1.
The Stock Market experienced its biggest intra-day fall ever on 22nd May
2006, with the BSE Sensex sliding by 1111.70 points. Trading had to be
suspended for an hour due to the sharp fall (the index-based circuit breakers
came into play). After some reassurances from the Finance Minister, SEBI
and the RBI, the market recovered and finally closed at 10,481.77, which
still meant a net fall of 456 points. This comes after a fall of 826 points
on 18th May and 452 points fall on 19th May. This was the biggest stock
market meltdown experienced in India. Although a further decline could
be prevented, mainly on account of buying by the public financial institutions
like the LIC and UTI as well as Mutual Funds, the stock markets continue
to witness gyrations.
2.
On 24th May, the Finance Minister issued a statement in Rajya Sabha on
''Recent Developments in the Stock Market'' where he sought to downplay
the market crash and reiterated that the rise in the interest rate in
the US due to inflationary expectations and a global fall in metal and
other commodity prices were the prime reasons for the market meltdown.
These factors have no doubt contributed to the crash. It is also true
that stock markets globally have witnessed downturns over the past one
week. However, the market crash in India stands out both in its magnitude
as well as its specific underlying causes.
3.
The Finance Minister's statement says, ''Data from the markets received
yesterday confirm that Mutual Funds have been net buyers. Even FIIs have
been overall net buyers with large purchases in the derivatives market''.
Question naturally arises that if both the FIIs as well as the Mutual
Funds, who are the main movers of stock market, were net buyers, then
why did the crash occur at all? Which were those entities whose heavy
selling led to the crash? The fact of the matter is that while the FIIs
may have invested large sums in the Futures and Options segment (derivatives)
on 22nd May as claimed by the Finance Minister, but they were net sellers
in the stock market.
4.
Data from the SEBI show that FIIs' net investment stood at - 2200.30 crore
rupees for the entire month of May till 23rd May 2006. FII net investment
on 22nd May, i.e. the day of the crash was - 1361 crore rupees. It is
clear from the data that heavy selling by the FIIs caused the market meltdown.
This is further corroborated by the fact that the exchange rate has declined
continuously in the month of May in keeping with the withdrawal of funds
by the FIIs. The rupee which stood at Rs 44.90 against a dollar on 2nd
May 2006 slided to Rs 45.73 by 24th May 2006, indicating the capital flight.
The Finance Minister is clearly trying to shield the role of the FIIs
in the market crash by making misleading statements in Parliament.
Daily
Trends in FII Investments upto May 23, 2006
Reporting
Date |
Debt/Equity
|
Net
Investment (Rs. Crores) |
02-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
60.90 |
Debt |
0.00 |
03-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
218.50 |
Debt |
-
50.00 |
04-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
907.20 |
Debt |
0.00 |
05-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
322.60 |
Debt |
0.00 |
08-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
1108.10 |
Debt |
0.00 |
09-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
366.50 |
Debt |
0.00 |
10-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
460.50 |
Debt |
0.00 |
11-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
322.90 |
Debt |
0.00 |
12-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
-
1199.10 |
Debt |
396.90 |
15-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
18.60 |
Debt |
0.00 |
16-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
-
728.40 |
Debt |
-
199.50 |
17-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
-
533.40 |
Debt |
127.90 |
18-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
-423.50 |
Debt |
0.00 |
19-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
-810.60 |
Debt |
43.10 |
22-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
-
1361.30 |
Debt |
-52.70 |
23-MAY-2006 |
Equity
|
-
929.80 |
Debt |
0.00 |
Total
for May |
Equity
|
-
2200.30 |
Debt |
265.70 |
Source:
Securities and Exchange Board of India
Exchange
Rate (Rs/$)
Date |
Rs. |
24/05/2006 |
45.7300 |
23/05/2006 |
45.5200 |
22/05/2006 |
45.6800 |
19/05/2006 |
45.4600 |
18/05/2006 |
45.4800 |
17/05/2006 |
45.3400 |
16/05/2006 |
45.6100 |
15/05/2006 |
45.3900 |
12/05/2006 |
45.0500 |
11/05/2006 |
45.0700 |
10/05/2006 |
44.9300 |
09/05/2006 |
44.9600 |
08/05/2006 |
44.8800 |
05/05/2006 |
44.8800 |
04/05/2006 |
44.9700 |
03/05/2006 |
44.8600 |
02/05/2006 |
44.9000 |
Source: Reserve Bank of India
5. The stock market has experienced an
unprecedented bull run since the UPA Government came into office. While
the Sensex was around 4500 in May 2004, it crossed 7000 points in June
2005, 8000 in September 2005, 9000 in November 2005, 10000 in February
2006, 11000 in March 2006 and 12000 in April 2006. This abnormal price
appreciation was a bubble that kept growing with the Finance Minister
justifying and celebrating it in terms of the strong ''fundamentals''
of the economy.
