst.

U.S. issues rule requiring banks to identify shell company owners

A company list showing the Mossack Fonseca law firm is pictured on a sign at the Arango Orillac Building in Panama City in this April 3, 2016 file photo. REUTERS/Carlos Jasso/Files

The Obama administration is issuing a long-delayed rule requiring the financial industry to identify the real owners of companies and proposing a bill that would require companies to report the identities of their owners to the federal government, U.S. officials said on Thursday.

The Customer Due Diligence (CDD) rule, in the works since 2012, and the proposed legislation are meant to hinder criminals from using shell companies to hide ownership and launder money, finance terror, and commit other threats to the global financial system.

The use of shell companies to hide assets and avoid taxes is in the spotlight following a massive leak of data from the Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca, which embarrassed several world leaders and sparked government investigations around the globe into possible financial wrongdoing by the wealthy elite. The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists said it will release a searchable database of more than 200,000 offshore entities next week.

“Fundamentally our financial system should not provide the rich, the powerful, and the corrupt with the opportunity to shield their assets,” said Wally Adeyemo, the U.S. deputy national security advisor for international economics, in a call with reporters on Thursday. “Nobody should be able to hide in the shadows from their legal obligations.”

The final CDD rule will require banks, brokers, mutual funds and other financial institutions to collect and verify the identities of the real people, or “beneficial owners,” who own and control companies when those companies open accounts.

Financial institutions will have to verify the identity of any person or company who owns more than 25 percent of the company, and one live person who controls the company even if that person owns less than 25 percent.

Banks will have two years to get their systems into compliance, said Jennifer Fowler, the U.S. Treasury deputy assistant secretary for terrorist financing.

The U.S. Treasury said in 2012 it planned to propose a rule that would clarify and standardize financial institutions’ obligations to know the identities of their customers.

But the proposal generated opposition from the financial industry, which argued it would be costly, ineffective, and difficult to implement because the United States lacks a national database of corporate information.

To address one of those industry concerns, Treasury will propose legislation requiring companies to report to the Treasury the identity of beneficial owners when a company is incorporated. The legislation would create a central registry of beneficial ownership, something the U.S. currently does not have, Fowler said.

U.S. secretaries of state have lobbied against similar legislative action in the past, arguing that the Internal Revenue Service already has corporate ownership records that it could make available to law enforcement.

Adeyemo said the Obama administration had been “consulting actively” with secretaries of state. “This is a place where we need Congress to act,” he said.

Taken together, the measures would make the financial system more transparent and close loopholes that allow for abuse or illegal activity, officials said.

More than 1,000 prosecutions are brought each year in the United States for money laundering, Fowler said. “This is a record that no one in the world can match.”

But, she added, “there are vulnerabilities that we need to address in order to maintain an effective regime.”

The Treasury is also proposing a regulation that would increase requirements for some foreign-owned companies operating in the United States to report information to the government, which officials said would prevent the use of those companies for tax avoidance purposes.

In addition, the Justice Department is proposing amendments that would strengthen its ability to pursue foreign corruption cases, including issuing subpoenas for records in money laundering investigations, obtaining overseas records, and using classified information in civil cases.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-regulations-finance-idUSKCN0XX02O

Income tax refunds worth Rs 1.22 lakh cr issued in FY’16: Govt

The Income Tax department has issued 2.10 crore refunds totalling over Rs 1.22 lakh crore in 2015-16, which saw 94 per cent the returns being filed online.

“During FY 2015-16, more than 2.10 crore refunds amounting to Rs 1,22,425 crore were paid compared to Rs 1,12,188 crore in the Financial Year 2014-15 and Rs 89,664 crore in the Financial Year 2013-14,” a finance ministry statement said.

In 2015-16, more than 94 per cent of income tax returns were filed online and 4.14 crore returns were processed by the Central Processing Centre (CPC), Bengaluru, without any human intervention.

