
But it is not his pusillanimity that is postponing the introduction of the GST; it is the cussedness of the states. And why are they being cussed? One reason could be that the GST will replace all other indirect taxes; even if the GST is calibrated so as to give the same revenue as the sum of all those taxes, it will bring more revenue to some states and less to others. The finance minister has promised to take care of that, and to reimburse the difference to the losing states out of central revenue for some years. But he cannot do so forever without making a mockery of the reform; and states can keep asking him, “What after you stop?” More importantly, states will lose the power to vary indirect tax rates. Since they cannot levy income tax, they cannot vary it anyway. So GST will deprive states of most of their power of taxation. Is that a good thing? The practice in “good” countries is to make as few and infrequent changes in tax rates. The objective should be to forget tax changes and to learn to manage within the revenue. That is what the states should also learn to do if they are interested in good governance and in attracting investment from other states and countries.
There is a more important source of the states’ resistance that is never mentioned – namely, the multitude of taxes levied just now are collected by a large tax force at many points – in factories, at city outposts, at interstate border crossings, and so on. They offer so many points at which bribes are collected; the tax collectors of states cannot bear the thought of these retail earnings ceasing. The primary advantage of the goods and services tax for taxpayers is also a crippling disadvantage to tax receivers; their interests conflict, and the tax collectors have won till now.
Is GST worth bothering about then? It is, not simply because it will make business taxpayers’ lives easier, but because it will turn India into a single market. That is an odd thing to say, for the whole point of creating a country is that there are not movement, entry and exit barriers within it: that people, goods and services can move seamlessly across it. Unfortunately, India has never been a country in that sense. It emerged as a loose collection of presidencies and provinces as the British conquered it bit by bit. It remained fragmented under the British, and it has never been fully integrated 68 years after they left.
Can it be integrated? Of course it can; but the economists’ arguments and bureaucrats’ file notings will not do it. It is the politicians who will have to do it; and there will always be many politicians who see no point in whipping junior tax officials into line. They will do it if they are themselves whipped into line by a strong leader. We are supposed to have one in our Prime Minister; this is a job worthy of his talents. Whether he has it in him, we just have to wait and see.