Fiscal Policy generally refers to the use of taxation and government expenditure to regulate the aggregate level of economic activity in a country. Fiscal policy in Bangladesh basically comprises activities, which the country carries out to obtain and use resources to provide services while ensuring optimum efficiency of the economic units. The policy influences the behaviour of economic forces through public finance. Major objectives of the fiscal policy of Bangladesh are to ensure macroeconomic stability of the country, promote economic growth, and develop a mechanism for equitable distribution of income.
The main tools to achieve these objectives are variation in public revenue, variation in public expenditure, and management of public debt. These are reflected in the budgetary operations of the government, prepared and implemented on year-on-year basis. In the initial years of independence, the government of Bangladesh had to spend a large amount of its resources in reconstruction and rehabilitation work. It had negative public savings and limited private investment.
We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!
Despite large inflows of foreign aid, the increasingly large financing gap became the main concern of the government. The situation was further aggravated by frequent internal and external shocks. Under the circumstances, government fiscal policies during 1970s and 1980s were largely oriented at rehabilitating the war-torn economy as well as stabilising it from various shocks. This had gradually lead to weak fiscal structure and poor fiscal management.
The tax structure was such that any increase in taxes due to built-in consequences of economic growth was virtually not possible. This was because of the fact that despite a moderate growth of the economy, income distribution was skewed, and had been pushing more and more people below the poverty line each year. As such, the proportion of population with taxable surplus went down overtime. More than 80% of the total tax revenue came from indirect taxes, amongst which taxes on imports contributed about 60%.
Since most imports were in the government sector and basic need-oriented, it was hardly possible to increase import duty. Despite higher production costs, prices of most public goods could not be rationalised due to socio-economic reasons. As such, these were kept lower, which resulted in inadequate cost recovery. Current expenditure had always been underestimated in the country, while current surplus as well as foreign loans and grants were overestimated. Therefore, the overall fiscal deficit experienced a large variability all the time.
The whole scenario may be described as such that the fiscal policies of the past could not be used as an adequate tool for ‘fine-tuning’ the economy towards achieving macro-economic stability and higher economic growth. Regular deficit financing, normally undertaken through borrowings from abroad, from bangladesh bank, and from scheduled banks, has become a basic feature of the fiscal policy of the country. Opportunity of borrowing from the public by the government for financing budget deficit is very limited in the country as savings capability of the people is very low.
Therefore, the opportunity of non-inflationary financing of budget deficit does not exist here. Availability of foreign borrowing depends on the international liquidity situation and the prevailing circumstances in the international capital market, which is always uncertain and volatile for a country like Bangladesh. The commercial banks, because of their potential for central bank refinancing, are also not effective sources of non-inflationary finance.
Given the circumstances, whatever is the size of the fiscal deficit in any particular year, a part of it cannot be financed by external borrowing and, therefore, must be financed out of central bank borrowing. As a result, the essential element of fiscal deficit in Bangladesh has become such that once a deficit is incurred, government borrowing from the Bangladesh Bank became inevitable. In the early 1990s, the government of Bangladesh undertook some comprehensive steps towards the improvement of the country’s fiscal front.
The major objective of the government fiscal policy was to restrict the growth of current expenditure to a level below the growth of the nominal GDP, thereby making more resources available to support annual development programme (ADP) undertaken in each year. In line with the Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility (ESAF) of the IMF, a number of reforms were initiated, the most important of which was the introduction of value added tax (VAT) in July 1991. VAT was introduced at a uniform rate of 15% at the manufacturing-cum-import level.
Together with protection-neutral supplementary duties, this system largely replaced the earlier structure of differentiated sales tax on import and excise duties on domestic goods. In case of personal income tax, the major reforms involved the inclusion of entertainment allowances in the personal income tax base, deduction of investment in approved assets from the tax base, and an introduction of a withholding tax on dividend with limitation of special expenditure within a reasonable limit. Steps were taken to reduce interest rates on government savings instruments and subsidies for food and jute.
A good number of public sector enterprises were denationalised through sales to the private sector. These reform measures resulted in a remarkable improvement in the fiscal situation of Bangladesh after 1990. The growth of current expenditures was contained below the rate of GDP growth. Tax reform led to an increase in government revenues from much below 10% of GDP in fiscal year 1989-90 to 11% in fiscal year 1991-92. This trend continued and revenue collections reached more than 12% of GDP by the FY 1994-95.
This trend is continuing, although with minor fluctuations. Moreover, this was accompanied by changes in the tax structure of the country, reflected in the decline of the shares of customs duties and increase in the share of income and profit taxes in the total tax revenues in the subsequent period. As a result, the shortage of local funds that had constrained in the project implementation capacity of the country and had shrunk the country’s absorptive capacity for project aid for a long period was largely removed.
The improvement of the government’s fiscal performance was reflected in the budgetary outcome of the country. The overall budget deficit was 8. 4% of GDP during the 1980s and came down to 5. 9% in 1991-92 and thus provided a breathing ground for the government. Up to 1997-98, the budget deficit could be successfully contained to less than 6%, helping to stabilise the economy to a great extent. But this could not be maintained in the following year due to the devastating and prolonged floods that occurred in the first half of 1998-99.
There was a considerable slippage in the expenditure programme of the government due to floods while revenue collection lagged far behind the target. As a result, the overall budget deficit shot up to 7. 8% in the FY 1998-99. Although the government took some steps, the overall deficit remained slightly above 6% in 1999-2000. Up to 1989-90, foreign aid had financed the lion’s share of fiscal deficit of Bangladesh. Since then there has been a considerable shift in the sources of funds for financing budget deficit.
Domestic sources could provide only 15% of the total deficit during 1989-90. In contrast, in FY 1999-2000, the comparative figures for domestic and foreign sources in funding the budget deficit were 47% and 53% respectively. However, an absolute decline in the flow of external funds on concessionary terms is also partly attributable to this. Increased dependence on local funds has largely reduced the uncertainties of the implementation of the budgetary programme. But this has also increased the risk of additional burden of higher interest costs from domestic borrowing.
Efforts to generate increased domestic resources are generally based on various tax reforms as well as reforms in the financial sector. On the expenditure side, the government has given increased emphasis on human resource development and poverty alleviation programmes. Top priority has been given to improve the quality and coverage of the education system as well as health and family planning services, and social safety net pogrammes to serve vulnerable group. This is demonstrated in the increased budgetary allocation in these heads in recent years. Abu Chaleh Dhaka Bangladesh [email protected] com
Related essay samples:
- Gdp in Bangladesh
- What Do Undergrads Need to Know About Trade
- Balance of Payment of Bangladesh
- Explain Why Tax Revenue Changes When the Economy Goes Into a Recession.
- Clinton The method he uses is to
- The growth in bond issues in Australia Essay
- Public Fiscal Administration
- Importance of Small and Mediun Entreptises in a Developing Economy
- Two Macroeconomic Objectives the Government
- Overview Of The Operational Programmes In Romania Economics Essay
- Macroeconomics Tutorial Test Essay
- Chinas Slow Growth Economic Economics Essay
- Tourism Development in India
- Swot Analysis of Bank Al-Falah
- Data for Newark General Hospital Essay