Both the Central Board of Director Taxes (CBDT) and Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) are making optimum use of technology for expeditious disposal of assessment and refunds as well as for addressing the issues relating to custom clearance and facilitating trade among others, it said.

As regards indirect tax collections last fiscal, the indirect tax to GDP ratio is about 5.17 per cent as compared to 4.36 per cent for FY 2014-15.

Indirect tax to GDP ratio for the current Financial Year 2016-17 is estimated to be 5.20 per cent, the ministry said.

E-payment of Central Excise and Service Tax refunds and rebates through RTEGS/NEFT has been implemented and 80 percent of the refund amount is granted within 5 days for service exporters.

Single Window Interface for Facilitating Trade (SWIFT) acts as a single point interface for over 50 offices of six government agencies for clearance of Exim Goods and reduces documentation and costs, thereby benefiting over 97 per cent of India’s imports, the ministry added.

Source: http://www.firstpost.com/business/income-tax-refund-financial-year-2768332.html

Ultra-rich must declare cost price of expensive assets: CBDT

People with annual income of over Rs 50 lakh will have to disclose the acquisition cost of all the assets like land, building and jewellery in the Income Tax return forms for assessment year 2016-17.

The luxury items to be disclosed will also include utensils, apparels and furnitures studded with precious stones and ornaments made of gold, silver, platinum or any other precious metal or alloy.

“The amount in respect of assets to be reported will be the cost price of such assets to the assessee,” the Central Board of Direct Taxes ( CBDT) has said while issuing instructions on the new ITR forms.

In case the precious items had been received as gifts, the assessee will have to declare the cost of acquisition by the previous owner along with value additions.
“In case where the cost at which the asset was acquired by the previous owner is not ascertainable and no wealth-tax return was filed in respect of such asset, the value may be estimated at the circle rate or bullion rate, as the case may be, on the date of acquisition by the assessee as increased by cost of improvement, if any, or March 31, 2016,” the instructions said.

The assessee will also have to declare whether such items and their value were disclosed at the time of filing wealth tax returns earlier.

The tax department had in April notified the new ITR forms for assessment year 2016-17 and introduced a fresh reporting column in ITR-1, ITR-2 and 2A called ‘Asset and Liability at the end of the year’ which is applicable in cases where the total income exceeds Rs 50 lakh.

“There are only 1.5 lakh individuals whose total income would be above Rs 50 lakh. This schedule in ITR only applies to ultra-rich and will not affect the common man,” Revenue Secretary Hasmukh Adhia had earlier said.

As per the new schedule in ITR forms, individuals and entities coming under this total income bracket will have to mention the total cost of movable and immovable assets.

While immovable assets include land and building, movable assets to be disclosed were cash in hand, jewellery, bullion, vehicles, yachts, boats, aircraft etc.

ITR-1 can be filed by individuals having income from salaries, one house property and from other sources including interest. ITR-2 is filed by Individuals and HUFs not having income from business or profession. ITR-2A is filed by those individuals and HUFs who do not have income from business or profession and capital gains and who do not hold foreign assets.

Read Source:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/52106652.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

 

Financial inequality highest in India, China: International Monetary Fund

According to IMF, China and India have grown rapidly and reduced poverty sharply, however, this impressive economic performance has been accompanied by increasing levels of inequality.

Financial inequality is highest in India and China among Asia Pacific countries despite the two being among the fastest growing economies, IMF has said.

According to the International Monetary Fund, China and India have grown rapidly and reduced poverty sharply, however, this impressive economic performance has been accompanied by increasing levels of inequality.

“In the past, rapid growth in Asia came with equitable distribution of the gains. But more recently, while the fast-growing Asian economies have lifted millions out of poverty they have been unable to replicate the ‘growth with equity’ miracle,” the Fund said.

As per the report, China managed to increase middle class in urban areas, as did Thailand, while India and Indonesia struggled to lift sizeable portions of their populations toward higher income levels.

“In India, differences between rural and urban areas have increased, and have been accompanied by rising intra-urban inequality,” it said.

