Aggregate demand* accelerated further in 2010-11. Private consumption and investment were
the key drivers of growth in 2010-11, even though investment moderated somewhat in Q3.
Government consumption expenditure has decelerated and this rebalancing should be
maintained by focusing on fiscal consolidation. In this context, it is important to contain subsidies
that are at risk of overshooting the budgetary provisions as global oil prices rise.
Demand conditions remain supportive of
growth
II.1 Aggregate expenditure, in real terms,
accelerated in 2010-11 with private consumption
as well as investment expenditure growing at a
brisk pace (Table II.1). Going forward, private
expenditure is likely to continue to be the main
driver of growth, though some moderation can
be expected in response to high inflation and
demand-side policy measures. Government
consumption expenditure has decelerated
significantly in 2010-11 and this rebalancing
could be maintained this year by staying on the
path of fiscal consolidation. Investment expenditure is expected to remain moderate.
Recovery in investment expenditure from the
soft patch in Q3 of 2010-11 would depend on
pick-up in execution of large infrastructure
projects.
Table II.1 : Expenditure Side of GDP (2004-05 Prices) |
(Per cent) |
| |
2009-10 Q.E. |
2010-11 A.E. |
2009-10 |
2010-11 |
2009-
10 |
2010-
11 |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Apr-
Dec |
Apr-
Dec |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
| |
Growth Rate |
Real GDP at market prices |
9.1 |
9.7 |
6.5 |
7.6 |
9.2 |
10.2 |
10.4 |
9.7 |
7.8 |
10.1 |
Total final consumption expenditure |
8.7 |
7.3 |
9.3 |
12.2 |
7.4 |
7.4 |
8.9 |
6.9 |
9.5 |
7.7 |
(i) Private |
7.3 |
8.2 |
7.3 |
8.5 |
7.0 |
7.0 |
8.6 |
9.0 |
7.6 |
8.3 |
(ii) Government |
16.4 |
2.6 |
21.3 |
37.5 |
9.6 |
9.1 |
10.4 |
-3.0 |
20.5 |
4.7 |
Gross fixed capital formation |
7.3 |
8.4 |
-0.4 |
0.3 |
8.7 |
25.7 |
17.8 |
6.0 |
2.9 |
16.1 |
Changes in stocks |
90.8 |
7.1 |
78.9 |
86.1 |
95.4 |
6.4 |
8.2 |
4.0 |
86.8 |
6.1 |
Net Exports |
10.2 |
-9.5 |
11.1 |
-21.4 |
14.8 |
6.2 |
13.8 |
-59.4 |
-0.4 |
-18.4 |
| |
Relative Share |
Total final consumption expenditure |
70.1 |
68.5 |
73.1 |
71.4 |
73.6 |
71.3 |
70.4 |
71.7 |
72.7 |
71.1 |
(i) Private |
58.5 |
57.6 |
61.8 |
60.2 |
60.4 |
60.1 |
59.2 |
60.1 |
60.8 |
59.8 |
(ii) Government |
11.6 |
10.8 |
11.3 |
11.2 |
13.1 |
11.2 |
11.2 |
11.6 |
11.9 |
11.3 |
Gross fixed capital formation |
32.0 |
31.6 |
30.4 |
31.9 |
30.9 |
34.6 |
34.1 |
29.8 |
31.1 |
32.7 |
Changes in stocks |
3.5 |
3.5 |
3.5 |
3.6 |
3.5 |
3.4 |
3.6 |
3.3 |
3.5 |
3.4 |
Net Exports |
-7.2 |
-6.0 |
-6.6 |
-7.2 |
-8.7 |
-6.4 |
-7.5 |
-3.2 |
-7.6 |
-5.6 |
Memo: |
` Crore |
| Real GDP at Market Prices |
48,69,317 |
53,42,571 |
11,12,505 |
11,37,893 |
12,55,103 |
12,25,551 |
12,56,776 |
13,76,242 |
35,05,500 |
38,58,568 |
Q.E. : Quick Estimates. A.E.: Advance Estimates.
Note : As only major items are included in the table, data will not add up to 100.
Source : Central Statistics Office. |
Saving rate driven up by public sector,
investment rate by private corporates
II.2 Both saving and investment rates
improved in 2009-10. Improvement in the
overall saving rate has been led by the public
sector while the investment rate has been
boosted mainly by private corporate sector
(Table II.2).
