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

Look at your own country: Bombay High Court raps CPI(M) over Gaza protest petition
Look at your own country: Bombay High Court raps CPI(M) over Gaza protest petition

The Hindu

timean hour ago

  • The Hindu

Look at your own country: Bombay High Court raps CPI(M) over Gaza protest petition

The Bombay High Court on Friday (July 25, 2025) dismissed a petition filed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and the CPI challenging the Mumbai Police's decision to deny permission for a protest at Azad Maidan against the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The court observed that the Indian political organisations should prioritise domestic issues over international conflicts. A Division Bench comprising Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad pulled up the petitioners for focusing on matters outside the country and said, 'Our country has enough issues to deal with. We do not want anything like this. I am sorry to say that you are short-sighted. You are looking at Gaza and Palestine while neglecting what's happening here. Why don't you do something for your own country? Look at your own country. Be patriots. People say they are patriots, but this is not patriotism. Show patriotism for the citizens of our own country first,' the Bench remarked sharply during the hearing. Senior advocate Mihir Desai representing CPI(M), informed the Bench that on June 13, 2025, his clients submitted an application seeking permission from the Azad Maidan police station to hold a peaceful protest and gathering in Azad Maidan to show solidarity with the people of Gaza, who are currently in the midst of a genocide, by calling for a ceasefire. On June 17, denying permission to the All India Peace and Solidarity Foundation (AIPSF) that police informed them that the permission to protest was being denied in exercise of their powers under Section 168 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and Section 68 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. Mr. Desai informed the Bench that the political parties have time and again taken up several causes that has concerned India and have been conducting health and education camps. The Court noted that the CPI(M), being a registered as Indian political party, should ideally be engaging with local civic concerns. 'You are a registered party in India. Your party could have taken up issues like garbage dumping, pollution, drainage, or flooding. Why are you not protesting on these issues? We are only giving examples. Instead, you want to protest over something happening thousands of miles away and showing concern for Palestine and Gaza,' the Bench observed. The petitioners stated that the Indian government's stance and support of Palestine as a State, has been an integral part of the nation's foreign policy. In 1974, India became the first Non-Arab State to recognize Palestine Liberation Organisation as the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. In 1988, India was also one of the first countries to recognize Palestine as a State. In April 2024, India voted in favour of the Human Rights Council Resolution on the Right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. Moreover, India is a State signatory to the Genocide Convention, 1948, and the protest which was held to condemn violence and genocide in Gaza, can in no way termed to be the foreign policy of the India State. Mr. Desai further argued that citizens have a fundamental right to protest at designated places and that disagreements with the government's foreign policy cannot be grounds to stifle dissent. He also contended that mere apprehensions of law-and-order issues, without concrete evidence, should not override constitutional freedoms. He also clarified that the protest has nothing to do with Operation Sindoor or India's border relations with neighbouring countries. CPI(M) issues statement Rejecting the petition, the court observed, 'You don't know the dust it could kick up. Whether to take a side for Palestine or Israel is their (Govt of India) work, why do you want to create such a situation that the country has to take sides on this? Why do you want to do this? It's obvious, going by the party you represent, that you don't understand what this could do to the foreign affairs of the country.' The CPI(M) has strongly condemned the Bombay High Court's remarks while dismissing its petition challenging the denial of permission to protest against the Gaza conflict. Calling the Court's comments unconstitutional and politically biased, the CPI(M) criticised the bench for questioning its patriotism and aligning with the Central government's foreign policy stance. 'It is regrettable to say that the Bench appears to be completely unaware of the constitutional provisions that empower political parties or the history of our country and the support and brotherly feelings of the Indian people towards the Palestinian people for their right to a homeland. The statement made by the High Court bench regarding the CPI(M) smacks of the bench aligning itself with the position of the Central Government,' the party said in a statement. The party invoked India's historical support for Palestine and urged citizens to reject what it termed a troubling judicial trend undermining democratic rights. 'We appeal to the freedom and democracy-loving people of the country to stand shoulder to shoulder with us in unequivocally rejecting this objectionable view,' the statement read.

