logo
Why is corporate investment lagging behind?

Why is corporate investment lagging behind?

The Hindu15-07-2025
India is going through a rocky terrain as far as industrial production and corporate investment are concerned. On June 30, the Ministry of Statistics and Program Implementation (MoSPI) released the monthly growth rate of the Index of Industrial Production (IIP), which has slowed to a nine month low of 1.2%. This piece attempts to explain why industrial activity has not really picked up in any meaningful way since the COVID-19 pandemic.
To be fair, it is not as if the government has not tried. They have tried every trick in their book, starting with a significant corporate tax cut to the tune of eight percentage points in September 2019 (from 30% to 22%), then a significant capex-push over the last few budgets, and lastly an interest rate cut recommended by the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) recently. The 2024-25 Economic Survey expressed its dismay by stating that 'in terms of financial performance, the corporate sector has never had it so good … (but) (h)iring and compensation growth hardly kept up with it … Private sector GFCF in machinery and equipment and intellectual property products has grown cumulatively by only 35% in the four years to FY23, (which will) delay India's quest to raise the manufacturing share of GDP, delay the improvement in India's manufacturing competitiveness, and create only a smaller number of higher-quality formal jobs than otherwise.'
Determining investment
There is a famous debate between two Marxist scholars, Rosa Luxemburg and Tugan Baranovsky, on what determines investment in a capitalist economy which might be valuable to this discussion. To appreciate this debate and to understand the current predicaments of the Indian economy, we would like to present a basic representation of GDP and its determinants in a 'pure' capitalist economy, that is, one without any State intervention or access to external markets (see Box 1 for such a representation).
GDP can be measured in different ways. What we demand generates production in the economy, with the other side being the income generated for the producers. So, from the income side, the GDP is a sum of workers' wages and capitalists' profits and, from the expenditure/demand side, a sum of workers' consumption and capitalists' investment. The purpose of this piece is to explain the latter.
To get to the meat of the matter, we make a simplifying assumption that workers consume all their wages and capitalists do not consume at all (the argument does not change even if we remove this strict assumption). As Box 1 shows, wages and workers' consumption cancel each other out. What we are left with are profits which must be equal to investment in such an economy. This equation, however, does not tell us whether profits cause investment or investment causes profits. This innocuous relationship has led to quite a debate in economics, which continues to this day.
To resolve this apparent chicken and egg problem, Kalecki, a Marxist economist asked a simple question: of the two, which one can the capitalists decide/control? 'Capitalists may decide to … invest more in a given period than the preceding one, but they cannot decide to earn more.' In other words, investment determines profits in a given period, not the other way round. But if this is the case, what is the limit to investment? Why can they not invest any amount they like? In fact, why should there be a problem of a lack of investment at all?
Baranovsky argued that there is no limit to investment provided a certain proportion is maintained between consumption and investment sectors. He went to the extent to say that investment decisions need not be tied to any final consumption demand. An economy where workers' consumption is kept suppressed may still flourish with higher investment and higher profits simply by the decision of the capitalists to accumulate. Since capitalism and accumulation of capital is driven by profitability, investment provides the market for itself. Machines can produce machines to produce more machines.
However, Luxemburg countered by saying that while it's true that investment leads to profits, it does not mean that any amount of investment will necessarily be undertaken. That would be a gross misreading of the relationship represented in Box 1. If the corporate sector were to collectively decide to invest, they would all be generating markets for each other, thereby, generating profits. But, unfortunately, investment decisions under capitalism are made by individual firms/capitalists and their decisions would be driven by their own assessment of demand for the products they produce. For example, in situations where the economy is not growing, it would be foolhardy for an individual capitalist to invest because adding capacity, when the existing factories are not running to capacity, would entail more losses. At the same time, if they were to invest collectively, the economy would have actually recovered. But coordinated or collectively planned investment is an anathema to capitalism.
Investment, first and foremost, depends on the demand for the goods (whether machinery, toys or cars) it produces. It does not, and cannot, have a life of its own. A pure capitalist economy, without exogenous stimuli, cannot provide an endogenous impetus for its own survival. It requires an exogenous stimulus to kickstart the cycle of more investment and profits. The situation is particularly grave when the economy is in a downturn/slowdown because demand is down. The only way there can be a turnaround is if there is a turnaround in demand itself.
The other factor behind investment is finance — internal (retained profits) or external (debt, public offerings etc).
Lagging corporate investment
The government assumed that with tax cuts and higher post-tax profits in the hands of the corporate sector, investment would pick up. But they have perhaps read the profit-investment causality wrong. Even others, who believe there can be an investment-led revival, miss the crucial point that Luxemburg was making. Investment will follow if there is a revival in process; it cannot lead the revival under conditions of slowdown. Investment cannot be made for the sake of investment. It requires the exogenous stimuli that Luxemburg was talking about. Where can that come from?
There are two such exogenous sources — government expenditure and external markets (see Box 2). With a slowing global demand, which is perhaps going to worsen with the 'reciprocal' tariff regime under U.S. President Trump, government expenditure is the most important lever to kickstart the investment cycle. But then has the government not done enough in the form of capex spending? Government indeed has spent but it has so far not succeeded as much as expected. Why?
The idea behind capex spending is that it would crowd-in private investment. This crowd-in could happen through a direct impact on investment as a result of better infrastructural facilities or by generating demand for goods produced by the corporate sector.
While there is no denying that there is a possibility of crowding-in, there are multiple factors at play here. First, the crowd-in of the first kind, which is through better infrastructure, may be delayed due to the gestation lags these big scale projects usually have. For example, a port takes time to build and become operational.
Second, while it is true that all such projects, whether big or small, create an immediate demand, how much of it is domestic demand and how much it is for economies outside depends on the import component of this spending. In other words, a part of this capex may be spent on imports, which simply cancels out without providing adequate domestic demand. Third, even how much domestic demand such a capex would generate depends on the labour intensity of these projects. If most of the money is spent on heavy duty machines, the employment generating capacity will be low, which translates to lower consumption demand.
As for the incentive to finance investment through lower interest rates or liquidity, both of which the RBI has been trying, it is like putting the cart before the horse. Capitalists would take loans only if they believe they will profit from such investment to pay the loans back. With sagging demand, low costs of finance is not enough. As Keynes had famously said, 'whereas the weakening of either [speculative confidence or the state of credit] is enough to cause a collapse, recovery requires the revival of both.' This simple lesson needs to be learnt by both the RBI and the Finance Ministry if they want the economy to revive.
Rohit Azad and Indranil Chowdhury teach Economics at JNU and PGDAV College, Delhi University, respectively
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Who Is Sōhei Kamiya AKA Japan's Donald Trump? A YouTuber, teacher wins election in Japan
Who Is Sōhei Kamiya AKA Japan's Donald Trump? A YouTuber, teacher wins election in Japan