Table II.2 : Gross Domestic Saving and Gross Domestic Capital Formation |
(Per cent to GDP at current market prices) |
Item |
2007-08 |
2008-09 |
2009-10 QE |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
1. |
Gross Domestic Saving |
36.9 |
32.2 |
33.7 |
|
1.1 Household Sector |
22.5 |
23.8 |
23.5 |
|
Financial saving |
11.7 |
10.8 |
11.8 |
|
Saving in physical assets |
10.8 |
13.1 |
11.7 |
|
1.2 Private Corporate Sector |
9.4 |
7.9 |
8.1 |
|
1.3 Public Sector |
5.0 |
0.5 |
2.1 |
2. |
Gross Domestic Capital Formation* |
38.1 |
34.5 |
36.5 |
|
2.1 Household Sector |
10.8 |
13.1 |
11.7 |
|
2.2 Private Corporate Sector |
17.3 |
11.5 |
13.2 |
|
2.3 Public Sector |
8.9 |
9.5 |
9.2 |
* : Adjusted for errors and omissions. QE : Quick Estimates. |
Key fiscal indicators budgeted to improve
in 2011-12
II.3 The key fiscal indicators of the Central
Government showed an improvement in 2010-
11 (RE) attributable mainly to larger than
expected proceeds from telecom spectrum
auctions. The Government chose to utilise these
excess receipts to increase allocations for rural
infrastructure, implementation of Right to
Education Act, plan assistance to States and
recapitalisation of public sector banks. The
Budget intends to carry forward the process of
fiscal consolidation in 2011-12 through
reduction in expenditure growth. Recognising
that the windfall benefit of one-off non-tax
revenues of 2010-11 would not be available
during 2011-12, the revenue deficit as a ratio to GDP is budgeted to remain unchanged.
Nonetheless, the gross fiscal deficit (GFD) as
ratio to GDP is budgeted to decline reflecting
compression in capital expenditure in 2011-12
(Table II.3).
Fiscal consolidation process to continue
but quality and pace matter
II.4 Over the medium term, the Government
has envisaged a gradual reduction in key
deficit indicators in consonance with its
macroeconomic projections and conservative
stance on revenue collections. However, key
deficit indicators are likely to remain higher than
the prescribed path of the Thirteenth Finance
Commission and accordingly, the Government
would not be able to achieve revenue balance
by 2013-14. Although the Government focuses on reducing ‘effective revenue deficit’, which
excludes capital grants to States, the headline
revenue deficit, as a ratio to GFD, is expected
to remain higher in 2011-12. This indicates that
a larger portion of GFD would emanate from
revenue deficit, reducing the availability of
resources to undertake capital outlays.
Table II.3 : Key Fiscal Indicators of the Central Government |
(Per cent to GDP) |
Year |
Primary Deficit |
Revenue Deficit |
Gross Fiscal deficit |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
2009-10 |
|
3.1 |
5.2 |
6.4 |
2010-11
|
BE |
1.9 |
4.0 |
5.5 |
2010-11
|
RE |
2.0 |
3.4(2.3) |
5.1 |
| 2011-12 |
BE |
1.6 |
3.4(1.8) |
4.6 |
|
13th FC |
- |
2.3 |
4.8 |
| 2012-13 |
(Rolling targets) |
|
|
|
|
MTFP |
- |
2.7(1.1) |
4.1 |
|
13th FC |
- |
1.2 |
4.2 |
| 2013-14 |
(Rolling targets) |
|
|
|
|
MTFP |
- |
2.1(0.5) |
3.5 |
|
13th FC |
- |
0.0 |
3.0 |
BE: Budget Estimates. RE: Revised Estimates.
MTFP: Medium Term Fiscal Policy Statement.
13th FC: Thirteenth Finance Commission.
Note: Figures for ‘effective revenue deficit’ are indicated in brackets.
Source: Union Budget 2011-12 and 13th FC. |
Tax buoyancy helps though tax cut rollback
was partial
II.5 The Central Government is calibrating the
roll-back of taxes/duties towards the pre-crisis
levels recognising the emerging inflationary
situation. The growth in gross tax revenues,
however, is budgeted to be lower for 2011-12
as compared with 2010-11 (Table II.4). By
keeping the standard rates for excise duty and
service tax unchanged, the Government intends
to stay on course towards introduction of goods
and services tax. With the implementation of
direct tax code in 2012-13, the tax buoyancy is
expected to improve and raise the gross tax-
GDP ratio gradually to 11.3 per cent by 2013-14, though lower than its pre-crisis peak of 11.9
per cent in 2007-08.
