Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Goods and Services Tax (GST), implemented in July 2017, was heralded as India’s most significant tax reform since independence. It subsumed a multitude of indirect taxes – including central taxes like excise duty and service tax, and state taxes like VAT, sales tax, and octroi – into a unified tax regime. Prior to GST, Centre-State financial relations were characterized by tax devolution based on recommendations of the Finance Commission, and a complex system of central sales tax (CST) compensation. The introduction of GST aimed to create a common national market, improve tax compliance, and simplify the indirect tax structure. However, its implementation has profoundly altered the dynamics of Centre-State relations, both financially and politically, necessitating a detailed analysis.
Financial Shifts
The GST regime has brought about significant financial changes in Centre-State relations. Before GST, states had considerable autonomy in levying and collecting taxes, particularly VAT. GST shifted this power towards a more centralized system.
- Revenue Sharing: GST revenue is divided between the Centre and States. Currently, the Central GST (CGST) and State GST (SGST) are levied simultaneously. The CGST is collected by the Centre, while the SGST is collected by the States. Integrated GST (IGST) collected on inter-state supplies is also shared between the Centre and States.
- Compensation Mechanism: Recognizing the potential revenue loss for states, particularly those with lower economic growth, a compensation mechanism was built into the GST framework. States were guaranteed a revenue neutral rate of growth of 14% over their 2015-16 revenue base for the first five years (until June 2022). The Centre collected a 'GST Compensation Cess' on luxury and demerit goods to fund this compensation.
- Increased Dependence on Centre: The compensation mechanism, while initially beneficial, created a dependence of states on the Centre for revenue assurance. The delay in release of compensation funds during the pandemic (2020-22) led to significant financial distress for many states.
- Impact on State Finances: While GST aimed for revenue neutrality, several states experienced revenue shortfalls, especially in the initial years. This necessitated borrowing by states to meet their expenditure requirements.
Political Shifts
GST has also led to notable political shifts in Centre-State relations, primarily through the establishment and functioning of the GST Council.
- GST Council: The GST Council, a constitutional body under Article 279A, is the key decision-making authority for GST. It comprises the Union Finance Minister, the Union Minister of State for Finance, and the Finance Ministers of all states. This council has become a crucial forum for Centre-State cooperation and consensus-building on tax policy.
- Cooperative Federalism: The GST Council exemplifies cooperative federalism, where the Centre and States work together to formulate and implement tax policies. However, the decision-making process isn’t always smooth.
- Increased State Representation: The GST Council provides states with a direct platform to voice their concerns and influence tax policy decisions. This is a significant departure from the pre-GST era where the Centre held greater sway over indirect tax matters.
- Areas of Conflict: Despite the cooperative framework, disagreements have arisen within the GST Council, particularly regarding the extension of the compensation period, rates on certain goods and services, and the distribution of IGST revenue. For example, states like Kerala and West Bengal have voiced concerns about the Centre’s handling of GST revenue and the impact on their finances.
Challenges and Ongoing Issues
Despite the benefits, the GST implementation has faced several challenges that continue to impact Centre-State relations.
- Complexity of the System: The GST system, with its multiple rates and compliance requirements, remains complex for many businesses, particularly small and medium enterprises (SMEs).
- Technical Glitches: The GST Network (GSTN), the IT infrastructure underpinning the GST system, has faced technical glitches and capacity issues, hindering smooth implementation.
- Revenue Volatility: GST revenue has been volatile, impacted by economic slowdowns and changes in consumption patterns.
- Trust Deficit: The delay in compensation payments and disagreements within the GST Council have eroded trust between the Centre and States.
| Aspect | Pre-GST | Post-GST |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Structure | Multiple indirect taxes (VAT, CST, Excise, Service Tax etc.) | Unified GST (CGST, SGST, IGST) |
| Revenue Control | States had significant autonomy | Shared control through GST Council |
| Centre-State Financial Relations | Tax devolution based on Finance Commission recommendations, CST compensation | Revenue sharing based on GST laws, Compensation mechanism (until 2022) |
| Decision Making | Centre dominated indirect tax policy | GST Council – Cooperative federalism |
Conclusion
The implementation of GST has undeniably led to a paradigm shift in Centre-State relations. While it has fostered greater cooperation through the GST Council and streamlined the indirect tax system, it has also created new financial dependencies and potential areas of conflict. The success of GST hinges on continued collaboration, addressing the remaining challenges, and ensuring a fair and equitable distribution of revenue between the Centre and States. Moving forward, strengthening the GSTN, simplifying compliance procedures, and fostering greater transparency in revenue sharing will be crucial for realizing the full potential of this landmark tax reform.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.