EU demands duty-free car imports into India; domestic auto industry worried

April 12, 2013

EU_duty-free_car
New Delhi, Apr 12: The domestic auto industry is foxed with the latest demand from the European Union — to allow zero duty import of cars.

The proposal, which has come at the behest of the German lobby that includes global giants like Mercedes, BMW and Audi, has so far been resisted by the government but it has set off fresh fears in the industry that the government may agree to cut tariffs to as low as 5-10 % from the notified rate of 60%. After all, the government has done a series of U-turns on its position despite getting nothing much in return.

"We hope India does not give in," said Vishnu Mathur, head of Siam, the auto industry lobby group.

From holding out on cutting import duty on cars and wines and spirits to giving a firm grip to European companies in government contracts and decisions that could hinder medicine exports, the government has gone the extra mile to accommodate EU's interests.

What it has so far got in return is the promise of zero-duty textiles exports, which will put it on par with Bangladesh, while the European trading bloc has resisted any move to ease visa rules or make it simpler for Indian IT companies to do business in the 27 member countries.

Lower duty good for car buyers

While allowing professionals and contract service providers into EU, there is a safeguard clause that will kick in when 20% of the committed number of professionals enter the territory. This clause will virtually render the "flexibility" meaningless but European negotiators are unwilling to concede any ground on it.

Lower duty on cars is good for consumers dreaming of buying the latest hot rod but is bad news for creating jobs in not just the automobile industry but even in components and logistics that depend on it. In fact, it was to protect these segments that the government had chosen to keep tariffs at 100% levels after import restrictions were eased.

But during the negotiations with EU — led by commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma and closely monitored by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh — the tariff walls are all set to collapse. India has already conceded that it will lower import duty to 30% from 2017 before cutting it to 20% in 2020.

Similarly, customs duty on "high-end" wine is proposed to be slashed to 30% from near 150% levels. Although the move may not be palatable to local players, consumers would be literally uncorking the bubbly as duty will fall on bottles that cost over $3.75.

In return, it is offering to lower customs duty on sensitive goods such as milk powder , a move that will put local dairies at risk.

What has come as a huge surprise is that EU reopened talks on auto import tariffs just when the issue looked settled . When Sharma meets his EU counterpart Karel De Gucht on Monday, the issues will be back on the agenda, amid fears that the deal will be sealed in Brussels. The fears stem from the undue haste shown by the government in doing a series of Uturns .

Despite maintaining for years that it will not give any preference to European firms in government contracts , negotiators have now agreed to treat them at par with Indian companies for contracts below a threshold — likely to be fixed at Rs 100 crore. For contracts beyond the trigger point, there will be international competitive bidding. "It will also put Indian SMEs at a disadvantage since their counterparts from EU will be given the same treatment in contracts," said Third World Network's K M Gopakumar.

Similarly, on Bilateral Investment Protection Agreement , something that EU was initially not keen to negotiate, India has gone beyond what it has done for any other country despite the prospect of having to shell out billions after challenges from a host of overseas investors ranging from Telenor and Sistema to The Children's Investment Fund (TCIF).

Again, on intellectual property rights, the government's record is patchy. It may accept a proposal from EU to certify that goods exported out of India meet the norms, a task which is so far performed by European customs agents. Even on geographical indications, negotiators have softened their stance saying that they will consider special dispensation for countries that are signatories to international agreements and purely on a reciprocal basis.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 11,2024

birensingh.jpg

The Manipur Kuki MLAs have released a statement calling out Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's 'lies' in the Supreme Court. In a joint statement, the MLAs, including those from the Bharatiya Janata Party, said they had not had any meeting with the Chief Minister since May 3, 2023, nor did they intend to meet him in the future as “he was the mastermind behind the violence”.

As per the MLAs, the SG lied about state CM N Biren Singh speaking to Kuki MLAs to control the situation there, in order to halt a Supreme Court probe into the leaked tapes which allege that Singh has been complicit in the violence that broke out between Kukis and Meitis there.

"We...clarify that we have never had any meeting with Chief Minister, Shri N. Biren Singh since May 3, 2023, nor have any intention to meet him in future as he is the mastermind behind the violence and ethnic cleansing of our people from the Imphal valley, which is continuing till today, the latest being the brutal killing and burning of Mrs Zosangkim Hmar on November 7, 2024," the letter read, while condemning the recent 'barbaric' killing of the woman there, and noting the SG's assertion is 'tantamount' to misleading the top court.

“We, the undersigned ten MLAs, have come to know that during the Supreme Court hearing held on November 8, 2024, the Solicitor General of India submitted that ‘CM is meeting all Kuki MLAs and trying to bring the situation down to get peace’. In this connection, we hereby categorically state that this submission is a blatant lie and tantamount to misleading the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India,” the statement said.

The Supreme Court, while hearing a petition by a Kuki organisation, asked that it submit audio tapes to substantiate its claim that the Chief Minister was instrumental in inciting and organising violence in the northeastern State.

Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta orally informed the court that the Chief Minister was meeting all the Kuki-Zo MLAs and that peace in the State had come at a huge cost.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 12,2024

ikramuddinkamil.jpg

The Taliban regime has appointed Ikramuddin Kamil as the acting consul in the Afghan mission in Mumbai, Afghan media has reported.

It is the first such appointment made by the Taliban set up to any Afghan mission in India.

There was no immediate comment from the Indian side on the appointment that came.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan has announced the appointment of Kamil as the acting consul in Mumbai, the Taliban-controlled Bakhtar News Agency reported on Monday, citing unnamed sources.

"He is currently in Mumbai, where he is fulfilling his duties as a diplomat representing the Islamic Emirate," it said.

The appointment is part of Kabul's efforts to strengthen diplomatic ties with India and enhance its presence abroad, the media outlet said

Kamil holds a PhD degree in international law and previously served as the deputy director in the department of security cooperation and border affairs in the foreign ministry, it said.

He is expected to facilitate consular services and represent the interests of Afghanistan in India, the report added.

Kamil's appointment comes days after the external affairs ministry's point-person for Afghanistan held talks with the Taliban's acting defence minister, Mullah Mohammad Yaqoob, in Kabul.

Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, the Taliban's deputy foreign minister for political affairs, also posted on X about Kamil's appointment.

The appointment of Kamil is seen as part of efforts to facilitate consular services to the Afghan population in Mumbai.

There has been almost negligible presence of diplomatic staff at the Afghan missions in India.

Most of the diplomats appointed by the Ashraf Ghani government have already left India.

In May, Zakia Wardak, the seniormost Afghan diplomat in India, resigned from her position after reports emerged that she was caught at the Mumbai airport for allegedly trying to smuggle 25 kg of gold worth Rs 18.6 crore from Dubai.

Wardak had taken charge as the acting ambassador of Afghanistan to New Delhi late last year, after working as the Afghan consul general in Mumbai for more than two years.

She took charge of the Afghan embassy in New Delhi last November, after the mission helmed by then ambassador Farid Mamundzay announced its closure.

Mamundzay, who was an appointee of the Ghani government, had moved to the United Kingdom.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.