Table II.4 : Central Government Finances |
Item |
Growth rate ( per cent) |
Per cent to GDP |
2009-10 |
2010-11(RE) |
2011-12(BE) |
2009-10 |
2010-11(RE) |
2011-12(BE) |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
1. |
Total Expenditure |
15.9 |
18.7 |
3.4 |
15.6 |
15.4 |
14.0 |
2. |
Revenue Expenditure |
14.9 |
15.6 |
4.1 |
13.9 |
13.4 |
12.2 |
3. |
Capital Expenditure |
25.0 |
44.6 |
-1.4 |
1.7 |
2.1 |
1.8 |
4. |
Non-Developmental Expenditure |
20.1 |
10.5 |
9.5 |
7.8 |
7.2 |
6.9 |
5. |
Development Expenditure |
12.1 |
26.5 |
-0.9 |
8.1 |
8.5 |
7.4 |
4. |
Non-Plan Expenditure |
18.5 |
13.9 |
-0.7 |
11.0 |
10.4 |
9.1 |
5. |
Plan Expenditure |
10.2 |
30.2 |
11.8 |
4.6 |
5.0 |
4.9 |
6. |
Revenue Receipts |
6.0 |
36.8 |
0.8 |
8.7 |
9.9 |
8.8 |
|
i) Tax Revenue (net) |
3.0 |
23.5 |
17.9 |
7.0 |
7.2 |
7.4 |
|
ii) Non Tax Revenue |
19.9 |
89.3 |
-43.0 |
1.8 |
2.8 |
1.4 |
7. |
Gross Tax Revenue |
3.2 |
26.0 |
18.5 |
9.5 |
10.0 |
10.4 |
|
i) Direct Tax |
13.1 |
18.1 |
19.4 |
5.8 |
5.7 |
5.9 |
|
ii) Indirect Tax |
-9.0 |
38.0 |
17.3 |
3.8 |
4.3 |
4.5 |
| Memo: |
Primary Deficit |
41.9 |
-22.0 |
-9.6 |
3.1 |
2.0(1.9) |
1.6 |
Revenue Deficit |
33.7 |
-20.4 |
13.9 |
5.2 |
3.4(4.0) |
3.4 |
| Gross Fiscal Deficit |
24.2 |
-4.2 |
2.9 |
6.4 |
5.1(5.5) |
4.6 |
Note: Figures in bracket are budget estimates for 2010-11 as per cent of GDP.
Source: Union Budget 2011-12. |
Focus on quality of expenditure
important in fiscal consolidation
II.6 Sharp moderation in revenue expenditure
growth and marginal decline in budgeted capital
expenditure are expected to contain expenditure
growth this year. The fiscal consolidation
strategy for 2011-12 is primarily expenditure
driven, reflecting the impact of lower growth
in expenditure on salary and pensions and
subsidies. While controlling non-plan revenue
expenditure growth is a positive feature, the
compression in capital expenditure poses
concerns regarding the quality of fiscal
consolidation.
Capping of expenditure on subsidies is
subject to upside risks
II.7 The Budget’s lower projection of subsidies
for 2011-12 is subject to the underlying
assumption of no major variation in
international fertiliser and petroleum prices
during the entire span of 2011-12, which may
not hold (Table II.5). There is an upside risk in
the case of fertiliser subsidy as fertiliser input
prices have increased. Fertiliser subsidies are likely to exceed budgetary provisions unless
urea price is decontrolled or Nutrient-Based
Fertiliser Subsidy scheme succeeds in
effectively capping the total fertiliser subsidies.
Further, the rising international oil prices may
generate pressures on the fiscal situation in case
there is a delay in the corresponding adjustment
in domestic prices, leading to larger subsidy
expenditure towards under-recoveries of
downstream oil public sector units.
Furthermore, the introduction of National Food Security Bill may also have additional
expenditure implications.
