#Union Budget 2017 Highlights

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Scott Horton  · Drew Sheneman, Newark Star-Ledger

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

February 15, 2023

Heather Cox Richardson

President Joe Biden hit the road today to continue the push to highlight the successes of his administration's investment in the economy. In Lanham, Maryland, at the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 26, he celebrated the economic plan that “grows the economy from the bottom up and the middle out, not the top down.”

He praised union labor and said that the nation’s investment in green energy would mean “good-paying jobs for electricians, plumbers, pipefitters, laborers, carpenters, cement masons, ironworkers, and so much more. And these are good jobs you can raise a family on.” “It’s a stark contrast to our Republican friends, who are doubling down on the same failed politics of the past. Top-down, trickle-down economics is not much trickle down…to most kitchen tables in America,” he said.

He reiterated that he would lay out his budget on March 9 and that he expected the Republicans to lay out theirs, so people can compare the two. Biden maintains that his policy of investing in infrastructure and putting money in the hands of ordinary Americans will nurture the economy and reduce the deficit as growth brings in more tax dollars. Meanwhile, he said, the Republican tax cut of 2017 has already added $2 trillion to the federal deficit.

Good economic news is putting wind under Biden’s wings. The economy continues to perform better than expected in 2023. Retail buying increased 3% in January, and the job market remains strong. The administration today highlighted another series of large private sector investments in American manufacturing: Boeing announced that Air India has contracted to buy more than 200 aircraft; Ford announced it will build a $3.5 billion factory in Marshall, Michigan, to make advanced batteries for electric vehicles; and Texas Instruments announced it will build an $11 billion semiconductor plant in Lehi, Utah.

Biden emphasized that these investments would provide “good-paying jobs that [Americans] can raise a family on, the revitalization of entire communities that have often been left behind, and America leading the world again in the industries that drive the future.”

Biden accused the Republicans of proposing measures that would raise the deficit, which is already rising again. The Congressional Budget Office today projected a much higher deficit for 2023 than it did in May 2022 because of new laws, mandatory spending for Social Security and Medicare, and higher interest rates in place to combat inflation. The CBO notes that “spending substantially exceeds revenues in our projections even though pandemic-related spending lessens. In addition, rising interest rates drive up the cost of borrowing. The resulting deficits steadily increase the government’s debt. Over the long term, our projections suggest that changes in fiscal policy must be made to address the rising costs of interest and mitigate other adverse consequences of high and rising debt.”

This is precisely what Republicans have been complaining about with regard to the Democrats’ recent laws to rebuild infrastructure and invest in the economy, while ignoring that their own tax cuts have also added mightily to the deficit. Republicans want to address the rising deficit with spending cuts; Biden, with taxes on wealthy Americans and corporations.

Biden appears to be trying to turn the nation to a modern version of the era before Reagan, when the government provided a basic social safety net, protected civil rights, promoted infrastructure, and regulated business. Since the 1980s, the Republicans have advocated deregulation with the argument that government interference in the way a company does business interrupts the market economy.

But the derailment of fifty Norfolk Southern train cars, eleven of which carried hazardous chemicals, near East Palestine, Ohio, near the northeastern border of the state on February 3 has powerfully illustrated the downsides of deregulation. The accident released highly toxic chemicals into the air, water, and ground, causing a massive fire and forcing about 5,000 nearby residents in Ohio and Pennsylvania to evacuate. On February 6, when it appeared some of the rail cars would explode, officials allowed the company to release and burn the toxic vinyl chloride stored in it. The controlled burn sent highly toxic phosgene, used as a weapon in World War I, into the air.

Republican Ohio governor Mike DeWine has refused federal assistance from President Biden, who, he said, called to offer “anything you need.” DeWine said he had not called back to take him up on the offer. “We will not hesitate to do that if we’re seeing a problem or anything, but I’m not seeing it,” he said.

Just over the border, Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, said that Norfolk Southern had botched its response to the accident. “Norfolk Southern has repeatedly assured us of the safety of their rail cars—in fact, leading Norfolk Southern personnel described them to me as ‘the Cadillac of rail cars’—yet despite these assertions, these were the same cars that Norfolk Southern personnel rushed to vent and burn without gathering input from state and local leaders. Norfolk Southern’s well known opposition to modern regulations [requires] further scrutiny and investigation to limit the devastating effects of future accidents on people’s lives, property, businesses, and the environment.”

Shapiro was likely referring to the fact that in 2017, after donors from the railroad industry poured more than $6 million into Republican political campaigns, the Trump administration got rid of a rule imposed by the Obama administration that required better braking systems on rail cars that carried hazardous flammable materials.

According to David Sirota, Julia Rock, Rebecca Burns, and Matthew Cunningham-Cook, writing in the investigative journal The Lever, Norfolk Southern supported the repeal, telling regulators new electronically controlled pneumatic brakes on high-hazard flammable trains (HHFT) would “impose tremendous costs without providing offsetting safety benefits.” Railroads also lobbied to limit the definition of HFFT to cover primarily trains that carry oil, not industrial chemicals. The train that derailed in Ohio was not classified as an HHFT.

Nonetheless, Ohio’s new far-right Republican senator J. D. Vance went on the Fox News Channel show of personality Tucker Carlson to blame the Biden administration for the accident. He said there was no excuse for failing infrastructure after the passage last year of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, and said that the administration is too focused on “environmental racism and other ridiculous things.” We are, he said, “ruled by unserious people.”

He also issued a statement saying that “my office will continue to work with FEMA” over the issue, although FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, has not been mobilized because Ohio governor DeWine has not requested a federal disaster declaration.

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[aakashmalhotra]

Union Budget 2024 Industry impact: Life Sciences and Health Care

Key highlights

The following are the salient features of the pharma and life science sector:

A commitment to boost research and development.

Certain cancer drugs will be exempt from customs fees, and there will be a reduction in Basic Customs Duty (BCD) for some life-saving treatments, pharmaceuticals, and medical equipment.

The removal of the angel tax is expected to provide a significant boost to the pharmaceutical start-up world.

Union Budget 2024 industry impact: Introduction

Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman presented the union budget on Tuesday, July 23rd. All eyes were keenly focused on the healthcare and pharma sectors, anticipating significant developments. However, no significant proposals were made, as expected by the industry leaders. 

The Union Budget 2024-25 for the Pharma and Healthcare Industry did not fully meet the high expectations set for it. The Finance Minister addressed the government's increase in health expenditure from 1.4% of GDP in FY 19 to 2.1% of GDP in FY 23, but little else was covered.

The Interim Budget 2024–2025 introduced several significant healthcare initiatives. Notably, a new campaign was launched to promote immunisation against cervical cancer in girls aged 9 to 14, aimed at lowering the prevalence of this preventable disease.

The speech also discussed plans to establish new medical colleges in Bihar. It is also highlighted, exempting three crucial cancer drugs from custom duty and reducing duties on specific components used in medical X-ray tubes and digital detectors to boost domestic manufacturing capacity. 

Healthcare Budget 2024 Policy priorities

In order to attain social justice, the government will provide education and health programs to all eligible individuals.

The government will create digital public infrastructure (DPI) apps for the general public to boost productivity, generate business opportunities, and promote innovation in the private sector. This initiative covers various sectors, including healthcare.

The government is committed to accelerating the integration of technology to drive the digital transformation of the economy across all sectors.

New medical colleges and sports infrastructure will be established in Bihar, demonstrating a significant investment in the region's educational and athletic facilities.

Budget 2024 Allocation to Life Sciences & health

The Union Health Ministry has been allotted a budget of Rs 90,658.63 crore in the interim Budget for the fiscal year 2024-2025. This Budget allocation reflects a substantial increase of 12.59 percent from the revised estimates of Rs 80,517.62 crore for the previous fiscal year 2023-2024.

Healthcare Budget 2024: Significant difference in treatment costs between private and public sectors

The 75th Round of the National Sample Survey highlighted a significant disparity in out-of-pocket treatment costs between public and private hospitals. In 2017-18, the average medical cost of hospitalisation was much lower in government hospitals compared to private hospitals, with both rural and urban areas showing substantial gaps. Additionally, the survey revealed that individuals financed a significant percentage of hospitalisation cases in both rural and urban areas through borrowings.

In budget 2024 healthcare sector, FM proposes changes in essential custom duty for X-ray devices

The Finance Minister, Nirmala Sitharaman, has proposed modifications to the fundamental customs duty for X-ray tubes and flat panel detectors utilised in medical X-ray machines. The alterations are in line with the gradual production plan and intend to coordinate with the increase in domestic capacity.

Customs duty exemptions for individuals with cancer

During her presentation on the Union Budget For Health Care Sector 2024, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman proposed the complete exemption of three cancer treatment medications from basic customs duty.

Need to enhance expenditures in primary healthcare

The urgent need to increase investments in primary healthcare to improve health outcomes is highlighted, with a focus on the NHM setting targets for indicators such as Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) and prevalence of anaemia. The IMR target set by NHM is less than 25 per 1000 live births, but as of the latest data from the Sample Registration System in 2020, the IMR in India is analysed to be 28 per 1000 live births.

Anaemia is a crucial sign of women's nutrition and health as it can have serious negative effects on the health of both women and children. However, it can be tackled through primary healthcare. According to NFHS 2019-21, 53% of women aged 15 to 49 are affected by anaemia, which is significantly higher than the global rate of 30% for this age group.

