OIL SUBSIDY BURDEN:
Why The Kirit Parikh Committee Recommendations
Should Be Taken Seriously By The Government?
Rama Krishna Vadlamudi
February 5, 2010
What is Oil Subsidy?
In India, fuel oils – petrol, diesel and kerosene
and domestic LPG cylinders are sold at a price much lesser than their cost
price. The subsidy is the most in case of diesel and PDS Kerosene. The prices
at which public sector oil marketing companies (OMCs) have to sell the prices
of these petroleum products are set by the Government of India. Public Sector OMCs
– IOC, BPCL and HPCL – do not have the freedom to sell at a price over and
above the cost price. Successive governments at the Centre have been
prevaricating on the issue of oil subsidy for more than seven to eight years.
The oil subsidy all these years has run into lakhs of crores of rupees.
India depends on imported oil to an extent of about
80 per cent of its total requirements. Crude oil prices have gone up substantially
from a level of USD 20 per barrel in 2002 to an all-time peak of around USD 148
a barrel in July 2008 and plunged to a low of USD 35 per barrel by December
2008 before rising to the present level of around USD 73 per barrel (around
1.00 AM IST today) on the Nymex. Nymex crude oil price is the most widely
tracked price in the world.
Oil subsidy is the difference between the fuel cost
incurred by the OMCs and the sale price. As given above, crude oil price has
gone up by up to four times in the last eight years. Fearing inflation and
political backlash from low-income and middle classes, the Governments have
done precious little to cut down this oil subsidy all these years. The Central
Government lacks the political will to cut down them, which has adversely
impacted India’s fiscal deficit.
How much is the
subsidy burden?
The oil subsidy burden for OMCs is the most for
Kerosene, which has been kept at an artificially lower price of Rs 9/litre for
several years. The kerosene subsidy works out to around Rs 18/litre. The
subsidy burden amounts to Rs 4.70/litre for petrol and around Rs 2.30/litre for
diesel and around Rs 290 in case of an LPG cylinder. The downstream OMCs have
been making huge losses for several years due to this heavy burden on them.
The compensation for this subsidy has been coming from the Central Government partially and some portion is coming from upstream PSU companies, ONGC, GAIL India and Oil India Limited (OIL). As a result of this heavy oil subsidy burden, all these public sector have been suffering massive losses despite the compensation from Government in the form of oil bonds, which have to be sold by OMCs to meet their working capital requirements.
The compensation for this subsidy has been coming from the Central Government partially and some portion is coming from upstream PSU companies, ONGC, GAIL India and Oil India Limited (OIL). As a result of this heavy oil subsidy burden, all these public sector have been suffering massive losses despite the compensation from Government in the form of oil bonds, which have to be sold by OMCs to meet their working capital requirements.
The total under-recoveries (a euphemism for
subsidies) for six years between 2003-04 and 2008-09 amount to Rs 2.99 lakh
crores – out of which, diesel accounts for Rs 1.21 lakh crore; while PDS
kerosene, domestic LPG and petrol account for Rs 92,800 crore, Rs 68,000 lakh
crore and Rs 17,400 crore respectively for the six-year period. From the total
of these six years subsidies, around 60 per cent is from 2007-08 and 2008-09
only.
The burden of this oil burden is shared by the Government
with Rs 1.42 lakh crore in the form of oil bonds and by three upstream public
sector oil companies (ONGC, OIL and GAIL) to an extent of Rs 1.01 lakh crore in
the form of a subsidy sharing formula for the six-year period. The OMCs have
absorbed losses to the tune of Rs 56,000 crore.
Who are the
beneficiaries of this oil subsidy?
The political spin given to justify the continuance
of these subsidies is that the burden will be very high on the poor and low
income group classes. The government wants to insulate the domestic consumers from volatile oil prices. However,
the biggest beneficiaries are the rich classes who have got a vested interest
in keeping the subsidies intact. In a city like Bombay, all the wealthy, people
in positions of power, big executives and well-heeled people use their own cars
or hired taxis to travel long distances – like from Borivali to Nariman Point,
the one-way distance of which is around 35 km by road. They use their own BMWs,
Mercs, Innovas or other gas guzzlers.
