Economic freedom for true independence

By Dhananath Fernando

Originally appeared on the Morning

For the last 76 years, we Sri Lankans have looked at different ways of making Sri Lanka a wealthier and developed country. A popular refrain during every Independence Day celebration week has been that “when we got independence, we were only second to Japan”. Another quote bragged about how good we were, as “Singapore was behind us and they took Sri Lanka as their model for development”. 

Unfortunately, much of Sri Lanka’s independence has only been ceremonial, not real. We have still failed to capture the science of equitable wealth creation, which only comes with economic freedom. Economic freedom leads to true and meaningful independence. All countries in the region, including Singapore and Japan, overtook us by establishing the elements of economic freedom at various degrees rather than simply taking Sri Lanka as an example.  

Science of wealth creation 

Wealth creation is science, not magic. It has always been a function of maximising the use of limited resources and increasing productivity. Both can be done when individuals have better incentives to create wealth. For individuals to create wealth, their rights over property have to be secure. The government should ensure that the property of people belongs to them. 

The government should allow individuals to do business and create wealth instead of trying to intervene in markets and pricing. Further, a government poking its fingers in and preferential treatments in a sector serve to discourage individuals from being in the same business. 

Wealth can also be created when raw materials are competitive in price and good in quality. Having a variety of choices in a competitive market system is paramount. The simplest way of creating a competitive environment is by opening up for international trade. 

Regulatory barriers have to be minimal. This does not mean the government plays no part in regulation. The government can adopt a regulatory function without intervening in the market to ensure that the competition and competitive nature of the industries are protected. 

Lastly, all transactions in the modern world take place in a fiat currency. Simply put, we store all our production as individuals in a form of a paper called money. The monopoly of money belongs to the government and when it does not protect the value of the money, it amounts to theft of the hard work and production of an individual. 

The science of wealth creation is simply establishing these five principles. This has been statistically proven by the Economic Freedom of the World Index by the Fraser Institute. 

Over the decades, it has monitored these five indicators and data have shown the relationship and causation between wealth creation. 

The per capita GDP of countries with the highest level of economic freedom is on average about $ 48,000 while for countries with the lowest level of economic freedom the per capita GDP averages at $ 6,300. 

Even if we consider the standard of living amongst the poorest 10% of the population in the countries with higher economic freedom, the income distribution among the poorest 10% is eight times higher than in countries with very low economic freedom. 

Sri Lanka falls under the third quartile, meaning that our performance in economic freedom is not that great. We have ranked 116 out of 165 countries. 

Science of economic freedom

In modern times, many people consider happiness as a function of wealth, freedom, and independence. When we look at the data on economic freedom, it is clear that countries with higher ratings indicate a higher score on the UN World Happiness Index as well. 

Even if we look at poverty numbers, the countries with higher economic freedom obviously have low poverty rates compared to countries with low economic freedom. 

Over the last 76 years, the science of economic freedom is something we have failed to utilise. One reason this column has always advocated for reforms of State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) is because a limited government improves the economic freedom of people, which leads to creating wealth. People having ownership and rights over land is another reform we require to improve the property rights indicated in economic freedom, which will also lead the process of wealth creation.   

On this independence day, our prime focus has to be on creating wealth. We can create wealth by establishing economic freedom. When we have wealth and economic freedom, we become independent. That is when we leave the trap of poverty, our standards of living improve, and we provide value for the globe. 

Happy Independence Day, Sri Lanka.

The dangers of the Online Safety Bill

By Dhananath Fernando

Originally appeared on the Morning

The Online Safety Bill is scheduled to be taken up for debate at its second reading in Parliament on 23 and 24 January. Unfortunately, this bill is going to make our current economic situation a bit more difficult in the short run and as well as the long run.  

The Asia Internet Coalition (AIC), where tech platform giants such as Google, Meta, and Amazon are partners, twice brought up the danger this bill could pose to the digital economy.  

Economy is beyond just supply and demand of rupees and cents. Economies are mainly the ideas that solve a problem of fellow humans and an exchange of those products and services with scarcity of resources. 