Improvement required in the primary healthcare infrastructure

The primary healthcare system in India comprises Sub-Centres (SCs), Primary Healthcare Centres (PHCs), and Community Healthcare Centres (CHCs). However, there is a deficiency in the number of operational centres to effectively cover the population as per the Indian Public Health Standards (IPHS), 2022.

Conclusion

The Indian healthcare sector is experiencing rapid growth due to a combination of factors. These include an ageing population, the expanding middle class, an increase in lifestyle diseases, a greater focus on public-private partnerships, and the widespread adoption of digital technologies such as telemedicine. Additionally, there has been notable interest from investors and an influx of foreign direct investment (FDI) over the past two decades.

[graphaizesmm]

Electoral Bond Data Visualised: Transparency & Reports

In 2018, India introduced electoral bonds to enhance transparency in political funding. However, between March 2018 and March 2021, over ₹7,000 crores were funneled through these bonds, with the identities of donors and recipients largely hidden from public scrutiny. This opacity has sparked widespread debate: are electoral bonds truly a step towards transparency, or do they cloak the financial roots of political power? As the largest democracy grapples with this issue, it’s crucial to examine the data behind electoral bond data, understand their impact on democratic integrity, and explore potential reforms. Join us as we delve into the complex world of electoral bond data transparency, uncovering the facts that shape our electoral landscape.

Origin or Electoral Bond The idea of electoral bonds was introduced in India’s 2017 Union Budget by then-Finance Minister Arun Jaitley to reform the opaque nature of political funding. Launched in March 2018, these bonds aimed to curb black money in elections and enhance transparency. Individuals and corporate entities can purchase these bonds from authorized banks and donate them to political parties anonymously. Between March 2018 and March 2021, over ₹7,000 crore worth of electoral bonds were sold, significantly changing India’s political funding landscape. The bonds, available in denominations from ₹1,000 to ₹1 crore, can be bought during specific government-notified periods.

The government contends that electoral bonds bring clean money into the political system, with donors using legal banking channels to ensure accountability and tax compliance. Political parties can only encash these bonds through their official bank accounts, creating an ostensible paper trail. However, critics argue that the anonymity feature undermines transparency, raising questions about the bonds’ effectiveness. The ongoing debate highlights concerns about balancing donor privacy with the need for transparency in political funding, questioning the true impact of electoral bonds on India’s democratic process.

Data transparency and SBI reports Since the electoral bond scheme’s inception in March 2018, the State Bank of India (SBI) has been the exclusive institution authorized to issue and redeem these bonds. Handling over ₹7,000 crore in transactions between March 2018 and March 2021, SBI’s electoral bond data is pivotal for assessing the transparency and impact of electoral bond funding. Electoral bonds come in denominations of ₹1,000, ₹10,000, ₹1 lakh, ₹10 lakh, and ₹1 crore, available during quarterly ten-day purchase windows. Donors buy these bonds and anonymously donate them to political parties.

A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court unanimously struck down the Centre’s electoral bond scheme which facilitates anonymous political donations for being unconstitutional. It underscored that the scheme violates the right to information under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

Who were the top 20 Electoral bond donors? According to SBI data, lottery king Sebastian Martin’s firm Future Gaming and Hotel Services was the top donor to the scheme, purchasing bonds worth Rs 1,365 crore. Second-ranked Megha Engineering & Infrastructures donated Rs 966 crore, and Reliance-linked Qwik Supply Chain purchased bonds worth Rs 410 crore.

Since the electoral bond scheme’s launch in March 2018, a significant portion of donations has come from a small group of high-value contributors. State Bank of India (SBI) data shows that between March 2018 and March 2021, over ₹7,000 crore in bonds were transacted, with a majority of funds stemming from high-denomination bonds, particularly those valued at ₹1 crore. This indicates that large corporate entities and wealthy individuals are the primary users of electoral bonds, raising concerns about the potential influence of big money in politics.

While the anonymity of electoral bonds was designed to protect donor privacy, it has led to questions about the disproportionate influence of wealthy donors. Despite the government’s claims that these bonds promote clean and transparent political funding, the dominance of large donors suggests a need for closer scrutiny.

FUTURE GAMING AND HOTEL SERVICES PR

₹12,08,00,00,000

MEGHA ENGINEERING AND INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED

₹8,21,00,00,000

QWIK SUPPLY CHAIN PRIVATE LIMITED

₹4,10,00,00,000

HALDIA ENERGY LIMITED

₹3,77,00,00,000

VEDANTA LIMITED

₹3,75,65,00,000

ESSEL MINING AND INDS LTD

₹2,24,50,00,000

WESTERN UP POWER TRANSMISSION COMPANY LIMITED

₹2,20,00,00,000

KEVENTER FOODPARK INFRA LIMITED

₹1,95,00,00,000

MADANLAL LTD

₹1,85,50,00,000

BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED

₹1,83,00,00,000

YASHODA SUPER SPECIALITY HOSPITAL

₹1,62,00,00,000

UTKAL ALUMINA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

₹1,35,30,00,000

DLF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPERS LIMITED

₹1,30,00,00,000

MKJ ENTERPRISES LIMITED

₹1,28,35,00,000

JINDAL STEEL AND POWER LIMITED

₹1,23,00,00,000

B G SHIRKE CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY PVT LTD

₹1,17,00,00,000

DHARIWAL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED

₹1,15,00,00,000

BIRLA CARBON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

₹1,05,00,00,000

CHENNAI GREEN WOODS PRIVATE LIMITED

₹1,05,00,00,000

RUNGTA SONS P LTD

₹1,00,00,00,000

electoral bond data Electoral Bond Data Which political parties received the most? The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was the biggest beneficiary of the electoral bonds scheme, with donations worth over Rs 6,000 crore in the last four years. Hyderabad-based infrastructure company Megha Engineering (MEIL) was the biggest donor to the BJP, with bonds purchased worth Rs 519 crore. Qwik Supply, an unlisted private company, donated Rs 375 crore, followed by Vedanta with Rs 226.7 crore and Bharti Airtel worth Rs 183 crore.

Since the electoral bond scheme’s inception in March 2018, there’s been a marked disparity in fund distribution among political parties. Data from the State Bank of India (SBI) reveals that over ₹7,000 crore worth of bonds were sold between March 2018 and March 2021. A significant portion of these funds has gone to a few major political parties, primarily benefiting the ruling party and several key opposition parties. This concentration of funds raises concerns about the scheme’s impact on political competition and fairness.

The dominance of a few parties in receiving electoral bond donations suggests that smaller and regional parties may need help to compete financially. This disparity potentially skews political competition, favoring well-established parties and undermining democratic equity. While the scheme aims to promote clean political funding, the uneven distribution underscores the need for greater transparency. Understanding which parties benefit most is crucial for assessing the scheme’s impact and ensuring a fair political landscape. The ongoing debate highlights the necessity for reforms to address these disparities and enhance transparency in political funding in India.

BHARTIYA JANTA PARTY

₹ 60,60,51,11,000

ALL INDIA TRINAMOOL CONGRESS

₹ 16,09,53,14,000

ALL INDIA CONGRESS COMMITTEE

₹ 14,21,86,55,000

BHARAT RASHTRA SAMITHI

₹ 12,14,70,99,000

BIJU JANATA DAL

₹ 7,75,50,00,000

DMK PARTY IN PARLIAMENT

₹ 6,39,00,00,000

YSR CONGRESS PARTY

₹ 3,37,00,00,000

TELUGU DESAM PARTY

₹ 2,18,88,00,000

SHIVSENA (POLITICAL PARTY)

₹ 1,58,38,14,000

RASTRIYA JANTA DAL

₹ 72,50,00,000

AAM AADMI PARTY

₹ 65,45,00,000

JANATA DAL (SECULAR)

₹ 43,50,00,000

SIKKIM KRANTIKARI MORCHA

₹ 36,50,00,000

NATIONALIST CONGRESS PARTY PARLIAMENT OF India

₹ 30,50,00,000

JANASENA PARTY

₹ 21,00,00,000

ADYAKSHA SAMAJVADI PARTY

₹ 14,05,00,000

BIHAR PRADESH JANTA DAL(UNITED)

₹ 14,00,00,000

JHARKHAND MUKTI MORCHA

₹ 13,50,00,000

SHIROMANI AKALI DAL

₹ 7,26,00,000

ALL INDIA ANNA DRAVIDA MUNNETRA KAZHAGAM

₹ 6,05,00,000

SIKKIM DEMOCRATIC FRONT

₹ 5,50,00,000

RASHTRIYA JANTA DAL

₹ 1,00,00,000

SHIVSENA

₹ 1,00,00,000

MAHARASHTRAWADI GOMNTAK PARTY

₹ 55,00,000

JAMMU AND KASHMIR NATIONAL CONFERENCE

₹ 50,00,000

NATIONALIST CONGRESS PARTY MAHARASHTRA PRADESH

₹ 50,00,000

GOA FORWARD PARTY

₹ 35,00,000

The analysis of electoral bond data offers crucial insights into the financial landscape of political funding in India. The significant contributions received by major political parties underscore the importance of corporate influence in politics and highlight the need for greater transparency and accountability. To maintain public trust, it’s essential to strike a balance between protecting donor privacy and ensuring transparency. Advocating for stronger regulatory frameworks, such as mandatory disclosure of donor identities and limits on contributions, and leveraging technology like blockchain for transparent records, can enhance accountability.

