Urban consumers expect decline in both price and inflationary pressures over coming year
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
42 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Minimum balance requirement not under regulatory domain: RBI Governor
Two days after ICICI Bank sharply hiked the minimum monthly average balance (MAB) requirement in customer accounts to Rs 50,000, Reserve Bank Governor Sanjay Malhotra said the MAB requirement is 'not under regulatory domain'. 'The RBI has left it to the banks to decide on the minimum balance. Every bank has its own minimum balance requirement. This is not under any regulatory domain,' Malhotra said on the sidelines of an event here. This means each bank is free to fix any amount it desires as the minimum monthly average balance in accounts. The ICICI move has come at a time when public sector banks were scrapping the MAB requirement. ICICI Bank, the country's second-largest private lender, sharply increased the minimum monthly average balance from Rs 10,000 to Rs 50,000 for all accounts opened in metro and urban areas starting August 2025. For semi-urban branches, the new MAB requirement has increased to Rs 25,000 from Rs 5,000 earlier. In the case of rural branches, accounts will require a minimum balance of Rs 10,000, compared to the earlier Rs 2,500, according to the bank. ICICI Bank has said if the minimum balance criteria is not met by the customer, there will be a penalty of 6 per cent of the shortfall in required MAB or Rs 500 whichever is lower. ICICI Bank is the first bank to go for a steep hike in MAB. The country's largest lender, State Bank of India, has not levied non-maintenance penalties since March 2020. According to data shared by Minister of State for Finance Pankaj Chaudhary in response to a question in the Rajya Sabha, state-owned lenders collected Rs 8,932.98 crore as penal charges on non-maintenance of minimum Average Monthly Balance in the five years starting 2020-21 and up to 2024-25. The data shared by the finance ministry on Tuesday comes days after Union Bank of India joined a host of other PSBs in waiving off penalties on non-maintenance of minimum balances, an issue that has been a sensitive one for some time. Other PSBs that have ended these charges from the ongoing quarter include Canara Bank, Bank of Baroda, Punjab National Bank, Indian Bank, Bank of India, and Central Bank of India, the finance ministry said on Tuesday. The finance ministry last week informed the Parliament that public sector banks (PSBs) collected almost Rs 9,000 crore as penalties as customers failed to maintain the MAB over a five-year period.
News18
2 days ago
- News18
Donald Trump May Not Be Familiar With India's Resilience, But History Is
Last Updated: The Trump-era tariffs may have been designed as a blow, but are more likely to become a spark. India's history shows that adversity is often the beginning of its next success story India stands at a momentous crossroads in its economic journey. Unlike China, it may not enjoy the tailwinds that turned growth into more growth, having now landed in the tariff crosshairs of an insecure America. Yet, over the past three decades, it has left an undeniable mark on the global economy—built on the blood, sweat, and determination of its people. Every percentage point of GDP growth has been hard-earned and well-deserved. The imperialist tendencies of superpowers are nothing new to India. The long shadow of the British Raj etched that lesson deep into its national DNA. India not only knows how to resist such pressures but how to transform crises into opportunities. For India, a crisis is not a stumbling block but an opportunity with ample possibilities. From the watershed reforms of 1991 to the tremors of the 2008 global financial crisis, every disruption has been a trigger for transformation. Now, in 2025, with the United States imposing steep tariffs as high as 50 per cent on Indian exports, the country finds itself at another crossroads. If history is any indication, this moment will not mark decline but renewal. 1991: From Near Collapse to Economic Reinvention 2008: Building Buffers in Global Turbulence The global financial crisis of 2008 sent shockwaves across the world, but India avoided the worst by leaning into stimulus measures, investing heavily in infrastructure, and diversifying its trade relationships. By reducing dependence on any single market and sustaining domestic demand, India learned that resilience comes from balance and diversification. 2025: The Tariff Shock and the Strategic Response President Trump has raised tariffs on Indian imports to 50 per cent, citing a failure to land a favourable deal for Trump, and India's continued purchase of Russian oil. The move has affected trade negotiations between the two nations and drawn sharp criticism from New Delhi, which called the decision unfair and unjustified. The Indian economy is now bracing for impact. Exporters rushed shipments to beat the August 27 deadline. Moody's warned that higher tariffs could shave 0.3 percentage points off India's GDP growth. The rupee suffered its longest losing streak in months, prompting Reserve Bank intervention, while defence procurement plans involving US aircraft and arms were put on hold. The government's response has been swift and multi-layered. While it continues backroom talks, it has signalled that reforms that had been pending for years will now be accelerated to strengthen domestic competitiveness. Prime Minister Modi has made it clear that India