Problem-solving for humans comes with the freedom to think and with freedom of speech and dissemination of information. All attempts to restrict our freedom of expression, speech, and dissemination of information will backfire on the country and the economy. 

Sadly, the Online Safety Bill seems to be doing just that.

Self-censorship kills ideas for prosperity 

The bill has left significant room for vagueness in many clauses and definitions. According to the proposed bill, the commission appointed by the Constitutional Council has the powers to determine whether some facts are true or false and take follow-up actions. 

One example to showcase the impractical nature of this approach is the case of the Government decision on cremation of Covid-infected bodies, claiming that viruses could leak into the waterbed and cause contamination. This decision was highly debated on social media platforms and even scientists were divided on the decision. 

So if someone complains based on the Online Safety Bill, how does the committee decide on what is true and what is untrue when even scientists are unsure? Later the Government withdrew its decision and changed its initial stance. What was perceived as truth at one point was proved to be wrong at another point. What could have been the outcome if the Online Safety Bill had been enacted by then and if legal proceedings had been taken forward for those who commented for and against cremation of Covid deaths?

Looking at lessons from history, Galileo was killed for bringing an alternative view of the perceived truth on the shelving of the solar system. This act in this form takes us back to the repression faced by Galileo. It is severely problematic when the arbiter of ‘truths’ of fringe politics can also hand out punishments.

Generally when there is uncertainty, for their own safety, people engage in self-censorship. Self-censorship restricts the flow of ideas and minimises the ability of the economy to solve the problem. 

Let’s imagine that the Online Safety Bill had been enacted before 2021. During that time many analysts and economists on all social media platforms warned the Central Bank that excessive money printing could lead to inflation. The Central Bank was of the view that there was no relationship between money printing and inflation. So if the Central Bank complained to the Online Safety Commision on the opinions on the matter, most of the economists would have been punished by the bill by the time inflation was hitting 72%.

If the Central Bank says inflation has no relationship to money supply, there would have been no other way the commission could establish what was true or what was false at that point of time. The other possibility is that most of the economists would have self-censored knowing the repercussions of the bill, which could have caused greater harm to society.

If this bill creates a culture of self-censorship, our ability to hold the State accountable, ability to innovate, and ability to create would be quenched, leading to a stagnant economy. 

Impact on SMEs

The business models of tech giants are very cost effective. They do not have offices in every country, nor staff to monitor all content. Most of that is done through algorithms. They regulate harmful content through technology (algorithms) and very strict community guidelines are adhered to.

Anyone can read how comprehensive the guidelines of these tech platforms are on safety and trust and how effective they are on responding to these platforms’ community guidelines. Tech firms have refined algorithms to an extent that not a single photo falling under nudity can be found as the algorithm restricts them automatically. In that sense the tech companies have done a fantastic job compared to what a government tries to do with a bill in a market-based system.

Platforms such as TikTok are not only concerned about human rights but also about human safety, where drone shots with a risk of accidents are eliminated due to very high community standards.

If the Online Safety Bill becomes too much of a burden for these tech companies, with a response time of 24 hours for inquiries by the commision as per the bill, they will tune their algorithms to be very strict, which will have an impact on SME businesses run on social media. Simply, the competitors can complain on certain pages featuring products with various claims and pose an unnecessary burden to SMEs. 

Our tourism industry, where we have a long-tail SME sector, especially uses these platforms for room reservations. The reviews coming in the form of discrimination will fall under this and the booking sites will also fall under that purview, so they are likely to react to the online safety regulation, which will have an impact on our dollar-earning tourism industry.

The AIC has already twice highlighted its displeasure in diplomatic language, claiming as follows in a statement: “The proposed legislation, in its present form, poses significant challenges that, if not addressed comprehensively, could undermine the potential growth of Sri Lanka’s digital economy.”

Wrong signals to markets 

The Online Safety Bill also provides wrong signals to the market, including the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and our creditors. The IMF has provided a governance diagnostic where many other pieces of legislation, including the SOE Holding Company Act and Procurement Law, are among the top 16 priorities. Sadly our Government has brought a bill on Online Safety Bill, for which no stakeholder group which assisted Sri Lanka during the economic crisis has shown any interest other than highlighting its problematic nature, which ultimately impacts economic growth. 