The public transport is extremely poor in Bombay. The question that comes to your mind is: Do these affluent people deserve this burden? As prices are below cost, we do not have any responsibility towards environment and we tend to consume more of these fuels and increasing the release of green house gases into the climate affecting the pollution levels in the country.
The public transport is extremely poor in Bombay. The question that comes to your mind is: Do these affluent people deserve this burden? As prices are below cost, we do not have any responsibility towards environment and we tend to consume more of these fuels and increasing the release of green house gases into the climate affecting the pollution levels in the country.
What is the cost of
this oil subsidy to the economy?
As mentioned above, the OMCs have absorbed losses
to an extent of Rs 56,000 crore for six years between 2003-04 and 2008-09;
which means these oil subsidies have crippled them completely. These losses
have forced them to slow down their investments in creating new capacities or
participate in new exploration activities. Even upstream PSU oil companies had
to share a burden of Rs 1.01 lakh crore in these six years. This has also
hampered the ability of these companies to make new investments.
Our dependence on oil imports is going to increase
to 90 per cent (from the present 80 per cent) by the end of 2030 which would be
extremely perilous for our country which is on a high growth trajectory. This
clearly indicates the poverty of ideas from India’s political classes, who have
really disappointed the Indian masses. Our Prime Minister is fond of telling
the people that we have the potential to achieve double-digit growth, but he
never tells us how he is planning to do that miracle with woeful infrastructure
and dithering policies.
The cost of this oil subsidy (the fancy term used
as the official lingo for oil subsidies is under recoveries) is on the common
man (aam admi) only as he is the ultimate bearer of this subsidy in the form of
higher fiscal deficit. OMCS have not
been able to upgrade their fuels to higher Bharat IV norms (cleaner fuels from
an environment point of view) and they could not create any new capacities for
cleaner fuels. And they are not yet ready to meet the deadline for Bharat IV
norms (in line with Euro IV norms).
While private sector companies, like Reliance
Industries, Essar Oil and Videocon Industries, have made large investment in
exploration and created big refining capacities; OMCs, ONGC and Oil India have
not been able to make much headway as far as new investments are concerned.
With lesser investment for several years, ONGC pays an income tax of around 32
per cent (of its Profit Before Tax); whereas Reliance Industries pays around 20
per cent only. The big difference is due to RIL’s high depreciation resulting
from higher investments as compared to ONGC.
With lesser investments from public sector
behemoths, the country’s dependence on imported oil, instead of reducing, has
gone up substantially. The result is that India is poor in energy security and
we are vulnerable to volatile crude oil prices and the politics of OPEC and oil
world. This lack of energy security will be heavy on India as we are
susceptible to shenanigans that are played out in case of wars in the Middle East
Asia or the kind of oil shocks we witnessed in the early part of 1970s and 2008
when oil reached a peak of around USD 148 a barrel. While China has been
investing strategically in Africa and Latin America for their raw materials
needs, we have failed to make any attempts at energy security.
The only minister who made some noises about energy security and travelled across the US is Mani Shankar Aiyar a few years back. But, this dynamic minister was removed from his position for reasons best known to the Congress party. If my memory is correct C Raja Mohan, an expert on defence affairs, was writing about energy security in 1993 in a column he used to publish in The Hindu in those days. In that article of 1993, he strongly advocated that India should woo Bangladesh for its vast gas reserves. We did not seem to have done much in this regard.
However, the government of Khaleeda Zia, who is extremely hostile to India, has not helped matters much. Only the Tatas had tried to tap Bangladesh’s potential in natural resources. But even they could not make much headway there, I think. Now, with a friendly Haseena Begum in power, we can be optimistic about some progress in this regard if our government takes any initiative towards exploiting their gas reserves.
The only minister who made some noises about energy security and travelled across the US is Mani Shankar Aiyar a few years back. But, this dynamic minister was removed from his position for reasons best known to the Congress party. If my memory is correct C Raja Mohan, an expert on defence affairs, was writing about energy security in 1993 in a column he used to publish in The Hindu in those days. In that article of 1993, he strongly advocated that India should woo Bangladesh for its vast gas reserves. We did not seem to have done much in this regard.