Time of India

timean hour ago

  • Time of India

Who Is Sōhei Kamiya AKA Japan's Donald Trump? A YouTuber, teacher wins election in Japan

Sōhei Kamiya, a popular YouTuber-turned-politician, is currently making waves in Japanese politics. Also known as Japan's Donald Trump, Kamiya has emerged as a major figure after his far-right party, Sanseitō, shocked many by winning 14 seats in the recent Japan election. This surprising success has not only raised eyebrows domestically but also drawn comparisons to populist leaders like Donald Trump himself. From Fringe Candidate to Political Force The rise of Sōhei Kamiya marks a significant shift in Japanese politics. His party, Sanseitō, which started out on the fringes during the COVID-19 pandemic, has now become a strong force in the country's upper house. In 2022, Sanseitō held just one seat. But in the latest Japan election, the party secured 14–15 seats in the 248-member House of Councillors, dramatically increasing its influence. This unexpected gain has weakened Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba's coalition, placing Kamiya in a position to influence national legislation. Unlike mainstream parties, Kamiya prefers building alliances with other fringe groups instead of aligning with the ruling coalition. Who Is Sōhei Kamiya? Born on 12 October 1977 in Takahama, Fukui Prefecture, Sōhei Kamiya holds a law degree and has had a varied career. Before entering politics, he worked as an English teacher, supermarket manager, and later became popular on YouTube, where he posted political videos questioning government policies. His official political career began as a member of Suita City Council in Osaka. He was part of the Liberal Democratic Party from 2012 to 2015, later serving as an independent until he founded Sanseitō in 2020. Sōhei Kamiya's Career and the Birth of Sanseitō Sanseitō—also known as the 'Party of Do It Yourself'—was launched in April 2020 during the pandemic by a group of citizens frustrated with Japan's existing political choices. Since its foundation, Sōhei Kamiya's career has been closely tied to the growth of this party. As the Secretary General and key strategist, he has been its public face and driving force. The party's ideology includes Japanese nationalism, right-wing populism, and a firm anti-immigration stance. It also opposes LGBTQ+ rights, gender equality initiatives, and COVID-19 vaccines and masks—positions that have helped it gain popularity among right-leaning voters. In 2022, Sanseitō officially gained national party status by earning more than 2% of the national vote and winning one seat. Their success has now grown significantly, with 14 seats won in the 2025 Japan election. Why Is Kamiya Called 'Japan's Donald Trump'? Sōhei Kamiya has earned the nickname Japan's Donald Trump due to his populist rhetoric, controversial statements, and anti-establishment attitude. Like Trump, he positions himself as a voice for "ordinary people" and frequently criticises the government, media, and global institutions. His speeches often echo nationalist and xenophobic themes. During his campaign, Kamiya referred to Japan's reliance on foreign workers as 'national doping,' suggesting that immigration weakens national identity. He also drew criticism for saying, 'Only young women can have children,' a statement that many labelled as sexist and out of touch. Furthermore, he proposed that terminally ill patients should bear the full cost of life-prolonging treatments—another stance that stirred public outrage. Controversies and Criticism Like Trump, Sōhei Kamiya's career has been filled with controversies. He has made questionable historical claims, including suggesting that only American troops were responsible for Okinawan civilian deaths during the Battle of Okinawa—ignoring the role of Japan's own military. His party also came under fire when one of its candidates appeared on Russia's Sputnik News, leading to suspicions about pro-Russia leanings. However, Kamiya denied these allegations and called it a misunderstanding. What Lies Ahead for Sōhei Kamiya? With the momentum from the recent Japan election, Sōhei Kamiya and his party are expected to continue influencing Japan's political direction. As their online presence grows and their nationalist message resonates with certain voters, Kamiya is solidifying his place as a powerful new figure—one that many now call Japan's Donald Trump. Whether his rise will bring lasting change or fuel deeper divisions remains to be seen. But what's certain is that Sōhei Kamiya's career is just getting started, and the world is watching. To stay updated on the stories that are going viral, follow Indiatimes Trending.