will not compromise on the interests of farmers, dairy producers, and fishermen, even if it means paying an economic price. Exporters are already expanding outreach to Europe, Africa, the Middle East, and ASEAN to reduce over-reliance on the United States. Behind the scenes, quiet diplomatic efforts continue, with India signaling openness to revisit tariffs on select US agricultural imports in exchange for easing American duties on Indian goods. The story is familiar. In 1991, collapse led to structural reforms. In 2008, global turmoil triggered domestic expansion and diversification. In 2025, the tariff shock is catalysing deeper reforms, wider market access, and strategic resilience. With over 650 billion dollars in foreign exchange reserves, an expanding infrastructure network, and a young, skilled workforce, India is positioned to turn today's pressure into tomorrow's progress. Ready for the Next Chapter The Trump-era tariffs may have been designed as a blow, but they are more likely to become a spark. India's history shows that adversity is often the beginning of its next success story. In the shifting global trade environment, the country has a chance to emerge as one of the most trusted, competitive, and agile economies. If the past three decades are any guide, India will not just adapt—it will rise. About the Author view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
The Print
2 days ago
- The Print
Bank nationalisation will lead to totalitarianism: Phiroze Shroff
During recent years, they have opened numerous branches in order to extend credit facilities to people even in remote areas, even though the banking business in several branches has proved unremunerative. They have invested more than Rs 600 crore in Government securities. They have been broadening their capital base and increasing their reserves in accordance with statutory requirements. The enormous increase in their deposits during recent years bears testimony to the confidence which the public have in their working. The primary function of banks is to mobilise resources for economic development and that is exactly what the banks in our country have been doing. They have been working to attract deposits from those who have funds to spare on [a] long or short term basis. They have been making loans for industrial as well as agricultural expansion in accordance with numerous legislative requirements. Every now and then we hear the cry that banks should be nationalised. The taking over of banks by the State is urged on various grounds, namely, that it is necessary in order 'to mobilise resources' for the economic development of the country, 'to prevent the concentration of economic power', 'to check malpractices in the working of banks' and to put a stop to profiteering' by banks. All these arguments will be found to be untenable on a dispassionate scrutiny of the issues involved. By undertaking the foreign exchange business, our banks render considerable help in promoting exports. An occasional appearance of a black sheep in the sphere of banking, as in any other sphere, does not detract from the value of the service which the banks as a whole are rendering to the country. What is regrettable is that though the Reserve Bank is invested with extensive powers to prevent malpractices, in one or two cases it failed to exercise them to protect the interests of the depositors as well as shareholders. Ninety-five per cent of bank advances in India are secured loans. The corresponding figures for the USA, is only thirty per cent. This amply bears out the fact that our banks pursue a very conservative and safe policy while using the depositors' money for making loans. Various legislative measures have been taken to prevent possible malpractices by banks. The Deposit Insurance Scheme ensures security to depositors. Under the Scheme, the premium payable is 1/20 of 1 per cent. At present, the annual premium on the total deposits with the banks amounts to a little over one crore of rupees. If the Government desires to increase banking facilities, nothing prevents it from expanding the number and activities of its own banking and credit institutions and competing with banks in the private sector in terms of equality and fair play. There is no force in the argument that the banks are making huge profits. The dividends which the shareholders receive on their investments work out to about six to eight per cent taxable, on the basis of ruling quotations. In most cases, dividends are considerably less on the basis of actual investment by the shareholders. Assuming some banks have made somewhat higher profits during recent years, it is the Government which has been the greatest beneficiary. Not only does it take 50 per cent of the profits by way of the corporation tax, but it takes a considerable slice as income-tax on dividends in the hands of the shareholders. Indeed, the Government itself makes much higher profits in a few of the Public Sector concerns where it enjoys a virtual monopoly, though its over-all performance in the working of the numerous public sector concerns is highly disappointing. The banking industry in our country is subject to numerous controls, some of which are not only irksome but are uncalled for in the interest of the development of banking along right lines. However, the sphere in which banks can work on their own initiative is very valuable from the point of view of the society. The relationship between a bank and its client is one of great mutual confidence. It should be as intimate