Since actions speak louder than words, this will provide the wrong messaging to our creditors, bilateral and multilateral partners, and investors that our Government’s priority is not the economic crisis.

From the point of view of the investor, this will also have a serious impact on attracting FDI and key players with the potential to transform our economy. For instance, one company which has shown interest in investing in Government shares of Sri Lanka Telecom is Jio, where a majority share is with Reliance Group in India. Meta, Google, Intel, and the Saudi Arabia Wealth Fund are a few other strategic partners and shareholders of Jio. Can we expect a tech company to provide a positive referral to its main shareholder in an investment decision when its own platforms are under risk through an Online Safety Bill in Sri Lanka?

This bill is beyond repair and just plastering over its shortcomings will not make it any better. If this goes through Parliament, the risks on freedom and signalling for investors will be quite negative. Importantly, in an environment where freedom does not prevail, economic growth and prosperity will fail drastically. The only solution left for this bill is to repeal it.

Kick-Starting FDI - Industrial Zones with a Twist

Originally appeared on Echelon

By Ravi Ratnasabapathy

Liberalising Sri Lanka’s economy is a controversial topic. Different groups have different views on what this means or how far it should go, but most people will agree that attracting FDI and boosting exports is a good thing. One way to reconcile differing interests is to revisit the old concept of industrial zones – but with a twist; privately-run zones that are managed by international zone developers. The success of Japanese and Thai industrial zone developers in Vietnam and Thailand offer a model that may be replicated in Sri Lanka. Japanese zone developers offer investors a complete solution – not just the physical infrastructure but all the soft services: from company incorporation, tax registration and advice on visas for expats to introducing accounting and law firms.

COMPREHENSIVE ‘HARD’ INFRASTRUCTURE
The ‘hard’ infrastructure goes beyond just the land, power, water and waste disposal that Sri Lanka’s zones currently offer. Japanese developers offer housing (flats for expats), clinics, schools, banks, shops and even a Japanese restaurant (or canteen offering Japanese food) – sometimes even a golf course. With regard to power, the developers either have special arrangements with the utility to guarantee continuous power (with engineers dedicated 24×7 to deal with issues) or have a private power producer as a tenant in the zone. For example, in the Amata Nakorn Industrial Estate in Thailand, the developer has group companies that provide power, water, natural gas, logistics and transportation services to clients within the zone.

“What developers provide is a complete infrastructure and services model in which client companies can start operations almost on a plug-and-play basis”

SUPPORT SERVICES
The developer also offers services: continuous support during factory construction, as well as ongoing operational support—logistics, customs, recruiting, banking, courier service, security guards and fire brigade. To deal with problems, they provide a 24-hour, 365-day helpdesk. They also disseminate information on changes in laws, wage levels, etc., and hold a monthly meeting with tenant firms to discuss any common issues. Critically, soft services are provided by Japanese staff (or fluent Japanese speakers who understand their business mindset). Japanese investors tend to be more risk-averse than others, and Japanese SMEs even more so. The advantage is that, if a zone is developed with the Japanese, the standards of service would be to such exacting levels that any other investor would find it a breeze.

Thus, what developers provide is a complete infrastructure and services model in which client companies can start operations almost on a plug-and-play basis.

GETTING LAND AND DEALING WITH RED TAPE
A recent paper on industrial zones and their link to economic growth notes that access to suitable land is one of the biggest problems faced by investors. Some 80% of the land is owned by the government, and difficulties in obtaining land combined with uncertainty over land policy (constantly changing tax rates, ownership restrictions) act as a deterrent.

Interviews with investors revealed that it was relatively common for FDI projects to be stalled or cancelled due to land disputes with the government; as a result, many investors report using middlemen to obtain approvals.

Likewise, smaller firms reported operating without a licence due to issues securing formal land approvals. Industrial zones offer easy access to land, which solves this problem. It is worth noting that Sri Lanka has not built any new zones since 2000 (although some are now underway), and all the existing 12 zones are full. The lack of land may as well account for low FDI flows. The other problem is red tape when obtaining approvals, unclear or contradictory rules, multiple agencies and delays. The current zones offer some blanket approvals: environmental and land clearance, electricity, water and telecoms. However, site, building plan, environmental protection license and certificate of conformity all need separate approval, though the EPZs do offer an expedited process.

