Why FIIs will keep a wary eye on Jaitley

Because the most important budget announcement may be one that isn't made

<a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-83833021/stock-photo-woman-on-a-phone-analyzing-financial-data-and-charts.html?src=18VlZviwQT6WJyURjS724A-1-29" target="_blank">Investor</a> image via Shutterstock
Sachin Mampatta Mumbai
Last Updated : Feb 28 2015 | 10:10 AM IST
The usual hopes for an STT reduction or tweaks to the short term capital gains tax,  may or may not be met  as the budget is read out. The markets are unlikely to be greatly moved by these steps either way. But there is one development that the market may not be so blasé about. 


Those in the know have suggested that tax authorities are waiting to pounce on the tax returns of hundreds of foreign portfolio investors. And the axe will fall if there is no clarification in the budget over the application of Minimum Alternative Tax or MAT to foreign portfolio investors. 

MAT is applicable to large domestic corporates who do not pay any taxes because of various incentive schemes. The authorities are now seeking to apply the same to foreign portfolio investors who are structured as corporate entities. 
Notices in this regard have been sent out and foreign investors have been asked to clarify why MAT should not be imposed. The tax authorities have apparently conveyed to investors that MAT would apply if there is no clarification to the contrary in the budget. 

This would mean that foreign portfolio investors’ effective tax rate goes up from zero per cent for long-term capital gains to 20 per cent under MAT.

The application of Minimum Alternative Tax could cost as much as a hundred crores for a large foreign portfolio investor. With thousands of them in the mix, the tax liability is likely to be considerable. 

The basis of this application is flimsy, contended Rajesh Gandhi, Partner-Tax at Deloitte Haskins & Sells. 

"Primarily, they are relying on a recent decision pertaining to Castleton Investments, according to which MAT can be levied on foreign corporate entities. However, this is an advance ruling and not binding on other taxpayers. It might, at the most, have some persuasive value. In September 2014, the Delhi tribunal, in the case of Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi, had observed MAT was only payable by companies required to maintain books of accounts under Indian law," he had told Business Standard earlier. 

The government has every right to impose taxes if it deems them appropriate. But such taxes should be based on a clear position in law rather than the kind of ambiguity that tax experts are alleging. 

If you thought foreign investors' reaction to GAAR was bad; MAT has all the signs of being far, far worse.  
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Feb 28 2015 | 9:26 AM IST

Next Story