Jamshoro district council presents tax-free budget
In one of his speech Trump hints for huge taxes on Chinese imports. PHOTO: PEXELS
The Jamshoro District Council has presented a tax-free budget of Rs549.8 million for the fiscal year 2025-26. The budget was approved unanimously during a council meeting chaired by District Council Chairman Suhail Ahmed Shoro.
According to documents, the Sindh government failed to release the full allocated funds last year, while employee salaries have increased in the current year. During the session, Accounts Officer Pervez Baloch presented the budget breakdown, highlighting that Rs207 million have been earmarked for development projects.
Additional allocations include: Rs40.88 million for pensions, press clubs, social work, cultural events, and national celebrations; Rs97.3 million for engineering and infrastructure works; and Rs252.5 million for salaries of council employees.
For the current year, the Sindh government is expected to contribute: Rs352.1 million under the tax head; Rs7.05 million from property rentals; and Rs994,308 in other rents.
Chairman Shoro remarked that due to a shortfall in govt grants and the non-transfer of funds for SUG (Sindh Urban Governance) employees, the council had to disburse salaries from its allocated budget. Furthermore, the recovery of rent from district council-owned properties-such as shops and housing units-remained below 100%.
Meanwhile, opposition leader Shahnawaz Barfat advocated for greater allocations in development schemes and recommended awarding more council projects to local contractors.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
37 minutes ago
- Business Recorder
Dalian iron ore hits one-week
SINGAPORE: Dalian iron ore futures touched their highest levels in more than a week on Monday, supported by improving short-term demand prospects for the steelmaking ingredient in top consumer China. The most-traded September iron ore contract on China's Dalian Commodity Exchange (DCE) ended daytime trade 0.5% higher at 706 yuan ($98.25) a metric ton. Earlier in the session, prices rose to 709.5 yuan, their highest point since June 13. The benchmark July iron ore on the Singapore Exchange was 0.36% higher at $93.85 a ton, as of 0717 GMT. Hot metal production, a gauge of iron ore demand, inched up 0.24% week-on-week to 2.422 million tons, as of June 20, according to data from Chinese consultancy Mysteel. 'In the short term, hot metal production will remain stable, supporting prices for iron ore,' said broker Everbright Futures. However, demand in China is entering the off-season, with construction material consumption already weakening, broker Galaxy Futures said. Spring is typically the peak construction period ahead of the June rains, which have further dampened demand prospects. Capacity utilisation rates for China's electric-arc-furnace steelmakers fell 2.2% week-on-week to a three-month low of 54.5%, Mysteel said in a separate note, attributing the fall to persistent negative margins. Also capping gains was a firmer greenback, with the dollar index climbing 0.12% on Monday on safe-haven bids.
Business Recorder
an hour ago
- Business Recorder
Lurching towards another war
EDITORIAL: Belying international law and his own pledges to stay away from foreign conflicts, President Donald Trump's reckless decision to strike Iran's key nuclear sites could plunge the world into yet another endless war in the Middle East. Once again, Israeli interests have dictated US policy and trumped the interests of peace in the region. President Trump was quick to declare victory following the June 22 strikes, claiming they had 'totally obliterated' Iran's nuclear ambitions while Benjamin Netanyahu was at his obsequious best terming the decision as 'courageous'. Notwithstanding the claims of absolute destruction of Iran's nuclear material by the Trump Administration, the view of independent experts analysing commercial satellite imagery has been more muted, with many voicing the opinion that while there has been damage inflicted on Tehran's nuclear enterprise, it is far from completely destroyed. It is important to note that President Trump's decision to eschew diplomacy in favour of confrontation, claiming that was the only way to deter Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, which he insisted Tehran was on the verge of obtaining, directly contradicted assessments from the US intelligence community. Back in March, the US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard had categorically declared that Iran was 'not building a nuclear weapon and … Khomeini has not authorised the nuclear weapons programme that he suspended in 2003'. Israel's relentless bombing campaign against Iran, launched earlier in the month, also continues unabated, and now the American military intervention initiated at Tel Aviv's behest risks completely undermining the pillars of international stability. It strengthens a perverse logic, which follows that non-nuclear nations that agree to dialogue — as Iran did with its nuclear talks with the US — remain vulnerable to military action while nuclear-armed countries remain untouchable. Far from deterring Tehran, this turn of events may only harden its determination to pursue nuclear capabilities, regardless of the setbacks it has faced due to the American strikes. The US, for its part, has clearly learnt no lessons from history, with President Trump now floating highly dangerous ideas around regime change in Iran. The devastating missteps committed by the world's sole superpower over the last 20 years in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya have now been followed yet again by an act of war based on a lie. For decades, Netanyahu has been goading successive American administrations into striking Iran by grossly exaggerating its nuclear capabilities, belying assessment made by UN weapons inspectors and Western intelligence agencies. And Trump has now conveniently played into his hands. How Iran responds to this naked act of aggression will likely have far-reaching consequences even though the