SAS helped evasion of BBMP property taxes by commercial developers, some IT sector?

While the self assessment scheme (SAS) for property tax assessment was an original idea of the BMP there was support from BATF in terms of branding and marketing it. Yet the batf hyped up the SAS based on the transparency criteria and so while the common tax payer paid up their dues, the big wigs including WIPRO, Phoenix mall etc evaded the same; see below., wipro allegedly did not pay for a few years (total amount being Rs 19.28 crores)

The question is did the batf's support help in this evasion of property taxes? Did big properties remain un assessed ? So then without checks and balances by officer visiting the premises for simple assessment of properties huge amounts of taxes worth crores were evaded?

on top of all this evasion BBMP was not allowed to raise property taxes as per law.

This is a dangerous trend since it deprives the allocation or expenditure of funds for the basic needs for which the local property taxes are most important.

e.g. see news report below

===============================

Civic body "applies thought" to force Wipro to fork dues

CHITRA V. RAMANI

PTI A Bangalore Bruhat Mahanagar Palike (BBMP) squad conducting a "Drum Beating" session in front of the Wipro headquarters in Bengaluru on Friday.

Drumbeaters hired by the BBMP gathered outside Wipro’s head office

The IT city’s civic authority, the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), applied thought and came up with a winner here on Friday. On a day when Wipro Ltd. announced its third quarter results, BBMP officials were busy drumming up pressure to get the Bangalore-based bellwether to cough up Rs. 19.28 crore in property dues.

Even as the country’s third largest software company trumpeted a net profit of Rs. 1,716 crore, a team of the feared drumbeaters hired by the BBMP gathered outside Wipro’s head office at Doddakannelli village, Sarjapur.

INSTANTANEOUS EFFECT

The effect was magical. Embarrassed company officials hastily handed over a cheque for Rs. 5 crore to Ramanand Rai, Deputy Commissioner, Mahadevapura Zone, with a promise to clear the remaining dues in a week, a gleeful official told The Hindu, adding that Wipro had not paid its property tax for five years. The official said the BBMP had sent several reminder notices, the latest on January 11.

===============================

BBMP panel collects Rs. 5 cr. property tax dues from malls

At Tesco, the committee found that the establishment owed the BBMP nearly Rs. 10 crore. On insistence, Tesco immediately cleared 40 per cent of the dues by paying Rs. 4 crore.

Phoenix Mall owes the BBMP Rs. 3.5 crore.

================================

reference

1. http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/civic-body-applies-thought-to-force-wipro-to-fork-dues/article4320422.ece
2. http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/bbmp-panel-collects-rs-5-cr-property-tax-dues-from-malls/article4412112.ece

'privatising' politics: b.pac decreasing political risk to corporate investment ?

There are connections of b.pac founders and members to industry lobby groups like assocham, ficci, fkcci,nasscom or cii. these are industry or business chambers which influence and keep up group pressure on the Union and state govts for favourable policies. one such is associated chambers of commerce and industry (assocham) which has suggested points for the party manifestos :url link here (assocham moots 5-point growth agenda for parties in Karnataka )

and the report below correctly mentions that it is the IT- BT barons who are now funding 14 candidates from all parties with Rs 5 lakh each + campaigning online for them : url link here (IT-BT barons to fund 14 candidates).

Is it possible that the instability and inaction resulting from the 5 year term BJP govt has had an impact where rate of growth of Karnataka state has suffered due to which the it- bt honchos in the disguise of b.pac would like to ensure continued growth of their sectors? adb based in manila has cautioned the private corporate sector in general on the political risks and has therefore moved their project oriented decsion making to predominantly bureaucratic parastatal funding and investment institutions. If adb got a chance they would even have prepared a long term buisness plan for the KUIDFC in Karnataka -but were prevented from doing so at the last minute. Is this exactly the kind of business plan which is now being executed by b.pac through lobbying, and influencing outcomes so that political party manifestos and voting in elections by others need not create any setback for them, their business and business growth?


b.pac and other similar groups would like to decrease political risk arising in the KLA elections 2013, by asking parties to align with their it-bt business agenda, and their Bengaluru agenda viz.,
implementing the report of the Karnataka Information Technology and Communication (ict) Group which is over Rs 2,50,000 crores investment over 15 years just for Bengaluru : url link here ( The $50b Pai-Naidu Plan: too much, too late ). This was presented to the GoK after b.pac had coalesced but before it was formally launched as a trust on feb 3rd 13.
bmrg bill and bbmp legislation (initiated by abide but now backed by broad consensus in it-bt sectors through b.pac)

fact is that the pac's are a US phenomenon which gained strength before the 2010 elections to senate and congress and were supported by the US supreme courts 2010 decision in Citizens United vs Federal election commission.

b.pac has been inspired by them to push the agenda of ppp's (private sector-politician partnership) and it may well end up beginning the process of 'privatisation' of politics in Karnataka and India.

reference : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_action_committee

B.PAC : Promoting 'Selection' Democracy?

In a representative democracy like India where elections play a major part in the democratic process and are in fact called 'the dance of democracy' there can be no such thing as 'selection' democracy. Voters have a strong linkage with manifestos of political parties and the parties have to finally decide what represents the people's demands and needs in consultation with the public.