Understanding who receives the most funds through electoral bonds allows us to work towards a more transparent and equitable democratic process. For further insights and detailed analysis of electoral bond data, stay tuned to our blog and engage with our latest posts.

[kumard12]

8 Years to Start-Up India

Eight years ago, a vision ignited a revolution. In 2016, the Indian government launched Start-Up India, a flagship initiative announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The program aims to transform India’s business landscape by fostering a vibrant ecosystem for startups. 

This article delves into the initiative’s remarkable journey, its intricate link with the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT), and the pivotal role played by dedicated IAS officers in making it a reality. But first, let’s recall the Start-Up India initiative. 

Start-Up India

The Startup India initiative promoted and coordinated by DPIIT, offers a comprehensive support system, empowering startups to thrive. Here’s a glimpse into the key benefits:

Tax Relief - In 2016, the union budget highlighted Startup India’s tax incentives. Under this initiative, startups enjoyed a remarkable boost. More specifically, 100% tax exemptions and simplified angel tax compliance.

Simplified compliance - Startup India’s plan emphasised efficiency, with a faster registration process, self-certification of compliance, and reduced regulatory burden. 

Funding network - Spearheaded by dedicated DPIIT’s IAS officers and backed by the Indian government, Startup India facilitates networking and connections and DPIIT-recognised funds.

Faster Clearance - This includes, faster patent registration, easier IPR protection, and streamlined exit options. DPIIT’s IAS officers championed these initiatives, ensuring startups could navigate legal processes seamlessly.

With these advantages in place, the onus fell on the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) to shepherd the initiative and create a supportive ecosystem for startups to flourish. Let's explore how DPIIT and Startup India have evolved together over the past eight years.

Evolution of DPIIT and Startup India: Leadership and Impact (2016-2024)

2016 - Laying the Foundation 

Under the visionary leadership of Amitabh Kant, then Secretary of the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP), the core framework for Startup India was established. 

Startup India’s framework included simplifying registration processes, introducing tax benefits, and creating a network for funding, as mentioned in a DPIIT press release. For instance, KPMG, a leading consultancy firm, partnered with the DPIIT to streamline registration processes and reduce regulatory burdens. The active involvement of DPIIT’s IAS officers ensured effective implementation and seamless coordination with external stakeholders.

2017-2019: Streamlining and Growth

2016 marked the year Mr��Ramesh Abhishek, yet another accomplished IAS officer took over the position as the new Secretary for DPIIT. During his tenure, Mr Ramesh Abhishek implemented the start up action plan vigorously and targeted specific sectors like fintech, e-commerce, and healthcare, and saw a continued focus on streamlining processes and promoting growth. He also introduced faster patent registration and easier IPR protection for startups.

All of these efforts by the team of Mr Ramesh Abhishek eventually led to a surge in number of recognised startups. 

2020-2023: Adapting to Challenges

Building upon the strong foundation laid during the tenure of Ramesh Abhishek as DPIIT Secretary (2016-2019), the focus of Startup India shifted towards navigating new challenges and ensuring long-term sustainability for the program under Dr. Guruprasad Mohapatra's leadership in 2020. 

A key concern that emerged was the difficulty startups faced in securing funding beyond the initial seed stage, crucial for scaling their businesses. Recognizing this bottleneck, DPIIT prioritized solutions to bridge this funding gap. Furthermore, the program acknowledged the growing importance of a skilled workforce within the startup ecosystem. Initiatives were launched to promote skill development programs tailored to the specific needs of startups, ensuring a readily available pool of qualified talent. Notably, DPIIT’s IAS officers played a pivotal role in implementing and overseeing these initiatives, fostering collaboration between startups, investors, and educational institutions.

This multi-pronged approach aimed to not only nurture groundbreaking ideas but also encourage a dynamic and thriving ecosystem for startups to flourish in the long run.

2024: Way Forward 

And now, with Mr Rajesh Kumar Singh at the helm of DPIIT as of 2024, Startup India continues its journey of fostering innovation and entrepreneurial spirit. Building upon the successes of the past eight years, by Amitabh Kant, Ramesh Abhishek, and Guruprasad Mohapatra, the focus remains on addressing lingering challenges. Efforts to bridge the funding gap beyond the seed stage are ongoing, with new initiatives and collaborations being explored. Equipping the workforce with relevant skills through targeted skill development programs remains a top priority.

Looking ahead, DPIIT, along with the wider startup ecosystem, is committed to propelling India towards becoming a global leader in innovation and entrepreneurship. And as of 31st December 2023, a total of 1,17,254 startups have been recognized under the Startup India initiative. 

Wrapping Up

As Startup India embarks on its ninth year, the journey forward is paved with both opportunities and challenges. Maintaining the momentum achieved in fostering innovation across diverse sectors remains a key objective. 

While the first half of 2024 witnessed a positive uptick in funding compared to the latter half of 2023 (as per the India Tech Semi-Annual Funding Report), ensuring long-term funding solutions for scaling startups requires continued focus.

The leading sectors in terms of performance in H1 2024 were retail, enterprise applications, and fintech.

- India Tech Semi-Annual Funding Report

Here's where the leadership of DPIIT plays a crucial role. Building upon the groundwork laid by previous leaders like Ramesh Abhishek, who championed specific sectors like retail, enterprise applications, and fintech (sectors that continue to show strong performance in H1 2024), Rajesh Kumar Singh, the current DPIIT Secretary, is spearheading efforts to address lingering challenges.

A primary concern is bridging the funding gap beyond the seed stage. While India remained the fourth-highest funded country globally in the tech startup landscape in 2023, securing capital for scaling businesses remains a hurdle for many entrepreneurs. DPIIT’s leaders and IAS officers are, actively exploring new initiatives and collaborations to create a more robust funding ecosystem. This might involve fostering stronger connections between startups and venture capitalists, exploring alternative funding mechanisms like angel investment networks, or even encouraging the creation of specialized funds catering to specific growth stages.

[infinity-compliance]

Digital Services gst: GST on digital services: Budget 2023-24 broadens scope of OIDAR

The availability of cheaper and feature-rich cell phones along with the penetration of low-cost internet in rural India fuelled by the Digital India campaign, has pushed service providers to transform the way services are delivered and as a result, the players in advertising, media, education and gaming have grown exponentially over the last few years. Considering the size of the Indian market and growing demand in these sectors, several overseas entities are investing in India and rendering services digitally to Indian customers.The levy of tax on Online information and Database Access Service (OIDAR) was introduced in India in 2001 under the erstwhile service tax regime and in 2016 the ambit of services was widened to include several digital services into the tax fold. In July 2017, the GST law borrowed the provisions governing OIDAR from the service tax law.OIDAR is a category of services provided digitally through the medium of the internet and received by the recipient without a physical interface with the supplier of such services. The nature of OIDAR is such that it can be provided online from even a remote location outside India to a customer in India. The GST law defines OIDAR in clear terms and also enlists certain illustrative services such as advertising, cloud services, e-books, movie, music, software, data/information retrieval services, data storage and online gaming services rendered through online/internet mediums. Any overseas supplier involved in the rendition of such services to a customer in India shall follow a simplified registration process under the GST law, either directly or through the appointment of a representative in India and follows routine monthly compliances.The Government as part of the amendments proposed in the Union budget 2023-24 has broadened the scope of OIDAR services, by removing the term ‘essentially automated and involving minimal human intervention’ from the definition of OIDAR services. This would essentially mean that even if the services are not totally automated and involve human interactions through online/internet mediums for the rendition of services, the services will get qualified as OIDAR services.It would be important to highlight that several overseas educational institutions started conducting online education programs and considered their services as not qualifying under the OIDAR category as the education courses involved regular human interactions. However, the proposed amendment in the definition of OIDAR services would require such overseas service providers to revisit their tax position.In addition to the above amendment, the Union budget 2023-24 has also amended the definition of ‘non-taxable online recipient’, wherein the scope has been widened. The proposed amendment would make OIDAR services taxable in the hands of the overseas supplier (or intermediary as applicable) if any unregistered person or persons registered under Section 51 of the CGST Act in India, receives OIDAR services for any purpose.Any overseas entity rendering services to customers in India would be required to conduct the following key tests to determine the taxability of the transactions in India under the OIDAR provisions:- Whether the transaction qualifies as an OIDAR - Whether the entity qualifies as a ‘Non-Resident Taxable Person’ in India - Whether the services are rendered to any person who is not a GST registrant in India or to a person registered solely for deducting tax under section 51 of the CGST Act - Whether services are rendered by the overseas service provider directly through its website to end customers located in India - Whether the digital services are rendered through applications downloadable through third-party app - Whether GST is discharged by a third-party app service provider on behalf of the overseas entity - Create awareness - The lack of awareness of the OIDAR provisions is a key challenge that compels GST authorities to issue notice to demand tax, interest, and penalty on overseas suppliers. Several overseas suppliers were issued notices to their dismay where tax along with interest and penalty were recovered for non-compliance. In some instances, certain overseas entities have decided to discontinue services to a customer in India due to unexpected tax costs. To tackle this challenge, the Government shall establish a suitable system and robust technology to monitor the supply of OIDAR upfront and create awareness among overseas entities rendering services to customers located in India. This would enable the overseas service provider to remit GST by appropriately collecting the taxes from the customers, rather than bearing GST and rendering the business infeasible. - Challenges involved in registration, tax payment and compliances – Allow overseas suppliers to obtain a GST registration with the least possible documentation and convert the existing monthly compliance requirement to quarterly or half yearly to reduce the compliance burden. - Amnesty or tax settlement process – Provide an amnesty or tax settlement mechanism to overseas businesses engaged in the supply of OIDAR. The companies who had not collected taxes from end customers due to a lack of awareness may be afforded a onetime dispute settlement option for the initial years of GST, which would encourage them to come clean with respect to past dues. While ‘Ignorance of the law is no excuse’, the purpose and object of the law are not to multiply ignorant defaults or loose/delay revenue! It reminds us that ‘there is a true law, right reason, agreeable to nature, known to all men, constant and eternal, which calls to duty by its precepts, deters from evil by its prohibition’.The writer is Associate Partner - Indirect Tax, BDO India. ETRise MSME Day 2022 Mega Conclave with Industry Leaders. Watch Now. Source link Read the full article