Delhi HC grants bail to NewsClick founder in ED, EOW foreign funding case
Delhi HC grants bail to NewsClick founder in ED, EOW foreign funding case

Business Standard

timean hour ago

  • Business Standard

Delhi HC grants bail to NewsClick founder in ED, EOW foreign funding case

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday granted anticipatory bail to NewsClick Editor-in-Chief and founder Prabir Purkayastha in two cases — one filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for alleged money laundering, and the other by Delhi Police's Economic Offences Wing (EOW) related to foreign funding, Live Law reported. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna delivered the order, closing the bail pleas filed by Purkayastha in 2021. Along with Purkayastha, the court also granted anticipatory bail to NewsClick Director Pranjal Pandey in the EOW FIR linked to the same allegations. In June 2021, Purkayastha was given interim protection from arrest in these matters. The court had extended that protection multiple times since then. Funds from China were used illegally In May last year, the Delhi Police informed a local court that Purkayastha had allegedly channelled funds from China into India to incite the 2020 Delhi riots, run a misinformation campaign during the Covid-19 pandemic, support the farmers' protest, and finance terrorism-related activities in Kashmir, news agency PTI had reported. These claims were made in a charge sheet submitted before Additional Sessions Judge Hardeep Kaur. According to the charge sheet, Purkayastha allegedly provided salaries to several individuals associated with activist Teesta Setalvad. It also mentioned that the role of activist Gautam Navlakha is currently under investigation in connection with the same matter. The final report further stated that Navlakha was a shareholder in NewsClick, and protected witnesses have testified that he acted as a conduit for funding and supplying arms and ammunition to a banned Naxalite organisation. ED raided NewsClick offices in 2021 The Enforcement Directorate had searched the offices of NewsClick and the homes of its editors in February 2021. The raids were part of its investigation into a money laundering case, where it also carried out search and seizure actions. Investigating agencies have accused PPK Newsclick Studio Pvt. Ltd of allegedly violating foreign direct investment (FDI) rules. The company is suspected of receiving FDI by inflating its share value, which helped it bypass the cap set under FDI regulations. ED launched probe after EOW FIR After taking note of the FIR filed by the Economic Offences Wing, the Enforcement Directorate started its own investigation. It followed this up with search operations in relation to the case.

India resumes tourist visas for Chinese nationals after five-year freeze
India resumes tourist visas for Chinese nationals after five-year freeze

Business Standard

timean hour ago

  • Business Standard

India resumes tourist visas for Chinese nationals after five-year freeze

India will start issuing tourist visas to Chinese nationals from July 24 after halting them for five years, Reuters reported, citing the Indian Embassy in China. The development marks a shift in the strained ties between the two countries, which are aiming to improve ties and ease tensions after Galwan clashes in 2020. Chinese media Global Times shared the post made by the Indian Embassy in China on Weibo. Sharing the post on X, it said, "The Embassy of India in China announced via its Sina Weibo account on Wednesday that, starting from July 24, 2025, Chinese citizens can apply for a tourist visa to visit India after completing an online application, scheduling an appointment, and personally submitting their passport and other required documents to the Indian Visa Application Centers in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, in South China's Guangdong Province." It further added, "This marks the first time since the suspension in 2020 that India has resumed issuing tourist visas to Chinese citizens after a five-year hiatus, according to media reports." Earlier this year, the two countries also agreed to resume direct air services, along with resuming the Kailash Mansarovar yatra this summer. Both the direct air services and the Kailash Mansarovar yatra were suspended after the Covid-19 pandemic and the Galwan clashes. India suspends visas for Chinese nationals In 2020, India suspended all tourist visas for Chinese nationals in light of the Covid-19 pandemic. In April 2022, the International Air Transport Association (IATA) issued a notice, stating that all tourist visas to Chinese nationals will no longer be valid. The move came in retaliation after China limited the re-entry of as many as 22,000 Indian students in the country after the Covid-19 pandemic. Breakthrough in India-China ties Earlier this month, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar visited China, marking his first visit in five years, indicating a positive development in the ties of the two countries. Earlier in March this year, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi highlighted positive developments in India-China relations. He added that both countries have made positive strides in their bilateral ties and achieved encouraging outcomes. Yi emphasised the need for a cooperative partnership between the dragon (China) and the elephant (India). He stated, "China believes that as the largest neighbors, both countries should be partners in each other's success." He attributed the positive developments between the two countries to a successful meeting held between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping at Kazan, Russia.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store