IRDAI warns brokers on deal rush
IRDAI warns brokers on deal rush

Time of India

timean hour ago

  • Time of India

IRDAI warns brokers on deal rush

Mumbai: The Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India ( IRDAI ) has raised concerns over a surge in merger, acquisition, and demerger activities in the insurance distribution space, cautioning brokers against adopting sharp practices to solely inflate their valuations. "We have been witnessing record activity among brokers and other distribution intermediaries," said Satyajit Tripathy , member (distribution), IRDAI, at an Insurance Brokers Association of India event. "While this is fine by all means, I must add a word of caution that with increased growth being seen, we need not be adopting what we call as sharp practices to increase valuation, get listed, and to do business in a way, which may in the long run prove detrimental to the whole ecosystem." Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category PGDM CXO Project Management Leadership Healthcare Digital Marketing Others Technology Product Management Artificial Intelligence Operations Management Public Policy Cybersecurity Design Thinking Finance healthcare Management Data Science Degree Data Analytics others MCA Data Science MBA Skills you'll gain: Financial Analysis & Decision Making Quantitative & Analytical Skills Organizational Management & Leadership Innovation & Entrepreneurship Duration: 24 Months IMI Delhi Post Graduate Diploma in Management (Online) Starts on Sep 1, 2024 Get Details The inflow of private equity capital into insurance broking has risen about 20x between 2011-17 and 2018-24 to reach $4.8 billion. Indian insurance broking has 735 licensed brokers of which the top 36 drive over 85% of revenue, implying a long tail of brokers that have not scaled, according to a report by IBAI and McKinsey . by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like An engineer reveals: One simple trick to get internet without a subscription Techno Mag Learn More Undo Tripathy acknowledged the significant value addition brought in by brokers to the industry in the last 4-5 years, particularly post-Covid. At the event, the government urged over 700 insurance brokers to deepen insurance reach across the country and called on brokers to ensure access to affordable and appropriate insurance solutions for every Indian whether self-employed, salaried, agricultural, or industrial. Live Events "There is a vast untapped potential in Type 2 and Type 3 cities, agricultural and rural zones, in unorganised sectors, and among small businesses," said M Nagaraju, secretary, Department of Financial Services. "We believe insurance brokers can possibly increase awareness about the importance and availability of insurance in remote and low-income populations."

Defaulters face mass disconnection in Jabalpur
Defaulters face mass disconnection in Jabalpur

Time of India

time2 hours ago

  • Time of India

Defaulters face mass disconnection in Jabalpur

Jabalpur: The Madhya Pradesh Poorv Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Company launched a disconnection drive in Jabalpur, severing nearly 8,000 domestic electricity connections over the past three days. The action targets over 71,000 consumers, who had previously availed benefits under the then govt's pre-poll and post-Covid electricity bill suspension scheme but defaulted on their dues even after their old arrears were stalled. According to city superintending engineer Sanjay Arora, the govt suspended electricity bill payments between May 2020 and Aug 2023 as a relief measure during the pandemic. Approximately 81,201 domestic consumers in Jabalpur city benefited from this suspension, resulting in pending dues amounting to Rs 24.94 crore. Of these, 7,151 consumers have continued to default on payments since Sept 2023 and have not made any payments to date, Arora stated. The disconnection drive commenced on July 23, targeting such defaulters. On the first day, 474 connections were physically disconnected. On the second day, remote disconnection was carried out for 3,629 smart meter users. On the third day, over 3,800 connections were disconnected both physically and remotely, he added. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Learn How To Write Faster for Work (Find Out Now) Grammarly Learn More Undo Among those disconnected, around 4,700 consumers had not cleared their bills even after the end of the Covid relief period. The remaining defaulters include approximately 3,300 regular domestic consumers, who have not paid their dues for months. The company has warned that the disconnection drive will continue until significant recovery is made from defaulters.

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