immediate options before it remain limited. A direct attack on US assets in the region will surely result in a major American reprisal that Tehran and the wider region can ill-afford. Shutting down the Strait of Hormuz, the vital maritime corridor handling 20 percent of global oil shipments, could alienate Iran's regional allies and China, its largest oil importer, while also giving Western powers reason to intervene further in the region in a bid to prevent major market disruptions. For now, Tehran has confined its response to striking Israeli targets, but the threat of wider retaliation persists unless swift de-escalation efforts begin. However far-fetched this might seem right now, the surest path to defusing tensions lies in the US and Israel halting their campaign of aggression, starting with a ceasefire in Gaza as well as a cessation of hostilities with Iran. Third-party mediation by the likes of Qatar or China could provide opportunities for diplomatic off-ramps. Without such steps, the region, and the world, risks spiralling into uncontrolled conflict. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
an hour ago
- Business Recorder
India in the crosshairs
There have been two wars on our two borders in a span of two months. But only one is ours. Best to focus on that one. Those among us who say that Israeli and American aggression against Iran is condemnable in the strongest words, are right. There can be absolutely nothing right or justified in two nuclear powers ganging up against a non-nuclear country (no proof yet that Iran has weaponized enriched uranium) and launching unprovoked attacks against military and civilian targets. Pakistan has done right to express solidarity with Iran. We have also taken the correct initiative at the UN by sponsoring a resolution urging an immediate halt to aggression against Iran. But there are limits to what we can do. Or should do. These limits should be defined by our priorities. Not by our emotions. All policy must therefore coalesce around these priorities with clarity and cold logic. This logic dictates that our real, clear and present danger emanates from India, and India alone. All other threats are either indirect, or implied, or both. It makes perfect sense then to carry out our diplomatic and kinetic calculation in reference to the threat from India. The fog of war on our eastern border appears to have made this fact more difficult than it needs to be. Suddenly, it is all about Iran and Israel and the US, when in reality it should really be about India, India and India. Nothing illustrates this more than our approach towards the United States, and more specifically, towards its president. In the last six weeks he has midwifed a ceasefire between Pakistan and India (to our advantage), hyphenated Islamabad and New Delhi (to our advantage), repeatedly mentioned Kashmir thereby internationalizing it to the maximum (to our advantage), praised the leadership of both countries numerous times (to our advantage), and invited Pakistan's army chief for a lunch at the White House (to our huge advantage). At the same time, he has supported Israel's genocide in Gaza, persecuted immigrants in the US, slapped travel bans on countries that are mostly Muslim-majority, waged a tariff war against the world, insulted foreign leaders in the Oval office, and has now outrightly attacked Iran. It ain't a pretty scorecard by any measure. How should we read the scorecard from our vantage point? When we praise Trump but also support Iran, most people believe this is a contradiction that reflects poorly on our decision-making. This may not be entirely true. The fact is that we do not need to conduct our policy in binaries. If the United States has acted immorally in Gaza and duplicitously in Iran, it is not for the first time it has done so. And certainly not for the last time. But if the US president is providing us an advantage over India, this is definitely for the first time since at least the Bush-Musharraf bromance from two decades ago. It is, in fact, after decades that Pakistan finds itself in a foreign policy sweet spot. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's disastrous decision to launch attacks on Pakistan in May, and our subsequent victory in the four-day conflict has catapulted Pakistan to an elevated diplomatic level beyond all calculations. This provides us with a great opportunity to strengthen ourselves militarily, project our narrative diplomatically and leverage this sweet spot to improve our economic situation. It is a good time to be prudent and practical. It is a bad time to be reckless and rash. This means matters on our western border should not distract us from the urgency needed at the eastern border. Emotional outbursts at the role of the US president in the Middle East are good for venting but should have no place on the policymaking table. Pakistan is doing everything right by supporting Iran and condemning Israel, and it is doing nothing wrong with consolidating the relationship with President Trump. And no, this will not happen at the expense of our bond with China. That's fair to assume. Pakistan has given India a bloody nose with the support of China, and the next round with New Delhi is only a matter of time. We should aim to ensure that the next time is the last time. This will require an effort that needs maximum support – or at the least, appreciative understanding – from global powers. The Indus Water Treaty red light is flashing. As are many other danger lights from across the LoC and the international border. To wage successful offensive defence against India – the kind that deters and degrades India's will and capacity to strike at Pakistan – we need conceptual, doctrinal, material and military planning and preparedness far beyond our present level. To achieve this, we will need laser focus on the Indian threat and sharpened policy prescriptions that deflect all distractions and zoom in on all relations that strengthen our ability to solve the Indian problem once and for all. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