However, the government of Khaleeda Zia, who is extremely hostile to India, has not helped matters much. Only the Tatas had tried to tap Bangladesh’s potential in natural resources. But even they could not make much headway there, I think. Now, with a friendly Haseena Begum in power, we can be optimistic about some progress in this regard if our government takes any initiative towards exploiting their gas reserves.
What is the
difference between under recoveries and losses of OMCs?
Refining of crude oil is a process industry where crude oil constitutes
around 90% of the total cost. Since value added is relatively small,
determination of individual product-wise prices becomes problematic. Internationally,
there is not much of a difference between the sale price of diesel and
kerosene; whereas, petrol prices are lesser than that of diesel/kerosene by
about four per cent! In India, our policy is just reverse. While the sale price
of petrol is the highest and that of PDS kerosene is the lowest. And one fails
to understand what kind of logic is there in following such a distorted policy.
The OMCs are currently sourcing their products from the refineries on
import parity basis which then becomes their cost price. The difference between
the cost price and the realized price represents the under-recoveries of the
OMCs. The under-recoveries as computed above are different from the actual
profits and losses of the oil companies as per their published results. The
latter take into account other income streams like dividend income, pipeline
income, inventory changes, profits from freely priced products and refining margins
in the case of integrated companies. OMCs have been showing nominal profits due
to sale of their cross-holdings in other oil companies.
What are the demerits of following such a skewed
oil pricing policy by the Government?
1.
The
public sector OMCs and upstream oil companies have suffered financially as
their balance sheet strength has deteriorated considerably and they have lost
their competitive edge at the market place
2.
The
working capital loans of the public sector OMCs has gone up from Rs 23,000
crore in 2004-05 to Rs 1.07 lakh crore by December 2009 – forcing them to
borrow heavily from banks with massive rise in interest costs. Moreover, the
government is extremely slow in granting oil bonds to the OMCs resulting in the
heavy bleeding of these companies.
3.
The
adhoc system has resulted in speculation, hoarding and adulteration of diesel
with kerosene which is available at a cheaper rate or Rs 9 per litre compared
to a high price of Rs 35 per litre for diesel
4.
Even
domestic LPG cylinders are diverted for commercial and industrial purposes
5.
The private sector oil companies, Reliance
Industries, Essar Oil and Shell India have closed their retail petroleum
outlets
6.
The
less expensive fuel cost has made the users complacent about the perils of
green house gases and users have failed to understand the reasons for saving
fossil fuels
7.
The
artificially low fuel prices have encouraged auto manufacturers to be
complacent about developing fuel-efficient vehicles in India
What will happen if
we do not raise domestic prices of sensitive petro products in line with rise
in world crude oil prices?
At a crude oil price of USD 80/barrel, the total under-recoveries of
OMCs on sale of petrol, diesel, LPG and PDS kerosene work out to Rs.1,57,000
crore by 2020-21. If oil prices rise by 25 per cent to USD 100/barrel, the
under-recoveries will rise higher by 77 per cent. Likewise if oil prices rise
to USD 120/barrel (50 per cent increase) the under-recoveries will rise by 155
per cent. Higher the growth rate of GDP and longer the period beyond 2020-21,
the much higher will be the under-recoveries. Can India’s economy absorb such
shocks in future?
What is Kirit
Parikh Committee and why did the Government set up the Committee?
India’s consumption of petroleum products has
recorded an annual compound growth rate of around four per cent between 2002-03
and 2008-09. This is in line with India’s GDP growth which has reached levels
of between six and nine per cent during the period. At this rate of growth, our
dependence on oil imports is projected to grow to 90 per cent (from the present
80 per cent). The volatility in international crude oil prices has been a big
headache for the Government in fixing the prices of the four sensitive
petroleum products, namely, diesel, petrol, PDS kerosene and domestic LPG.