[newstfionline]

Thursday, May 6, 2021

Nearly 20 million more people hit by food crises last year (Reuters) Nearly 20 million more people faced food crises last year amid armed conflict, the COVID-19 pandemic and weather extremes, and the outlook for this year is again grim, according to a report by the Global Network Against Food Crises. The humanitarian agency, set up in 2016 by the European Union and United Nations, also warned that acute food insecurity has continued to worsen since 2017, the first year of its annual report into food crises. “We must do everything we can to end this vicious cycle. There is no place for famine and starvation in the 21st century,” said U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres. He added that conflict and hunger need to be tackled jointly, as they reinforce one another. Defined as any lack of food that threatens lives, livelihoods or both, acute food insecurity at crisis levels or worse impacted at least 155 million people last year, the highest number in the report’s five-year existence.

America’s new normal: A degree hotter than two decades ago (AP) America’s new normal temperature is a degree hotter than it was just two decades ago. Scientists have long talked about climate change—hotter temperatures, changes in rain and snowfall and more extreme weather—being the “new normal.” Data released Tuesday by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration put hard figures on the cliché. The new United States normal is not just hotter, but wetter in the eastern and central parts of the nation and considerably drier in the West than just a decade earlier. “Almost every place in the U.S. has warmed from the 1981 to 2010 normal to the 1991 to 2020 normal,” said Michael Palecki, NOAA’s normals project manager.

Nature at its craziest: Trillions of cicadas about to emerge (AP) Sifting through a shovel load of dirt in a suburban backyard, Michael Raupp and Paula Shrewsbury find their quarry: a cicada nymph. And then another. And another. And four more. In maybe a third of a square foot of dirt, the University of Maryland entomologists find at least seven cicadas—a rate just shy of a million per acre. A nearby yard yielded a rate closer to 1.5 million. And there’s much more afoot. Trillions of the red-eyed black bugs are coming, scientists say. Within days, a couple weeks at most, the cicadas of Brood X (the X is the Roman numeral for 10) will emerge after 17 years underground. There are many broods of periodic cicadas that appear on rigid schedules in different years, but this is one of the largest and most noticeable. They’ll be in 15 states from Indiana to Georgia to New York; they’re coming out now in mass numbers in Tennessee and North Carolina. When the entire brood emerges, backyards can look like undulating waves, and the bug chorus is lawnmower loud.

Reuniting refugee families (Washington Post) President Biden began fulfilling a campaign promise Tuesday as U.S. authorities started to help to reunite a number of migrant families forcibly separated by the previous administration. President Donald Trump imposed a “zero tolerance” policy on those crossing the U.S. border illegally that led to myriad unauthorized migrants being rushed through criminal proceedings and deported while their children who had accompanied them remained in the United States. It was easier to track the children than their parents. In some instances, advocates had to post radio advertisements in Mexico and Central America. The reunions Tuesday would mark, Kevin Sieff wrote, “the start of a massive relocation of parents deported by one U.S. president and returned by another. In total, more than 1,000 families are expected to be reunited.”

The Little Nation That Could (Guardian) The island of Cuba is dealing with a pandemic while suffering its worst economic crisis since the collapse of the Soviet Union. The US trade embargo restricts the medical equipment the island can import; even so, of the 27 coronavirus vaccines in final stage testing around the world, two are Cuban. The UN has called on the US to lift sanctions on the island during the pandemic, but the embargo has actually toughened since the outgoing Trump administration put Cuba on the US list of state sponsors of terrorism. “The US is trying to starve Cuba into submission,” said one of the doctors on the coronavirus taskforce. “It’s not only that it’s difficult to buy things directly from the US. It’s also that all these sanctions that the Trump administration put in place have dried up many sources of revenue.” Nevertheless, Cuban scientists are confident that widespread vaccination will be attained this year. “When you have everything, you don’t have to think so much.” said another scientist. “But when you have difficulties, you have to think up new ways to innovate.”

Years of Unheeded Warnings. Then the Subway Crash Mexico City Had Feared. (NYT) The capital had been bracing for the disaster for years. Ever since it opened nearly a decade ago, the newest Mexico City subway line—a heralded expansion of the second largest subway system in the Americas—had been plagued with structural weaknesses that led engineers to warn of potential accidents. Yet other than a brief, partial shutdown of the line in 2014, the warnings went unheeded by successive governments. On Monday night, the mounting problems turned fatal: A subway train on the Golden Line plunged about 50 feet after an overpass collapsed underneath it, killing at least 24 people and injuring dozens more. The accident—and the government’s failure to act sooner to fix known problems with the line—immediately set off a political firestorm for three of the most powerful people in Mexico: the president and the two people widely believed to be front-runners to succeed him as leaders of the governing party and possibly, the country.

Brexit problems (Foreign Policy) France has threatened “retaliatory measures”—including cutting power to Jersey, the largest of the Channel Islands—as tensions rise over fishing rights between Britain and France. Since the post-Brexit trade deal, French fishermen have been angered by delays in newly required licenses that have prevented them from accessing British waters—an area they say is necessary for their livelihoods.

Scottish independence 'front and center' in May 6 election (Washington Post) Scotland goes to the polls Thursday in a vote that could eventually lead to a truly historic event: the crackup of the United Kingdom. The independence movement has gained momentum in the wake of Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s Brexit. And the pandemic has further encouraged the idea that Scotland might be better off going its own way, with policies determined in Edinburgh viewed more favorably by Scots than those pronounced at Westminster. As a result, the Scottish National Party, led by the popular First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon, 50, is expected to perform well in Thursday’s vote for seats in the regional Parliament, with pro-independence parties winning a solid majority of the 129 seats in Holyrood. The talk shows, political magazines and news columns in Britain are full of speculation about a looming breakup. Since 2014, Scotland has voted overwhelmingly against Brexit, 62 percent to 38 percent. Many Scots then saw Johnson’s hard-split version of Brexit as an unnecessary affront. And since Britain left the European Union, Scotland has tallied more harms than benefits. The Scottish fishermen, for instance, say their industry is in crisis.

Belgian cyberattack (1440) Belgium was hit with a sweeping cyberattack yesterday, leaving its parliament, government agencies, universities, and other organizations without internet service for hours. The effort knocked out both websites and internal systems, including the country’s coronavirus vaccine registration portal. Hackers targeted the government’s service provider with a distributed denial-of-service, or DDoS, attack—a strategy that overwhelms networks with massive amounts of artificial internet traffic. Experts say such attacks are often meant to knock systems offline rather than steal information. It was unclear who was behind the attack. The incident highlights the growing ability of cybercriminals, either independent or state-affiliated, to strike unprepared governments and companies—some estimate cyberattacks will cost the global economy $6T in losses in 2021.

EU seeks rapid response military force, two decades after first try (Reuters) Fourteen European Union countries including Germany and France have proposed a rapid military response force that could intervene early in international crises, a senior EU official said on Wednesday, two decades after a previous attempt. The countries say the EU should create a brigade of 5,000 soldiers, possibly with ships and aircraft, to help democratic foreign governments needing urgent help, the official said. First discussed in 1999, the EU in 2007 set up a combat-ready system of battlegroups of 1,500 personnel to respond to crises, but they have never been used. Those battle groups could now form the basis of a so-called First Entry Force, part of a new momentum towards more EU defence capabilities. From this year, the bloc has a joint budget to develop weaponry together, is drawing up a military doctrine for 2022 and detailed its military weakness last year for the first time.

Staunch anti-India Kashmir politician dies in police custody (AP) A prominent politician in Kashmir who challenged India’s rule over the disputed region for decades died Wednesday while in police custody. Mohammed Ashraf Sehrai was 78. Sehrai’s son, Mujahid Sehrai, said his father was denied proper medical care while in jail. Sehrai was arrested last July under the Public Safety Act, which allows authorities in Indian-controlled Kashmir to imprison anyone for up to two years without trial. All Parties Hurriyat Conference, the main separatist grouping in Kashmir, said authorities had left Sehrai unattended in jail until his condition worsened. In a statement, it said it “deeply regrets this inhuman attitude of the authorities and is pained by it.” It also expressed concern about the health of hundreds of other Kashmiri political detainees as India faces a massive health crisis because of an explosion of coronavirus cases. Last week, the grouping said the prisoners were being denied “even basic amenities,” leading to “serious health problems among the prisoners.”

India’s COVID-19 surge spreads to Nepal (Reuters) Nepal is being overwhelmed by a COVID-19 surge as India’s outbreak spreads across South Asia, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies said on Wednesday. Nepal is now recording 57 times as many cases as a month ago, with 44% of tests now coming back positive. Nepalese towns near the Indian border could not cope with the growing number of people needing treatment, while only 1% of the country’s population was fully vaccinated.