6. In December 2004, when the Sensex was above 6000 points
the Finance Minister had said: "I don't react. As long as the Sensex
is driven by the fundamentals of the economy, I am very happy." In
July 2005, when the Sensex had crossed 7000 he said: ''If the Sensex crosses
8000, then I think that I would be concerned." In September 2005,
after the Sensex crossed 8000 he said: "We are looking at the price-earnings
(PE) ratio (of Sensex and Nifty). At this level, they look comfortable."
In December 2005, when the Sensex had crossed 9000 he said: "I expect
the Sensex to rise with investor and business confidence rising. However,
SEBI and I watch the movement carefully to see if there is any manipulation...My
impression is that mutual funds are quite active in the markets, meaning
thereby that small investors are putting their money in the mutual funds.''
7. When the Sensex went down by 463 points on 16th May,
The Finance Minister said: "I will put it as a correction provoked
by reasons which are quite understandable. All metal prices are down and
there is some impact of cement prices...and increases in US Fed rate.
All markets are doing the same." On 18th May, when the Sensex had
experienced a sharp fall he remarked: "Everyday movement in the stock
markets does not require a comment." After the crash of 22nd May,
the Finance Minister is seen to be desperately advising investors not
to panic and ''stay invested''. It is obvious that the public financial
institutions are being instructed to buy heavily in the stock market in
order to prevent any further fall of the indices.
8. FIIs were also behind the market crash of ‘Black Monday'
(17th May 2004), when the Sensex had fallen by 565 points. Enquiry into
the crash revealed that the instrument of Participatory Notes (PN) [which
are like contract notes issued by the FIIs to overseas clients who are
otherwise not eligible for investing in India] was misused by the FIIs.
The SEBI had issued notices to 12 FIIs for not complying with its rules
on furnishing details about PNs issued to overseas investors. However,
it could pin down only one FII, UBS Securities Asia, following its probe
into the stock market crash of 17th May 2004 and imposed a ban on its
issuing PNs for a year. Despite efforts the SEBI could not get details
of the other FIIs and investors who had withdrawn huge funds and contributed
to the market crash.
9. The Finance Ministry had set up an Expert Group ''On
Encouraging FII Flows and Checking the Vulnerability of Capital Markets
to Speculative flows'' [Chaired by Dr. Ashok Lahiri], in order to suggest
concrete measures to meet the objective of encouraging FIIs while reducing
the vulnerability of the financial system to the flow of speculative capital
as laid down in the National Common Minimum Programme. In its Report submitted
in November 2005, the Expert Group observed that, ''Participatory notes
(PNs) are instruments used by foreign funds, not registered in the country,
for trading in the domestic market. They are a derivative instrument issued
against an underlying security, which permits the holder to share in the
capital appreciation/income from the underlying security. PNs are like
contract notes and are issued by FIIs, registered in the country, to their
overseas clients who may not be eligible to invest in the Indian stock
markets. PNs are used as an alternative to sub-accounts by ultimate investors
generally based on considerations related to transactions costs and record
keeping overheads. In recent times, the anonymity afforded by the PN route
has led to concerns about the desirability of PNs. With effect from February
3, 2004, overseas derivative instruments such as PNs against underlying
Indian securities can be issued only to regulated entities and further
transfers, if any, of these instruments can also be to other regulated
entities only. FIIs/sub accounts have been required to ensure that no
further downstream issuance of such derivative instruments is made to
unregulated entities.''
10. The Expert Group recommended, ''The current dispensation
for PNs may continue. SEBI should have full powers to obtain information
regarding the final holder/beneficiaries or of any holder at any point
of time in case of any investigation or surveillance action. FIIs may
be obliged to provide the information to SEBI''. The RBI representative
in the Expert Group disagreed with this view. In his comments he wrote,
''The Reserve Bank's stance has been that the issue of Participatory Notes
should not be permitted. In this context we would like to point out that
the main concerns regarding issue of PNs are that the nature of the beneficial
ownership or the identity of the investor will not be known, unlike in
the case of FIIs registered with a financial regulator. Trading of these
PNs will lead to multi-layering, which will make it difficult to identify
the ultimate holder of PNs. Both conceptually and in practice, restriction
on suspicious flows enhance the reputation of markets and lead to healthy
flows. We, therefore, reiterate that issuance of Participatory Notes should
not be permitted.''