In the background of this heavy oil subsidy,
Government of India has set up a committee to look into the problem and suggest
a way out of this logjam. The expert group has been asked to submit its
recommendations for a viable and sustainable pricing policy of the four petro
products, which constitute 63 per cent of the country’s total consumption of
petro products. An expert group, under
the chairmanship of Kirit Parikh, a former member of the Planning commission,
was set up at the end of August 2009 by the
Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas. The group submitted its report on
February 2, 2010.
What are the recommendations of Kirit Parikh
Committee?
1.
Domestic
petroleum product prices have to reflect that of international prices. The
government should allow pass-through of international oil prices to domestic
users. This will enable the public sector OMCs and upstream oil companies to
remain financially stable and solvent.
2.
There
is no justification for continuance of subsidy for diesel and petrol and as
such their prices should be raised by Rs 2.33 per litre and Rs 4.72 per litre
respectively
3.
An
additional excise duty of Rs 80,000 per vehicle should be levied on diesel car
owners
4.
Smartcards
should be used to provide subsidy to the target/needy group on kerosene and
14.2 LPG cylinders. Subsidy on LPG cylinders should be discontinued immediately
except for the below the poverty line households.
5.
The
price of kerosene should be increased by Rs 6 per litre and that of LPG by Rs
100 per cylinder. The kerosene price increase should be in line with the
nominal growth in agricultural GDP. LPG price should be increased in line with
per capita income.
6.
The
government’s policy of incurring a cost of Rs 1.42 lakh crore towards
compensating the OMCs for the under recoveries is a complete failure. The
compensation burden has reached a level of 25 per cent of total revenue
receipts in 2008-09, which is totally unviable and perilous to the long-term
health of the economy.
Whether the
Government will accept and implement these recommendations?
This is a million-dollar question considering the
spiraling food inflation and the fear of the political repercussions for the
ruling Government. To examine this aspect further, let us go back a little and
see what the successive governments have done since the first Oil Shock of
1973. The Administered Price Mechanism (APM) existed from 1976. And it was
abandoned in 2002. The then NDA government said it would link the domestic
prices with that of international levels. It had followed this free policy for
a few months and could not muster the courage to follow further its own policy when
world oil prices started rising in the wake of the invasion of Iraq by the
George Bush-led USA and other friendly countries, like, Great Britain.
In 2005, Rangarajan Committee was set up to examine
the taxation and pricing policies. But the government had kept the report in
cold storage. Another committee headed by BK Chaturvedi was constituted to
examine the oil pricing policy in 2008. Not much has happened since then. Now,
we have another committee to bother about.
If one goes by the experience of the past, it is
very difficult to believe that the Government will bite the bullet and start
tightening the belt by implementing these latest recommendations. Simply, the political
classes do not have the courage to take decisions that are in the long-term
interest of the nation. They are looking toward the next elections; but not the
next generation. Basically, the decision will have to be a political one, but
not an economic one.
The most important conclusion of this Kirit Parikh panel
is that Indian Economy only has been bearing this massive oil burden through
higher fiscal deficit which would push up the interest cost of the government
and the people have to bear the burden in one way or the other. There is no
benefit to any one by following the existing opaque pricing policies for these
four sensitive petro products. The panel finds no compelling reason to justify
the continuing subsidies for diesel and petrol.
One only hopes that the Government will muster all political courage and take the recommendations seriously and implement them in letter and spirit in order to encourage transparency, viability of OMCs, investment in exploration and production activities and reduce the fiscal burden keeping the long-term interest of nation in high priority.
One only hopes that the Government will muster all political courage and take the recommendations seriously and implement them in letter and spirit in order to encourage transparency, viability of OMCs, investment in exploration and production activities and reduce the fiscal burden keeping the long-term interest of nation in high priority.
- - -
ABBREVIATIONS
USED:
BPCL :
Bharat Petroleum Copn Ltd
HPCL :
Hindustan Petroleum Corpn Ltd
IOC :
Indian Oil Corpn Ltd
Nymex :
New York Mercantile Exchange
OMC :
Oil Marketing Companies (public sector)
PDS :
Public Distribution System
You can read the above article on SCRIBD, just click:
No comments:
Post a Comment