Table II.5 : Major Subsidies |
(Amount in ` crore) |
Items |
2009-10 |
2010-11 RE |
2011-12 BE |
Amount |
per cent to GDP |
Amount |
per cent to GDP |
Amount |
per cent to GDP |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
Total Subsidies |
1,41,351 |
2.2 |
1,64,153 |
2.1 |
1,43,570 |
1.6 |
of which: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
i. Food |
58,443 |
0.9 |
60,600 |
0.8 |
60,573 |
0.7 |
ii. Fertiliser |
61,264 |
0.9 |
54,976 |
0.7 |
49,998 |
0.6 |
iii. Petroleum |
14,951 |
0.2 |
38,386 |
0.5 |
23,640 |
0.3 |
iv. Interest subsidy |
2,687 |
0.0 |
5,223 |
0.1 |
6,869 |
0.1 |
v. Others |
4,006 |
0.1 |
4,968 |
0.1 |
2,490 |
0.0 |
Source: Union Budget 2011-12. |
Robust sales growth points to enduring
demand conditions
II.8 Corporate sales growth remained robust
during Q3 of 2010-11 and together with
inventory movements signalled continued
buoyancy in demand. However, profit margin
came under pressure, on account of higher input
and interest costs (Table II.6). All components of input costs viz., expenses on raw materials,
power & fuel and staff costs witnessed
significant increase. Reflecting the tightening
of monetary policy rates, interest payments have
increased. Companies accumulated stocks as
reflected in the rise in stock-in-trade to sales
ratio. This may at the current juncture of cycle
indicate that producers anticipate a pick-up in
demand (Chart II.1). Early results for Q4 from
a small sample of companies suggest that sales
accelerated during the quarter.
Table II.6 : Corporate Sector-Financial Performance |
Item |
2009-10 |
2010-11 |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
(Growth rates in per cent) |
No. of Companies |
2530 |
2531 |
2562 |
2565 |
2546 |
2586 |
2643 |
Sales |
-0.9 |
0.1 |
22.5 |
29.1 |
24.2 |
18.7 |
17.6 |
Other Income* |
50.2 |
6.0 |
7.4 |
10.3 |
-21.2 |
58.5 |
14.7 |
Expenditure |
-4.4 |
-2.5 |
20.6 |
30.7 |
29.0 |
19.9 |
19.6 |
| of which: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Raw Material |
-13.6 |
-4.0 |
34.2 |
44.0 |
37.8 |
21.6 |
19.9 |
Staff Cost |
8.1 |
6.3 |
5.2 |
13.7 |
16.7 |
20.5 |
21.5 |
Power and Fuel |
-13.2 |
-16.1 |
-5.1 |
10.7 |
15.3 |
12.1 |
17.3 |
Depreciation provision |
21.5 |
20.7 |
21.6 |
20.1 |
19.9 |
16.8 |
13.6 |
Gross profits |
5.8 |
10.9 |
60.0 |
36.7 |
8.2 |
10.3 |
11.0 |
Interest payments |
3.7 |
-1.0 |
-12.3 |
-2.9 |
26.9 |
5.9 |
22.4 |
Profits after tax |
5.5 |
12.0 |
99.3 |
44.0 |
2.4 |
10.8 |
10.3 |
(Ratios in per cent) |
Change in stock# to Sales |
0.6 |
2.3 |
0.8 |
1.1 |
2.9 |
1.0 |
1.5 |
Gross Profits to Sales |
15.7 |
14.9 |
14.3 |
14.6 |
13.9 |
13.6 |
13.6 |
Profits After Tax to Sales |
10.2 |
9.4 |
8.8 |
9.0 |
8.6 |
8.5 |
8.3 |
Interest to Sales |
2.8 |
3.1 |
2.7 |
2.4 |
2.9 |
2.7 |
2.8 |
Interest to Gross Profits |
18.0 |
20.5 |
19.1 |
16.6 |
21.1 |
19.9 |
20.6 |
Interest Coverage (Times) |
5.6 |
4.9 |
5.2 |
6.0 |
4.7 |
5.0 |
4.9 |
* : Other income excludes extraordinary income/expenditure if reported explicitly
# : For companies reporting this item explicitly.
Note: 1. Data pertain to listed non-government non-financial companies.
2. Growth rates are percentage changes in the level for the period under reference over the corresponding period of the
previous year for common set of companies. |
 |
Investment intentions of corporates
moderate further in Q3 of 2010-11
II.9 Investment intentions of corporates
witnessed a further slowdown in Q3 of 2010-
11 after beginning to moderate from the
previous quarter. Out of total costs of projects
sanctioned in financial year 2010-11 (April-
December), the largest share is envisaged to be invested in the power sector followed by the
telecommunication sector and metal and
metal products.
Demand conditions may soften a little,
helping to rebalance growth
II.10 The pick-up in private spending in 2010-
11 helped in sustaining growth recovery from
the slowdown seen in the immediate aftermath
of the global financial crisis. This was essential
as the recovery in the initial phases was driven
by fiscal stimulus that resulted in large
government spending. Nevertheless, the pickup
in private consumption and fiscal
consolidation has enabled rebalancing of
demand. Restraint on subsidies in the wake of
high global oil prices, and maintenance of
investment demand are critical for sustaining
private demand.
*Despite well-known limitations, expenditure side GDP data are being used as proxies for components of Aggregate Demand. |