Nevertheless, a further gamut of paperwork must go through the normal approval processes: preliminary investment clearance, work permit/visa, tax registration, import and export registration, import and export licence, rules of origin certificate, chemical materials approvals, and company registration.

There is room for further simplification or speeding of approvals, which the developer will need to work with the BOI to achieve. Even if the red tape is minimised, it will still be a problem. From an investor perspective, having the developer to guide them through an unfamiliar bureaucracy in a foreign language in a strange country is a huge plus.

The Japanese philosophy is to create the environment where the investor can focus on his business, leaving all the hassle to be sorted by the developer.

COMPETITIVE FISCAL INCENTIVES AND A STABLE POLICY ENVIRONMENT
Policies in Sri Lanka are driven by short-term political considerations. Ad-hoc changes in rules and tariffs cause uncertainty, deterring investors. An export zone can be better insulated from domestic policy upheavals as it has minimal local market impact.

Industrial zones in Thailand and Vietnam offer a complete waiver of all import tariffs and VAT, as well as time-bound income tax holidays. Currently, exporters in Sri Lanka are offered similar terms for raw materials but not for capital goods, placing Sri Lanka at a disadvantage.

While Vietnam and Thailand allow the import of all construction material in zones free of tax, Sri Lanka charges PAL, NBT and duty on capital goods. Worse, key construction materials are subject to high protective tariffs and are on a ‘negative’ list, meaning that they must be sourced from the local market, at a higher cost. This raises construction costs significantly, resulting in lower returns to investors.

Sri Lanka is only one among many destinations for FDI. To succeed, we have to make a competitive offering. A comparative analysis of the tax/tariff regime is needed with competing destinations to offer an attractive overall package to investors.

“The zone developer not only develops but also markets the zone. The developer’s return is earned through rents and fees for ancillary services, so they have the incentive to ensure the zone is filled.”

ATTRACTING INVESTORS
The zone developer not only develops but also markets the zone. The developer’s return is earned through rents and fees for ancillary services, so they have the incentive to ensure the zone is filled.

One of the problems faced by Sri Lanka is the lack of diversification in exports. Exports grow not only because of volumes, but also because of new products being added to the basket. Between 2000 and 2015, Sri Lanka added just 7 new products (worth $0.1 billion) to its export basket. In contrast, Thailand added 70 new products (worth $21.8 billion) and Vietnam 48 (worth $50.4 billion). The possibility of exporting related products within Sri Lanka’s existing export basket seems exhausted, so completely new sectors must be attracted. Attracting investment into a sector in which the country has little experience is difficult. Firms tend to cluster in close geographic proximity to each other to benefit from reduced transport costs, shared inputs and productivity spillovers due to learning and technology transfers. Getting a good anchor tenant who attracts a critical mass of related firms to move is important.

A well-connected zone manager already has relationships with potential investors and can encourage their clients from other countries to extend their production networks to Sri Lanka.

For example, the Thang Long Industrial Park (Vietnam) attracted Canon, which was followed by several dozen satellite Japanese businesses. Today, the park hosts 98 businesses, 78 of which are Japanese.

OWNERSHIP MODEL
There are many ownership options for industrial zones, public, private or JV, but the model best suited at the initial stage is a public/foreign joint venture. The government, represented by the BOI, provides the land and the private developer invests in the infrastructure. As the BOI has a stake in the venture, it has an incentive to make it work. The BOI works with the developer to secure all approvals and streamline the processes. The developer manages the zone, renting the properties and providing services, and the government takes a share of this.

The good news is that Sri Lanka is taking steps in the right direction. Currently, a logistics and industrial zone is being developed in Hambantota with Chinese investment, while Rojana Corporation of Thailand, a joint venture with Nippon Steel and Sumikin Bussan Corporation of Japan, is setting up an industrial zone in Kalutara. More must be done. As at September 2016, Vietnam had 220 zones in operation with a further 105 under construction. In Thailand, the central agency operates 9 estates, plus 39 more in conjunction with the private sector, while 50 more zones are entirely private owned and operated.