Myanmar’s military disappearing young men to crush uprising (AP) Myanmar’s security forces moved in and the street lamps went black. In house after house, people shut off their lights. Darkness swallowed the block. When the military’s trucks finally rolled away, Shwe’s 15-year-old brother was missing. Across the country, Myanmar’s security forces are arresting and forcibly disappearing thousands of people, especially boys and young men, in a sweeping bid to break the back of a three-month uprising against a military takeover. In most cases, the families of those taken do not know where they are, according to an Associated Press analysis of more than 3,500 arrests since February. It is a technique the military has long used to instill fear and to crush pro-democracy movements. The boys and young men are taken from homes, businesses and streets, under the cover of night and sometimes in the brightness of day. Some end up dead. Many are imprisoned and sometimes tortured. Many more are missing.

Turkey and Egypt on the mend (Foreign Policy) Representatives from Turkey and Egypt meet in Cairo today for “exploratory” discussions “on the necessary steps that may lead towards the normalization of relations” according to a joint statement. Relations between the two countries have frayed due to maritime border disputes, Libya’s civil war, and President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s opposition to the 2013 coup which brought Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi to power. There were some signs of rapprochement in March, when the Turkish government directed Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated media channels in the country to refrain from criticizing the Egyptian president.

Why Nearsightedness Is on the Rise in Children (NYT) Look and you shall see: A generation of the real-life nearsighted Mr. Magoos is growing up before your eyes. A largely unrecognized epidemic of nearsightedness, or myopia, is afflicting the eyes of children. People with myopia can see close-up objects clearly, like the words on a page. But their distance vision is blurry, and correction with glasses or contact lenses is likely to be needed for activities like seeing the blackboard clearly, cycling, driving or recognizing faces down the block. The growing incidence of myopia is related to changes in children’s behavior, especially how little time they spend outdoors, often staring at screens indoors instead of enjoying activities illuminated by daylight. Gone are the days when most children played outside between the end of the school day and suppertime. And the devastating pandemic of the past year may be making matters worse. The prevalence of myopia in the United States increased from 25 percent in the early 1970s to nearly 42 percent just three decades later. And the rise in myopia is not limited to highly developed countries. The World Health Organization estimates that half the world’s population may be myopic by 2050.

[doctormage]

ok I don’t have a death wish so I’m not posting this on twitter but I am literally going to lose my mind if I see more people claim we didn’t like w****n bc she is a woman.

actually I didn’t back her bc she LIED about being indigenous, claimed that for 20 years, & used that to take opportunity away from ACTUAL indigenous women (and, in fact, contributed a plagiarized recipe to a cookbook called “pow wow chow”)

and because she has been explicitly asked by the Cherokee nation to renounce her claims of indigenous ancestry and she STILL has not, making her apology hollow and superficial

and because she believes more people should serve in the military and voted for an increased military budget as recently as 2017

and because she called herself a “capitalist to her bones” and stood and clapped when DONALD TRUMP said we would never be a socialist country in the 2019 State of the Union (here is a similar, but not exact, moment from the 2018 SOTU, in which she stands and applauds Trump for spouting platitudes about “American destiny,” which I can’t help but compare to “Manifest Destiny,” but of course this is my own attitudes entering a discussion of fact)

and because her plans were means-tested, NOT truly “for all,” which opens the door for others to decide who is “poor enough” to have access to things that are BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS

and because an understanding of the perils and exploitative nature of capitalism is KEY to not treating basic human rights as commodities, and we are well past hope of “reforming” the system that has let people DIE in the name of money since its inception

and because she promised to NEVER take super pac money because of her alleged belief that money should stay out of politics, then turned around and accepted a BIG ASS donation

and because she was a “diehard conservative” while Bernie Sanders has been fighting for marginalized groups since before he was even in office, but even more so DURING the 40 years he’s been in office

and because she defended additional military funding for Israel in 2014 during the war on Gaza, a conflict that lead to the death of 2,200+ Palestinians, including civilians; her record with foreign policy shows a failure to use her position of power and privilege for the benefit of others 

and because she doesn’t believe that all prisoners should have the right to vote, which aids in dehumanizing incarcerated people (a population which has a disproportionate amount of people of color), conflating morality with legality, maintaining the prison industrial complex, AND voter suppression

and because this year she supported letting the rules of the DNC “play out,” rather than backing the idea that the candidate with the most votes should win the nomination, which is yet another means of ensuring the voices of the american people are merely an afterthought to so-called democracy

and because no one wants to acknowledge that she started losing support once she started veering closer toward the center, she was doing quite well early on, so her change in approach had quite an impact on people withdrawing their support

I could go on, but for me, even 1 or 2 of these is enough for me to clearly state HER BEING A WOMAN DID NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHY I DO NOT SUPPORT HER. I am a woman. I am a woman who is getting ritually screwed over by government policy. I understand my privilege as a white woman and I FURTHER understand how the repetitive narrative that it was only her gender standing in her way is HARMFUL and ignores marginalized groups’ very valid criticism of her and her policies

I am far from saying that her being a woman had nothing to do with the downfall of her campaign, nor am I saying it wasn’t the dealbreaker for anyone. the kind of critique she received from plenty of people was gendered - but it is objectively untrue and unhealthy to assert that all of us who criticized her were being sexist. indigenous people, black people, and people of color deserve to be heard; the criticisms, thoughts, emotions, and ideas of the disabled, of the LGBT+ community, of the working class, of immigrants, of people in other countries, of the chronically ill, of the mentally ill, and of all the women who fall into at least one or more of these groups deserve to be heard. insinuating that ALL their criticisms are simply blinded by sexism only further highlights the racism, xenophobia, classism, homophobia, and transphobia that influence that assumption.

I fully understand the ability to learn and grow from your mistakes. I made a virtual 180 in my political beliefs - after working in politics for several years - when I was 19. However, when you’re an adult (and politician) your “opinions” have a tangible effect on others. It needs more than just an apology, and it sure as hell needs to be publicly addressed. No politician is perfect, of course. But at the end of the day, Bernie Sanders has been pushing the same progressive agenda since the beginning, and when a once-in-a-lifetime candidate like that is on the stage, I have to stand with him.

Also! This post isn’t about Bernie, but he is jewish and that 100% matters. Our country is run by a man who praises nazis. I hate to think of the anti-semitism on the rise as Bernie comes closer to victory. It is important that we acknowledge he is not free from the bigotry of others.

[stevetosh]

The Undeniable Value of a Whistleblower Hotline

It is common practice globally for Government organisations that are endeavouring to assist in identifying malpractice, criminal or unethical behaviour (whether it be tax, criminal justice, regulatory or public sector procurement) to introduce a whistleblower hotline.

The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners’ 2018 Report to the Nation estimated that up to 45% of fraud reports are received via tips, with 54% of those coming from employees.

In November 2018, with less than 3 years since the introduction of its whistleblower policy, the Economic and Financial Crime Commission, Nigeria announced that it had recovered over N$527 billion or approximately US$53 million.

Countries such as the United States of America, Canada and South Korea have introduced whistleblower reward programmes. The US Securities and Exchange Commission has awarded more than $300 million to whistleblowers since the inception of the agency’s whistleblower program in 2011. US Enforcement actions from whistleblower tips has resulted in more than $1 billion in financial remedies.

Implementation

The European Union, within its impact assessment in relation to the introduction of new whistleblower protection legislation, highlighted the economic, societal and environmental benefits of whistleblowing. It stated that whistleblowing will help to unmask and deter fraud and corruption within the EU budget (current risk in loss of revenue is estimated to between €179 and €256 billion). In the area of public procurement, it confirmed that the benefit of effective whistleblower protection in the EU is estimated to be between €5.8 and €9.6 billion each year.

In its 2017 report ‘Estimating the Economic Benefits of Whistleblower protection in Public Procurement’. The European Commission stated that the costs for setting up and maintaining whistleblower protection are quite low in comparison with the potential benefits. In the Netherlands, for example, the ratio of potential benefits to costs ranged from 22:1 to 37:1, while in Romania it ranged from 319:1 to 532:1. Specifically, for the €526,000 costs the potential benefits were between €168 and €280 million.

Use of technology

A greater use of technology is now being recognised as essential if an organisation wishes to maximise the receipt and analysis of data in order to map out its risk and to protect an organisation’s revenues. Initiatives such as ipaidabribe.com in India were set up to tackle corruption through public reports on the nature, number, pattern, types, location, frequency and value of corrupt acts. The reports are not only used to map out corruption but also for improving governance systems and procedures and tightening law enforcement and regulation where possible.

An organisation must first quantify what it wants to achieve from this data. Analytical solutions and technologies such as artificial intelligence, voice recognition and translation, location and data mapping give us significant opportunities to understand and picture current risks.

Whistleblower protection

Global whistleblower protection and legislation has seen varying degrees of disparity in safeguarding individuals. The US has introduced legislation that punishes organisations and compensates individuals where retribution is taken in response to whistleblowing.

Australia has taken whistleblower protection a step further and introduced law that requires all public and large proprietary company to spell out how they will “support and protect” those who speak up before they begin to experience any detrimental effects. Additionally, a company can now be held liable if it fails to prevent detrimental acts as a result of having no support plans in place or neglecting to implement those that are.

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Detection of Foreign Bribery: The Role of Whistleblowers and Whistleblower Protection also highlights good practice and areas where whistleblowers need greater protection.

