Income and wealth inequality in India is deepening. The current regime, despite its promises to tackle black money, has chosen a contradictory course of action which has bolstered financial secrecy in the country, further widening already existing structural inequalities.

The progressive realisation of human rights and availability of public services such as education, health, nutrition, drinking water and sanitation, etc. depend on how effectively national governments mobilize resources in the country. An integral part of this is national tax policy.

For most part, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – the global 2030 development agenda – are oriented towards securing human rights for populations across the world. While the world stands at a crossroads and faces challenges each more threatening than the last, the SDGs are a universal call to end poverty, protect the planet, and to ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity.

Higher budgetary outlays will not be able to eliminate gender-based violence. Policies will achieve limited impact unless backed by inclusive public spending

With capital becoming globalised, international investors look for the minutest of opportunities across the world to improve return on their funds. Such endeavours, many a time, fall into the grey zone where the difference between legal and illegal becomes very thin. Two such grey zone cases refer to ‘treaty shopping’ and ‘round tripping’.

While the recent Union Budget announced a number of changes related to taxation policies – like a change in corporate tax rate, a standard deduction of Rs 40,000 for the salaried class, changes in surcharge – one of its most noteworthy aspects is a departure from the past policy stance on two areas of taxation.

In India, historically and constitutionally, the fiscal spaces for states have been very limited because of their limited resource-generating capacity. However, Maharashtra is an exception. It is the wealthiest state in terms of its Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP). The growth rate of Maharashtra was 9.4% in 2016-17 – 2% more than the nation’s growth rate.

Farmers need higher returns for their produce to experience increased farm income. The government has continuously promised farmers at least 50 percent higher returns than the cost of their produce. In the backdrop of these assurances, it is pertinent to see what the Union Budget 2018-19 offers to the sector for ensuring a secured income, if not doubling it by 2022 in line with its promises.

The ideas of ‘good governance’ and ‘budget transparency’ are intricately related where one practice often influences the other. Over the past few years, the importance of transparency in governance has been amply stressed upon and budgets, in this context, are looked upon as primary tools that can be used to hold the government accountable. In view of this, it is pertinent to see where India stands in so far as budget transparency is concerned.

वित्तीय सेहत हो दुरूस्त तो भारत हो तंदुरस्त

In June last year, a small-scale awareness activity and camp in two blocks of Jharkhand saw hundreds of people showing up at the block office to register their names for pensions and MGNREGA work. On submitting their applications to the block administration, they were communicated the broken refrain of “abhi funds nahin hain” (there is no money available right now).

Finance minister Arun Jaitley was quite generous with promises relating to reformation of the education sector – along with other priority sectors like agriculture and rural economy – while giving his #Budget2018 speech on February 1.