But now in the recent formation of the Bangalore political action committee (B.PAC) we note that there's a deliberate approach towards 'selection' democracy. The elite of the city of Bangalore wax nostalgic for the heady day's of brand Bangalore. Some of them are the same ones who strongly objected to the renaming of the city as Bengaluru.

And that is where their frustration begins. Their frustration is about the lack of infrastructure and the un-governability of the city- because of its messy local politics. And these elite feel that the elected politicians are unaccountable. The elite of the city would like to see governance, and service standards of infrastructure which would suit them whether they lived in New York or London, or Bengaluru.

The B.PAC members believe it is beneath their level to deal with local government officials or elected representatives. It is also too difficult for them as well and so their strong sense of hierarchy forces them to deal with only the state or Union govt. In fact they would like Bengaluru to be a Union territory or a 'city-state' so that the messy local govt politics will become a thing of the past.

based on the USA super PAC's model

The B.PAC model is entirely based on the Super PACs in the US elections of 2012 and earlier. In the US these PACs are mainly corporate lobbies focused on creating specific profitable outcomes in the elections for themselves by supporting candidates. Indian democracy does not allow an important role for individual candidates, instead it depends on parties to select candidates based on political winnability.
 

B.PAC is a reactionary move by frustrated leaders of the corporate sector who feel they are losing control over the saleability of brand Bangalore, and its governance, and would therefore like to see a new law for BBMP and the passage of the Bangalore region governance (BRG) bill even if it is not consistent with constitutional mandates and priniciples. This bill which was promoted by abide during the entire 5 year term of BJP (2008-13) could not be passed due to opposition from the people, local elected reps and other MLAs. The govt could never even introduce this in the state legislative assembly (KLA).

So the b.pac now feels that the MLA's, corporators, councillors, panchayat members and all organisations and common public who opposed the BRG bill conceptually- such as on the proposed centralisation of powers, policy and legislation should be dealt with by possibly supporting and 'selecting' candidates for the Karnataka MLA election in May 2013. These candidates could be from any party - BJP, Congress, LokSatta, JD(S) etc. But they should support the b.pac Bangalore agenda. And they expect the 'aspiring' middle class to join them for the joy ride.

What is a fact is that they support the BRG bill, which these corporates have agreed is suited to their legislative requirements of governance, infrastructure and policy and their display of consensus through b.pac now, means that they have secretly cast their own 'vote' in favour of it (backed by corporate money power) prior to such a legislation even being readied for tabling in the Karnataka Legislative Assembly (KLA). This sort of secret 'voting' is highly anti-democratic and reactionary. Should such a method of remote control, whether it be from money or corporate clout be allowed in the upcoming 'dance of democracy'?

This sort of secret 'voting' by consultants, non-profits or even the 'policy community' is not new. The Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA) of the Govt of Karnataka (2002) was prepared with the agreement of the World Bank. And it was the brute majority of then ruling Congress party in the state which was utilised to pass this act. This unleashed a process of fiscal responsibility legislation for the entire country. The NDA led Indian government introduced the Fiscal responsibility and budget management act (FRBM) in 2003. Ultimately, in 2004 the UPA govt passed the act. all the states were later forced to adopt the same as a condition of the finance comission.

the impact of these FR Acts on the citizens of states needs to be the subject of another blog ...

First Lok Sabha Post-JNNURM election

15th Lok SABHA MP's must debate JNNURM

1. In 2005 before the JNNURM launch, OUR MP's never debated the mandatory and optional conditions which were part of reforms package.
2. Since these conditions were thrust upon the states who needed to enter a tripartite MoU with the Union, State and City governments being signatories, there is a need to debate the conditions of the reforms.
3. These reforms were essentially a sop to the lobbies of Finance, Insurance and Real Estate (FIRE) who had been demanding the same for a long time and still continue to do after 5 years of huge profits.
4. The 15th Lok Sabha MP's must undertake a wide ranging public consultation process on the success/ failure of JNNURM !
5. Urban areas have been developed in extremely inequitous manner.
6. Costly and expensive Facilities are being provided to rich and elite people who get massive tax concessions (www.cbgaindia.org) in excess of Rs 300,000 crores / year for the last 4 years 2004-08.
7. Projects must be prepared on priority to fulfil the essential needs services of the masses, the urban poor and the lower middle class.
8. Funding for the same should also be provided adequately.
9. Property taxes must not be escrowed to give an opportunity to payback investors THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. They must be invested in basic needs of the electorate such as drinking water, proper roads, air quality maintenance and pollution control.
10. Social Audit and monitoring that the funds must not be misused is to be introduced as a peoples initiative.
11. The GoI's 11th Plan document pushes back the date for achieving the urban drinking water targets to 2012. This needs to be relooked at and targets must be fulfilled earlier.
12. Development cannot happen for the rich only leaving the poor behind.

Development needs in Urban India

How is it possible for successive ruling Indian Union Govts to continue to spend large sums of money every year without fulfilling the goal of providing basic amenities to all?
It is because there are various advocates who want a priority allocation of funds and who want to ensure that funds are diverted to INFRASTRUCTURE.
Does this really boil down to a fight for funds between essential services and subsidies for the cement, steel, sand, concrete and construction industry?
Will a poor citizen not get the basic needs like food and drinking water if he cannot afford it? Can a policy which is formulated like this be constitutionally correct even if it violates fundamental rights?

The right to food and right to water should be the main first priority for all who vote and also all who are elected.