The value propositions

The significant global research that has been undertaken in this area outlines the many benefits for the introduction of a whistleblower hotline and protection mechanism. In addition to the significant opportunity for financial recovery, there are also many areas that include societal and environmental benefits and also positive action that support the protection of an organisation’s reputation.

Having additional inheformation that will allow an organisation the ability to map out its risks, to plan and introduce the correct level of risk mitigation, can only be of benefit.

Introducing a hotline and publishing the fact that an organisation has one also communicates within, and outside of, an organisation that it has a strong culture of ethics and that it is serious about protecting the organisation’s revenues. It is recognised globally that most organisations, large or small, are targeted by fraud or other financial crime. Hiding the fact that an organization has been the victim of these crimes, or that it does not have the facility for individuals to report such illicit conduct, may send the wrong message about an organisation’s values.

[bountyofbeads]

Science Under Attack: How Trump Is Sidelining Researchers and Their Work https://nyti.ms/2MyL8Yw

Science Under Attack: How Trump Is Sidelining Researchers and Their Work

By Brad Plumer and Coral Davenport | Published Dec. 28, 2019, 2:58 p.m. ET | New York Times | Posted Dec 28, 2019 |

WASHINGTON — In just three years, the Trump administration has diminished the role of science in federal policymaking while halting or disrupting research projects nationwide, marking a transformation of the federal government whose effects, experts say, could reverberate for years.

Political appointees have shut down government studies, reduced the influence of scientists over regulatory decisions and in some cases pressured researchers not to speak publicly. The administration has particularly challenged scientific findings related to the environment and public health opposed by industries such as oil drilling and coal mining. It has also impeded research around human-caused climate change, which President Trump has dismissed despite a global scientific consensus.

But the erosion of science reaches well beyond the environment and climate: In San Francisco, a study of the effects of chemicals on pregnant women has stalled after federal funding abruptly ended. In Washington, D.C., a scientific committee that provided expertise in defending against invasive insects has been disbanded. In Kansas City, Mo., the hasty relocation of two agricultural agencies that fund crop science and study the economics of farming has led to an exodus of employees and delayed hundreds of millions of dollars in research.

“The disregard for expertise in the federal government is worse than it’s ever been,” said Michael Gerrard, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, which has tracked more than 200 reports of Trump administration efforts to restrict or misuse science since 2017. “It’s pervasive.”

Hundreds of scientists, many of whom say they are dismayed at seeing their work undone, are departing.

Among them is Matthew Davis, a biologist whose research on the health risks of mercury to children underpinned the first rules cutting mercury emissions from coal power plants. But last year, with a new baby of his own, he was asked to help support a rollback of those same rules. “I am now part of defending this darker, dirtier future,” he said.

This year, after a decade at the Environmental Protection Agency, Mr. Davis left.

“Regulations come and go, but the thinning out of scientific capacity in the government will take a long time to get back,” said Joel Clement, a former top climate-policy expert at the Interior Department who quit in 2017 after being reassigned to a job collecting oil and gas royalties. He is now at the Union of Concerned Scientists, an advocacy group.

Mr. Trump has consistently said that government regulations have stifled businesses and thwarted some of the administration’s core goals, such as increasing fossil-fuel production. Many of the starkest confrontations with federal scientists have involved issues like environmental oversight and energy extraction — areas where industry groups have argued that regulators have gone too far in the past.

“Businesses are finally being freed of Washington’s overreach, and the American economy is flourishing as a result,” a White House statement said last year. Asked about the role of science in policymaking, officials from the White House declined to comment on the record.

The administration’s efforts to cut certain research projects also reflect a longstanding conservative position that some scientific work can be performed cost-effectively by the private sector, and taxpayers shouldn’t be asked to foot the bill. “Eliminating wasteful spending, some of which has nothing to do with studying the science at all, is smart management, not an attack on science,” two analysts at the conservative Heritage Foundation wrote in 2017 of the administration’s proposals to eliminate various climate change and clean energy programs.

Industry groups have expressed support for some of the moves, including a contentious E.P.A. proposal  to put new constraints on the use of scientific studies in the name of transparency. The American Chemistry Council, a chemical trade group, praised the proposal by saying, “The goal of providing more transparency in government and using the best available science in the regulatory process should be ideals we all embrace.”

In some cases, the administration’s efforts to roll back government science have been thwarted. Each year, Mr. Trump has proposed sweeping budget cuts at a variety of federal agencies like the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation. But Congress has the final say over budget levels and lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have rejected the cuts.

For instance, in supporting funding for the Department of Energy’s national laboratories, Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee, recently said, “it allows us to take advantage of the United States’ secret weapon, our extraordinary capacity for basic research.”

As a result, many science programs continue to thrive, including space exploration at NASA and medical research at the National Institutes of Health, where the budget has increased more than 12 percent since Mr. Trump took office and where researchers  continue to make advances in areas like molecular biology and genetics.

Nevertheless, in other areas, the administration has managed to chip away at federal science.

At the E.P.A., for instance, staffing has fallen to its lowest levels in at least a decade. More than two-thirds of respondents to a survey of federal scientists across 16 agencies said that hiring freezes and departures made it harder to conduct scientific work. And in June, the White House ordered agencies to cut by one-third the number of federal advisory boards that provide technical advice.

The White House said it aimed to eliminate committees that were no longer necessary. Panels cut so far had focused on issues including invasive species and electric grid innovation.

At a time when the United States is pulling back from world leadership in other areas like human rights or diplomatic accords, experts warn that the retreat from science is no less significant. Many of the achievements of the past century that helped make the United States an envied global power, including gains in life expectancy, lowered air pollution and increased farm productivity are the result of the kinds of government research now under pressure.

“When we decapitate the government’s ability to use science in a professional way, that increases the risk that we start making bad decisions, that we start missing new public health risks,” said Wendy E. Wagner, a professor of law at the University of Texas at Austin who studies the use of science by policymakers.

Skirmishes over the use of science in making policy occur in all administrations: Industries routinely push back against health studies that could justify stricter pollution rules, for example. And scientists often gripe about inadequate budgets for their work. But many experts say that current efforts to challenge research findings go well beyond what has been done previously.

In an article published in the journal Science last year, Ms. Wagner wrote that some of the Trump administration’s moves, like a policy to restrict certain academics from the E.P.A.’s Science Advisory Board or the proposal to limit the types of research that can be considered by environmental regulators, “mark a sharp departure with the past.” Rather than isolated battles between political officials and career experts, she said, these moves are an attempt to legally constrain how federal agencies use science in the first place.

Some clashes with scientists have sparked public backlash, as when Trump officials pressured the nation’s weather forecasting agency to support the president’s erroneous assertion this year that Hurricane Dorian threatened Alabama.

But others have garnered little notice despite their significance.

This year, for instance, the National Park Service’s principle climate change scientist, Patrick Gonzalez, received a “cease and desist” letter from supervisors after testifying to Congress about the risks that global warming posed to national parks.

“I saw it as attempted intimidation,” said Dr. Gonzalez, who added that he was speaking in his capacity as an associate adjunct professor at the University California, Berkeley, a position he also holds. “It’s interference with science and hinders our work.”

CURTAILING SCIENTIFIC PROGRAMS

Even though Congress hasn’t gone along with Mr. Trump’s proposals for budget cuts at scientific agencies, the administration has still found ways to advance its goals.

One strategy: eliminate individual research projects not explicitly protected by Congress.

For example, just months after Mr. Trump’s election, the Commerce Department disbanded a 15-person scientific committee that had explored how to make National Climate Assessments, the congressionally mandated studies of the risks of climate change, more useful to local officials. It also closed its Office of the Chief Economist, which for decades had conducted wide-ranging research on topics like the economic effects of natural disasters. Similarly, the Interior Department has withdrawn funding for its Landscape Conservation Cooperatives, 22 regional research centers that tackled issues like habitat loss and wildfire management. While California and Alaska used state money to keep their centers open, 16 of 22 remain in limbo.

A Commerce Department official said the climate committee it discontinued had not produced a report, and highlighted other efforts to promote science, such as a major upgrade of the nation’s weather models.

An Interior Department official said the agency’s decisions “are solely based on the facts and grounded in the law,” and that the agency would continue to pursue other partnerships to advance conservation science.

Research that potentially posed an obstacle to Mr. Trump’s promise to expand fossil-fuel production was halted, too. In 2017, Interior officials  canceled a $1 million study by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine on the health risks of “mountaintop removal” coal mining in places like West Virginia.

Mountaintop removal is as dramatic as it sounds — a hillside is blasted with explosives and the remains are excavated — but the health consequences still aren’t fully understood. The process can kick up coal dust and send heavy metals into waterways, and a number of studies have suggested links to health problems like kidney disease and birth defects.

“The industry was pushing back on these studies,” said Joseph Pizarchik, an Obama-era mining regulator who commissioned the now-defunct study. “We didn’t know what the answer would be,” he said, “but we needed to know: Was the government permitting coal mining that was poisoning people, or not?”

While coal mining has declined in recent years, satellite data shows that at least 60 square miles in Appalachia have been newly mined since 2016. “The study is still as important today as it was five years ago,” Mr. Pizarchik said.

THE COST OF LOST RESEARCH

The cuts can add up to significant research setbacks.

For years, the E.P.A. and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences had jointly funded 13 children’s health centers nationwide  that studied, among other things, the effects of pollution on children’s development. This year, the E.P.A. ended its funding.