Many factors have been identified as key drivers of the inequality between rural and urban areas in China and India.

In China, rapid industrialisation in particular regions and the concentration of foreign direct investment in coastal areas have led to substantial inequalities between coastal and interior regions. Other factors also include low educational attainment and low returns to education in rural areas.

On India, the report said inter provincial inequality is lower in India than in China, and rising inequality in India has been found to be primarily an urban phenomenon.

Moreover, the rural-urban income gap has increased, and higher rural inflation has been found to be a key driver of this. Educational attainment has also been identified as an important factor explaining rising inequality in India over the past two decades, the Fund said.

The two countries have introduced a number of policies to tackle the rising inequality.

China introduced the Minimum Livelihood Guarantee Scheme (Dibao) for social protection in the 1990s. Moreover, various social programs are aiming to expand social safety nets and provide support for the development of rural areas and western regions.

In India, the government introduced the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act to support rural livelihoods by providing at least 100 days of employment. Programs to improve education include the National Education Scheme and Midday Meal Scheme.

The Fund lauded the JAM (Jan Dhan-Aadhaar-Mobile) initiative and said that “the JAM trinity initiative helped India in making substantial advances in financial inclusion. More recently, programs aiming for universal bank account coverage were launched”.

Source:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/52106291.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

 

Clean energy projects get Rs 86,000 crore investment

Renewable energy projects have received Rs 86,000 crore investment, most of it from private sector, in the last three years with Madhya Pradesh at top garnering Rs 14,313.80 crore.

“Most of the investment in renewable energy came from private sector. Total estimated investment in renewable energy power projects during the last three years is around Rs 86,000 crore,” New and Renewable Energy Minister Piyush Goyal said in a written reply to Lok Sabha today.

According to the statement, around 15,400 million units has been generated through solar power projects during the last three years.

Madhya Pradesh remained at the top, recording maximum investment in clean energy projects at Rs 14,313.80. It was followed by Maharashtra at Rs 13,743.01 crore, Rajasthan at Rs 11,632.96 crore, Karnataka at Rs 9,586.31 crore, Andhra Pradesh at Rs 9,539.12 crore, Tamil Nadu at Rs 8,961.28 crore and Gujarat at Rs 6,646.35 crore.

The minister also stated that Pondicherry, Laskhwadeep, Dadar & Nagar Haveli, Sikkim, Manipur, Meghalaya and Goa received no investment at all for renewable energy projects in last three years.

According to a separate reply to the House, as on March 31, 2016, a cumulative capacity of 42.76 GW has been installed from various renewable energy sources, which include 26.78 GW from Wind, 6.76 GW from solar, 4.27 from small hydro power and 4.95 GW from bio power.

In another reply to the House, the Maharashtra will require the maximum solar power generation capacity of 13,270 MW by 2021-22 as per tentative renewable purchase obligation (RPO) requirement estimated by the ministry.

The ministry has estimated 1,02,021 MW solar power generation capacity to be installed in the entire country by 2021-22.

After Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh’s solar power generation capacity by 2021-22 as per RPO requirement would be the second highest at 12,124 MW followed by Gujarat at 9,796 MW, Tamil Nadu at 9,398 MW and Rajasthan 6,953 MW.

Under RPO, states are mandated by power regulators to have certain proportion of renewable energy capacity in their total power mix to promote clean and green sources like solar and wind.

The minister in another reply to the House stated that the new pithead thermal power plants have the lowest tariff of Rs 3.75 per unit in the first year of operation compared Rs 4.5 per unit for solar, Rs 4.6 for hydro, Rs 4.94 for atomic power and Rs 5.49 for non-pithed thermal plants.

However, the levellised tariff for hydro power plants is the lowest at Rs 4 per units compared Rs 4.5 for solar, Rs 5 for atomic power, Rs 4.57 for pithead based thermal power and Rs 7.57 per unit for non-pithead based thermal power plant.

Source:http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/52125394.cms