11. The opinion of the RBI, however, has been ignored
and the proportion of PNs in total FII investments have been allowed to
rise from 40% in 2005 to 52% by April 2006. This implies that more than
half of the beneficiaries of FII investments in India are unknown overseas
entities. In the wake of the current stock market meltdown, which has
been precipitated through heavy selling by the FIIs, it is important to
probe whether there has been any misuse of the PN route. The SEBI should
immediately institute an enquiry into the matter and make all the relevant
facts public.
12. Another important aspect of the stock market crash
is the role of the Central Board of Direct Taxes [CBDT] circular, containing
instructions to assessing officers to help them distinguish between share
traders and investors. The prospect that taxes will rise by four times
caused panic among the FIIs. Since then the Finance Minister has made
a statement clarifying that the CBDT circular is not meant for FIIs and
that the FIIs are outside the purview of such taxation since they do not
have any permanent establishment in India. The Finance Minister has further
stated that the CBDT circular was put out only to elicit public views.
13. It is noteworthy that the Comptroller and Auditor
General of India (CAG) in a Report tabled in Parliament on 5th May 2005
had suggested that income of FIIs and their sub-accounts from stock market
activities should be treated as business profit and taxed accordingly.
The Report said that income of FIIs/sub-accounts was often being "erroneously
categorised as capital gains and being exempted from tax by routinely
invoking the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs)." The CAG
suggested, "The board (CBDT) may issue necessary clarifications to
ensure correct and proper taxation of income arising to FIIs/sub-accounts".
It specifically sought clarification on whether sub-account arrangements
would constitute a `permanent establishment' under tax treaty. The CAG
recommended that the CBDT should strengthen mechanism of coordination
with regulatory bodies such as the SEBI and the RBI so that vital information
relating to the income of FIIs/sub-accounts is obtained regularly and
acted upon promptly by assessing officers with a view to bringing the
same to tax. It also said that legislative amendments, if necessary, could
also be opted for to achieve this objective.
14. The CAG report noted that the Income-Tax Department
did not have any centralised or alternative effective mechanism to correlate
or utilise the details available with SEBI relating to inflows and outflows
of FIIs. The CAG has also been given to understand from SEBI that application
for registration did not have details of an agent as provided under Section
163 of Income-Tax Act and no details such as local address were available
relating to FIIs. Further, the CAG has recommended that the CBDT should
ensure that a database of FIIs/sub-brokers relating to all entities operating
in India be prepared and their "liability to tax examined critically
so that benefits of DTAA are availed only by assesses actually and rightfully
entitled to the same." While highlighting that cost-benefit analysis
of DTAAs had not been conducted, the CAG report recommended that DTAAs
be examined critically through a phased and well-monitored programme so
that the interests of the revenue are safeguarded and one-sided concessions
are avoided. The CAG suggested that the board may "assess the costs
and benefits from each DTAA transparently and objectively, especially
as DTAAs are not placed before Parliament''.
15. It is evident that the CBDT circular is in keeping
with the eminently reasonable recommendations of the CAG. It is also clear
that the effort to bring the enormous profits reaped by the FIIs within
the tax net has led to this capital flight. The effort is to blackmail
the Government into giving up any effort to tax such speculative gains.
Media reports suggest that the Investment Company Institute, the Association
of the US Mutual Fund Industry, had written to the Indian Revenue Department
about a month earlier questioning the notices sent to several US Mutual
funds by the Indian Income Tax department. The tendency of the Government,
of course, is to surrender before the FIIs as is evident from the clarifications
issued by the Finance Minister. This should not be allowed to happen.
The CBDT should go ahead with the recommendations of the CAG, especially
with regard to a cost-benefit analysis of the DTAAs. Moreover, the Government
should reintroduce the long-term capital gains tax in order to correct
the pro-speculation bias in the existent tax policy.
16. Although not a cause of immediate concern, potentially
the most dangerous fallout of the stock market meltdown, particularly
if it continues over a period of time with the FIIs pulling out of the
market progressively, is its impact on the exchange rate. A secular depreciation
of the rupee, in the backdrop of the continuing rise in international
oil prices, is bound to cause inflationary pressures in the economy and
hit the common man hard. The RBI has to remain vigilant in this regard.
17.
The Government should also realize that the introduction of Capital Account
Convertibility, which was enthusiastically advocated by the Prime Minister
a few weeks ago, amidst the volatility that is being currently experienced
by the capital market would be a sure recipe for large-scale capital flight
and currency crisis. This move should be abandoned forthwith.
|