At the University of California, San Francisco, one such center has been studying how industrial chemicals such as flame retardants in furniture could affect placenta and fetal development. Key aspects of the research have now stopped.

“The longer we go without funding, the harder it is to start that research back up,” said Tracey Woodruff, who directs the center.

In a statement, the E.P.A. said it anticipated future opportunities to fund children’s health research.

At the Department of Agriculture, Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue announced in June he would relocate two key research agencies to Kansas City from Washington: The National Institute of Food and Agriculture, a scientific agency that funds university research on topics like how to breed cattle and corn that can better tolerate drought conditions, and the Economic Research Service, whose economists produce studies for policymakers on farming trends, trade and rural America.

Nearly 600 employees had less than four months to decide whether to uproot and move. Most couldn’t or wouldn’t, and two-thirds of those facing transfer left their jobs.

In August, Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, appeared to celebrate the departures.

“It’s nearly impossible to fire a federal worker,” he said in videotaped remarks  at a Republican Party gala in South Carolina. “But by simply saying to people, ‘You know what, we’re going to take you outside the bubble, outside the Beltway, outside this liberal haven of Washington, D.C., and move you out in the real part of the country,’ and they quit. What a wonderful way to sort of streamline government and do what we haven’t been able to do for a long time.”

The White House declined to comment on Mr. Mulvaney’s speech.

The exodus has led to upheaval.

At the Economic Research Service, dozens of planned studies into topics like dairy industry consolidation and pesticide use have been delayed or disrupted. “You can name any topic in agriculture and we’ve lost an expert,” said Laura Dodson, an economist and acting vice president of the union representing agency employees.

The National Institute of Food and Agriculture manages $1.7 billion in grants that fund research on issues like food safety or techniques that help farmers improve their productivity. The staff loss, employees say, has held up hundreds of millions of dollars in funding, such as planned research into pests and diseases afflicting grapes, sweet potatoes and fruit trees.

Former employees say they remain skeptical that the agencies could be repaired quickly. “It will take 5 to 10 years to rebuild,” said Sonny Ramaswamy, who until 2018 directed the National Institute of Food and Agriculture.

Mr. Perdue said the moves would save money and put the offices closer to farmers. “We did not undertake these relocations lightly,” he said in a statement. A Department of Agriculture official added that both agencies were pushing to continue their work, but acknowledged that some grants could be delayed by months.

QUESTIONING THE SCIENCE ITSELF

In addition to shutting down some programs, there have been notable instances where the administration has challenged established scientific research. Early on, as it started rolling back regulations on industry, administration officials began questioning research findings underpinning those regulations.

In 2017, aides to Scott Pruitt, the E.P.A. administrator at the time, told the agency’s economists to redo an analysis of wetlands protections that had been used to help defend an Obama-era clean-water rule. Instead of concluding that the protections would provide more than $500 million in economic benefits, they were told to list the benefits as unquantifiable, according to Elizabeth Southerland, who retired in 2017 from a 30-year career at the E.P.A., finishing as a senior official in its water office.

“It’s not unusual for a new administration to come in and change policy direction,” Dr. Southerland said. “But typically you would look for new studies and carefully redo the analysis. Instead they were sending a message that all the economists, scientists, career staff in the agency were irrelevant.”

Internal documents show that political officials at the E.P.A. have overruled the agency’s career experts on several occasions, including in a move to regulate asbestos more lightly, in a decision not to ban the pesticide chlorpyrifos and in a determination that parts of Wisconsin were in compliance with smog standards. The Interior Department sidelined its own legal and environmental analyses in advancing a proposal to raise the Shasta Dam in California.

Michael Abboud, an E.P.A. spokesman, disputed Dr. Southerland’s account in an emailed response, saying “It is not true.”

The E.P.A. is now finalizing a narrower version of the Obama-era water rule, which in its earlier form had prompted outrage from thousands of farmers and ranchers across the country who saw it as overly restrictive.

“E.P.A. under President Trump has worked to put forward the strongest regulations to protect human health and the environment,” Mr. Abboud said, noting that several Obama administration rules had been held up in court and needed revision. “As required by law E.P.A. has always and will continue to use the best available science when developing rules, regardless of the claims of a few federal employees.”

Past administrations have, to varying degrees, disregarded scientific findings that conflicted with their priorities. In 2011, President Obama’s top health official overruled experts at the Food and Drug Administration who had concluded that over-the-counter emergency contraceptives were safe for minors.

But in the Trump administration, the scope is wider. Many top government positions, including at the E.P.A. and the Interior Department, are now occupied by former lobbyists  connected to the industries that those agencies oversee.

Scientists and health experts have singled out two moves they find particularly concerning. Since 2017, the E.P.A. has moved to restrict certain academics from sitting on its Science Advisory Board, which provides scrutiny of agency science, and has instead increased the number of appointees connected with industry.

And, in a potentially far-reaching move, the E.P.A. has proposed a rule to limit regulators from using scientific research unless the underlying raw data can be made public. Industry groups like the Chamber of Commerce have argued that some agency rules are based on science that can’t be fully scrutinized by outsiders. But dozens of scientific organizations have warned that the proposal in its current form could prevent the E.P.A. from considering a vast array of research on issues like the dangers of air pollution if, for instance, they are based on confidential health data.

“The problem is that rather than allowing agency scientists to use their judgment and weigh the best available evidence, this could put political constraints on how science enters the decision-making process in the first place,” said Ms. Wagner, the University of Texas law professor.

The E.P.A. says its proposed rule is intended to make the science that underpins potentially costly regulations more transparent. “By requiring transparency,” said Mr. Abboud, the agency spokesman, “scientists will be required to publish hypothesis and experimental data for other scientists to review and discuss, requiring the science to withstand skepticism and peer review.”

AN EXODUS OF EXPERTISE

“In the past, when we had an administration that was not very pro-environment, we could still just lay low and do our work,” said Betsy Smith, a climate scientist with more than 20 years of experience at the E.P.A. who in 2017 saw her long-running study of the effects of climate change on major ports get canceled.

“Now we feel like the E.P.A. is being run by the fossil fuel industry,” she said. “It feels like a wholesale attack.”

After her project was killed, Dr. Smith resigned.

The loss of experienced scientists can erase years or decades of “institutional memory,” said Robert J. Kavlock, a toxicologist who retired in October 2017 after working at the E.P.A. for 40 years, most recently as acting assistant administrator for the agency’s Office of Research and Development.

His former office, which researches topics like air pollution and chemical testing, has lost 250 scientists and technical staff members since Mr. Trump came to office, while hiring 124. Those who have remained in the office of roughly 1,500 people continue to do their work, Dr. Kavlock said, but are not going out of their way to promote findings on lightning-rod topics like climate change.

“You can see that they’re trying not to ruffle any feathers,” Dr. Kavlock said.

The same can’t be said of Patrick Gonzalez, the National Park Service’s principle climate change scientist, whose work involves helping national parks protect against damages from rising temperatures.

In February, Dr. Gonzalez testified before Congress about the risks of global warming, saying he was speaking in his capacity as an associate adjunct professor at the University of California, Berkeley. He is also using his Berkeley affiliation to participate as a co-author on a coming report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations body that synthesizes climate science for world leaders.

But in March, shortly after testifying, Dr. Gonzalez’s supervisor at the National Park Service sent the cease-and-desist letter warning him that his Berkeley affiliation was not separate from his government work and that his actions were violating agency policy. Dr. Gonzalez said he viewed the letter as an attempt to deter him from speaking out.

The Interior Department, asked to comment, said the letter did not indicate an intent to sanction Dr. Gonzalez and that he was free to speak as a private citizen.

Dr. Gonzalez, with the support of Berkeley, continues to warn about the dangers of climate change and work with the United Nations climate change panel using his vacation time, and he spoke again to Congress in June. “I’d like to provide a positive example for other scientists,” he said.

Still, he noted that not everyone may be in a position to be similarly outspoken. “How many others are not speaking up?” Dr. Gonzalez said.

[krushapatel005-blog]

Budget 2018: In first 8 months of FY18, states have gone slow on capex

Budget 2018

Stitched by rising consumption because of homestead advance waivers and Pay Commission continues, state governments have backed off the pace of capital use in the current money related year.

An investigation of 17 state government accounts uncovers that nine states have so far spent just 36 for every penny of their planned capital consumption in the current monetary year (April to November), contrasted and 47 for each penny over a similar period the past budgetary year.

 Capex by two different states is imperceptibly lower than a year ago, while just six states have spent a more noteworthy extent of their ...

TO READ THE FULL STORY, SUBSCRIBE NOW AT JUST RS 74 A MONTH

Click Here To Know More – Budget 2018

[mylucky137276]

Budget 2018: Agriculture sector to get top priority, says Arun Jaitley

Budget 2018 Agriculture

Ahead of the Union Budget, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley on Sunday said the agriculture sector was the top priority for the government because the country’s economic growth is not “justifiable and equitable” unless the benefits are “clear and evident” in the farm sector.

Therefore, the government’s priority is to ensure the gains reach the farmers and the growth is visible even in the farm sector, he said at an event here.