as between a physician and his patients. If the banks were to be nationalised this relationship would become truncated if not totally destroyed. A banker is required to make quick decisions after bearing in mind various factors in his relationship with his client. He has to assume a reasonable degree of responsibility in making the decisions. The employee of a state-managed bank is naturally reluctant to shoulder this responsibility. He is anxious to fortify himself with authority and approval from his superiors. The process of obtaining such approval is time-consuming and defeats the purpose for which the institution of banking exists. It would be pertinent to quote in this context Mr C Subramaniam, Union Minister for Steel and Heavy Industries. Mr Subramaniam recently said that the Government had thought that members of the I.C.S., who had been excellent public administrators, would manage public corporations too, but very few of them had proved successful. The Minister observed that, 'In Government departments decisions are taken on the basis of precedents, no matter how long it takes to find out the precedent. In industry and business, it is absolutely necessary to take quick decisions. Hesitancy and delay in taking decisions is the greatest harm to industry and business.' An unimaginative compliance with regulations for extending credit is not the best way of transacting banking business. Government servants in the role of bankers would import red-tapism into banking. Needless to say these inseparable adjuncts of civil service are fatal to sound banking practices. Further, it has to be noted that civil servants have not made themselves conspicuous for courtesy or consideration to the members of the public. To give one instance, whereas some banks have made arrangements for the cashing of the current account cheques within five minutes of their presentation, we need not be surprised that because of red-tape procedures under bank nationalisation a holder of a cheque may have to wait for fifty minutes or more before his cheque is cashed. If banks were to be nationalised, politicians would start interfering with bank officials and put on them undue pressure. The Government would get huge patronage in respect of making appointments on the staff as also extending credit to various interests. An element of nepotism and favouritism may be introduced in the sphere of banking which should be free from these vices. Unscrupulous elements may use the enormous power of granting or denying credit to stifle political opposition. This might deal one more blow to the working of democracy in our country. Nationalisation of banks would not be to the interest of the bank employees. Against the combined role of the State and the employer, the employees will not be able to get their legitimate dues. Complaints have been made that labour legislation is often ignored in Public Sector concerns, giving rise to much discontent amongst labour. Friction between management and labour is responsible for lowered productivity. A number of Public Sector concerns are notorious for indiscipline of the employees and high degree of absenteeism. The country suffers as a result of all this. Idle capacity in men as well as machines in Public Sector concerns has been criticised by the Estimates Committee of the Lok Sabha. The latest Audit Report (commercial) placed on the table of the Lok Sabha by the Finance Minister has referred on the irregularities in the accounting and auditing systems of Government companies. For instance, Hindustan Shipyard and Indian Rare Earths diverted their audit staff for the preparation of final accounts, thereby, as rightly pointed out by the Audit Report, 'defeating the very object of internal audit.' This kind of irregularity in keeping accounts in case of nationalised banks would undermine the credit structure in the country, resulting in the loss of public confidence and consequent economic disruption. Our banks are sometimes blamed for not holding the price line. The banks, their employees and the public generally are themselves victims of governmental measures and policies which push up prices. To hold the banks responsible for the failure to hold the price line is unjustified. Far from nationalising banks, the time has come to institute a thorough probe into the working of the Public Sector concerns and to hand over to private management all State concerns which are working inefficiently. Without a free market economy there will be an end to all fundamental rights. There can be no true democracy without the recognition and enforcement of fundamental rights. Fundamental rights must necessarily include the right of the people to practise any legitimate trade, profession or calling. Accordingly, people should be free to carry on banking subject to reasonable regulation. State monopoly of banking will deal a serious blow to our mixed economy and pave the way for a totalitarian regime. Advocates of totalitarianism are fully conscious of this development, which explains their enthusiasm for bank nationalisation. The people and the Government must, therefore, remain vigilant against the machinations of the enemies of democracy and basic freedoms. This essay is part of a series from the Indian Liberals archive, a project of the Centre for Civil Society. It is taken from the economic supplement of The Indian Libertarian and titled 'Bank Nationalisation Will Endanger Our Democracy And Economic Growth', published on 15 December 1963. The original version can be accessed here.