According to latest data from the Central Statistics Office (CSO), the country’s economic growth is expected to slow to a four-year low of 6.5 per cent in FY18, the lowest under the Modi-led government, mainly due to poor performance of agriculture and manufacturing sectors. The CSO has pegged farm and allied sector growth to slow to 2.1 per cent in the current fiscal year from 4.9 per cent in the preceding year. “India is one of the fastest growing economies in the world and the growth is benefitting people in different sectors. But maximum population is dependent on agri-sector and unless the gains are clear and evident, the (economic) growth is not justifiable and equitable,” Jaitley said.

Among the priority areas, the agriculture sector is on top, he said. “Ensuring the benefits reach the agri-sector and growth is visible — this is among the priority areas for us.” Jaitley further said: “We see in some places the problem of falling prices because of higher production. Farmers are not getting the price for their produce.” He said many steps have been taken in the past few years to take farmers out of this situation. “There has been some impact,” he said.

Lauding the contribution of farmers, he said they have left no stone unturned to serve the nation. They have worked hard to turn a food shortage country to a surplus one now. However, due to higher production, they are now faced with falling prices, he said. The minister also mentioned that the launch of options trading was one of the major steps taken to help farmers.

In the beginning, options trading might look like a small step but when its awareness increases in the coming days, it will benefit farmers, he said.

[trendingcurrentaffairs]

Every announcement in Budget 2017 stems from demonetisation

BUDGET 2017 : Benefits start rolling

Decisions taken by the FM to alleviate demonetisation woes

MSMEs with less than annual turnover of ~50 crore to pay lower corporate tax of 25%

Higher allocation for rural, agri and social sector schemes

Increase in NPA provision of banks fearing higher default by MSMEs due to note ban

Cut in income tax rate by half for the lowest tax bracket

Electoral funding reforms as clamour to go after black money increases

Read Article Source>>>

[tanyagargunlimited-blog]

Budget 2017: Breather for gains from property and inherited jewellery

BUDGET 2017 - Capital gains on sales of assets such as property and gold will decline after the proposal to shift the base year for calculation of the indexation benefit from 1981 to 2001, as announced by Finance Minister Arun Jaitley.

The cost index helps to increase the price of acquisition of an asset by taking inflation into account.

To calculate the capital gains at the time of selling any property purchased before 1981, its purchase price is now calculated on the basis of the fair market value of 1981. Calculation at the fair market value of 2001 will increase the cost of acquisition and lower the capital gain.

If property or jewellery is held for more than three years, the long-term capital gains tax rate is 20 per cent with indexation. To arrive at the indexed value, the cost of acquisition of the asset is taken into account.

The cost of acquisition was assumed to be the fair market value of 1981 for older properties READ MORE

[poonamparekh]

Consolidation in PSUs flagged with oil sector taking lead

Budget 2017 - The government will create a mega oil company as part of its plan to consolidate public sector companies. The proposal of merging 13 government oil companies, which had stemmed out of the Cabinet Secretariat last year but did not find takers in the ministry of petroleum, is now back on the agenda. “We see opportunities to strengthen our central public sector undertakings through consolidation, mergers and acquisitions... Possibilities of such restructuring are visible in the oil and gas sector. We propose to create an integrated public sector ‘oil major’ which will be able to match the performance of international and domestic private sector oil and gas companies,” said Finance Minister Arun Jaitley in his Budget speech. He said that the CPSEs could be integrated across the value chain of an industry, which would give them “capacity to bear higher risks, avail economies of scale, take higher investment decisions and create more value for the stakeholders”. But, for reasons ranging from the managerial to employee management and legal, any attempt to execute the idea could see a long-drawn process involving legislative changes as well. Even an indomitable Mani Shankar Aiyar had to beat a retreat on this proposal, ostensibly on the recommendations of V Krishanamurthy’s Synergy in Energy panel in 2005.(Read More)

[kumard12]

8 Years to Start-Up India

Eight years ago, a vision ignited a revolution. In 2016, the Indian government launched Start-Up India, a flagship initiative announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The program aims to transform India’s business landscape by fostering a vibrant ecosystem for startups. 

This article delves into the initiative’s remarkable journey, its intricate link with the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT), and the pivotal role played by dedicated IAS officers in making it a reality. But first, let’s recall the Start-Up India initiative. 

Start-Up India

The Startup India initiative promoted and coordinated by DPIIT, offers a comprehensive support system, empowering startups to thrive. Here’s a glimpse into the key benefits:

Tax Relief - In 2016, the union budget highlighted Startup India’s tax incentives. Under this initiative, startups enjoyed a remarkable boost. More specifically, 100% tax exemptions and simplified angel tax compliance.

Simplified compliance - Startup India’s plan emphasised efficiency, with a faster registration process, self-certification of compliance, and reduced regulatory burden. 

Funding network - Spearheaded by dedicated DPIIT’s IAS officers and backed by the Indian government, Startup India facilitates networking and connections and DPIIT-recognised funds.

Faster Clearance - This includes, faster patent registration, easier IPR protection, and streamlined exit options. DPIIT’s IAS officers championed these initiatives, ensuring startups could navigate legal processes seamlessly.

With these advantages in place, the onus fell on the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) to shepherd the initiative and create a supportive ecosystem for startups to flourish. Let's explore how DPIIT and Startup India have evolved together over the past eight years.

Evolution of DPIIT and Startup India: Leadership and Impact (2016-2024)

2016 - Laying the Foundation 

Under the visionary leadership of Amitabh Kant, then Secretary of the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP), the core framework for Startup India was established. 

Startup India’s framework included simplifying registration processes, introducing tax benefits, and creating a network for funding, as mentioned in a DPIIT press release. For instance, KPMG, a leading consultancy firm, partnered with the DPIIT to streamline registration processes and reduce regulatory burdens. The active involvement of DPIIT’s IAS officers ensured effective implementation and seamless coordination with external stakeholders.

2017-2019: Streamlining and Growth

2016 marked the year Mr Ramesh Abhishek, yet another accomplished IAS officer took over the position as the new Secretary for DPIIT. During his tenure, Mr Ramesh Abhishek implemented the start up action plan vigorously and targeted specific sectors like fintech, e-commerce, and healthcare, and saw a continued focus on streamlining processes and promoting growth. He also introduced faster patent registration and easier IPR protection for startups.

All of these efforts by the team of Mr Ramesh Abhishek eventually led to a surge in number of recognised startups. 

2020-2023: Adapting to Challenges

Building upon the strong foundation laid during the tenure of Ramesh Abhishek as DPIIT Secretary (2016-2019), the focus of Startup India shifted towards navigating new challenges and ensuring long-term sustainability for the program under Dr. Guruprasad Mohapatra's leadership in 2020. 

A key concern that emerged was the difficulty startups faced in securing funding beyond the initial seed stage, crucial for scaling their businesses. Recognizing this bottleneck, DPIIT prioritized solutions to bridge this funding gap. Furthermore, the program acknowledged the growing importance of a skilled workforce within the startup ecosystem. Initiatives were launched to promote skill development programs tailored to the specific needs of startups, ensuring a readily available pool of qualified talent. Notably, DPIIT’s IAS officers played a pivotal role in implementing and overseeing these initiatives, fostering collaboration between startups, investors, and educational institutions.

This multi-pronged approach aimed to not only nurture groundbreaking ideas but also encourage a dynamic and thriving ecosystem for startups to flourish in the long run.

2024: Way Forward 

And now, with Mr Rajesh Kumar Singh at the helm of DPIIT as of 2024, Startup India continues its journey of fostering innovation and entrepreneurial spirit. Building upon the successes of the past eight years, by Amitabh Kant, Ramesh Abhishek, and Guruprasad Mohapatra, the focus remains on addressing lingering challenges. Efforts to bridge the funding gap beyond the seed stage are ongoing, with new initiatives and collaborations being explored. Equipping the workforce with relevant skills through targeted skill development programs remains a top priority.

Looking ahead, DPIIT, along with the wider startup ecosystem, is committed to propelling India towards becoming a global leader in innovation and entrepreneurship. And as of 31st December 2023, a total of 1,17,254 startups have been recognized under the Startup India initiative. 

Wrapping Up

As Startup India embarks on its ninth year, the journey forward is paved with both opportunities and challenges. Maintaining the momentum achieved in fostering innovation across diverse sectors remains a key objective. 

While the first half of 2024 witnessed a positive uptick in funding compared to the latter half of 2023 (as per the India Tech Semi-Annual Funding Report), ensuring long-term funding solutions for scaling startups requires continued focus.

The leading sectors in terms of performance in H1 2024 were retail, enterprise applications, and fintech.

- India Tech Semi-Annual Funding Report

Here's where the leadership of DPIIT plays a crucial role. Building upon the groundwork laid by previous leaders like Ramesh Abhishek, who championed specific sectors like retail, enterprise applications, and fintech (sectors that continue to show strong performance in H1 2024), Rajesh Kumar Singh, the current DPIIT Secretary, is spearheading efforts to address lingering challenges.

A primary concern is bridging the funding gap beyond the seed stage. While India remained the fourth-highest funded country globally in the tech startup landscape in 2023, securing capital for scaling businesses remains a hurdle for many entrepreneurs. DPIIT’s leaders and IAS officers are, actively exploring new initiatives and collaborations to create a more robust funding ecosystem. This might involve fostering stronger connections between startups and venture capitalists, exploring alternative funding mechanisms like angel investment networks, or even encouraging the creation of specialized funds catering to specific growth stages.

[jessica-dsilva]

Budget 2017 highlights Modi govt's agenda of transform, energise and clean on Business Standard. India is now on the cusp of a massive digital revolution: Arun Jaitley