To work best, they should follow the full service model described above and offer a competitive fiscal package.

Razeen Sally : Open up shipping and Tea to competition

If the outlined measures are implemented, two prominent sectors will be opened up to international competition: shipping and tea

Read the full article originally appeared on Financial Times

Sri Lanka desperately needs a new global economic strategy as part of a broader strategy for national renewal. It needs a decisive shift to markets and globalisation. A prospering, globalised market economy is the sturdiest foundation for a genuinely open society – for constitutional liberalism, the rule of law, ethnic peace and balanced international relations. Without it, all else fails. It has to be among the Government’s top priorities. The good news is that Sri Lanka has its most golden opportunity to achieve its long-advertised potential since the victory of the UNP in June 1977. 

But no economic reforms have materialised since the change of government last year. As I argued in my last Daily FT column, there should be four economic priorities for the remainder of this Government’s term: 1) “first do no harm” – no more senseless public sector salary hikes, price controls and ad hoc taxes; 2) fiscal stability, especially through tax and expenditure reforms; 3) improving the domestic business climate; and 4) trade and FDI liberalisation. They are all connected. Together they would greatly strengthen Sri Lanka’s competitiveness for higher productivity, growth and prosperity. Here I focus on the last component – a new trade policy.

Attracting FDI: Sorting out contradictions in policy

By Ravi Ratnasabapathy

The article originally appeared on the Daily News on 15 May 2015

The BOI is reportedly developing a new investment policy for Sri Lanka with the help of a panel of experts.

This is a welcome move, but the investment policy needs take a broad view in order to remove some of the impediments to investment that stem from different sources. Two in particular, the policy on land ownership by foreigners and the visas for foreigners have become a source of confusion and a barrier to investment.

Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is widely used by developing countries as a tool to solve their economic problems. FDI can create employment and result in the transfer of technology which contributes to long term growth.

In countries where unemployment or underemployment is a prevalent the creation of new jobs is a priority and a good enough reason to attract FDI.

Even more important is technology transfer, a broad term that encompasses not only equipment but technical know-how, organisational, managerial, marketing practices and other skills that the employees of a firm learn while working with a foreign partner. When employees move to other firms they take these skills with them, which results in the skills being diffused into the local labour market, improving its productivity.

The transfer of knowledge is not limited to direct employees; foreign affiliates can also diffuse technology and skills to domestic suppliers, customers and entities with which they have direct and indirect dealings.

To ensure that local inputs meet their stringent technical requirements, foreign affiliates often provide the local suppliers not just with specifications but sometimes also with assistance in raising their technological capabilities.

Naturally, as countries have become more aware of the benefits of FDI an intense 'global race' for foreign investment has developed and Sri Lanka should ensure that it is not left behind.

In order for a country to be more attractive to investors (both local and foreign), there is a need to put in place measures to ensure an enabling environment by reducing so-called hassle costs, which is why the BOI was set up as a central point for all paperwork.

Access to land is necessary for investment but recent shifts in policy on land have caused concern.

The purchase of land by foreigners was prohibited in 1963, under the Finance Act. In 1992, the Exchange Control Act repealed the Finance Act allowing the purchase of land by non-residents on payment of a 100% tax.

The growth of tourism in Galle and the southern coast since the mid 1990's, particularly the development of a new concept of 'boutique hotels' may be traced to this event. Prior to this Sri Lanka focused mainly on mass tourism, the change in land ownership policy attracted a different type of investor, who brought with them a new concept of selling to niche markets. The 100% transfer tax on land was repealed in 2002. This, together with the tax amnesty of 2003 created a boom in property.

Up to that point the policy on land followed a clear trajectory towards greater liberalisation. Then followed a series of policy flip flops. First the 100% land tax was re-imposed in 2004. The tax was initially applied only to foreign nationals but was later extended to local companies owned by foreigners.

Then an announcement was made in November 2012, during the budget speech, that the sale of land would be banned. No legislation was enacted but the land registry simply refused to register any transfers due to the uncertainty causing much annoyance and confusion amongst investors.

Parliament finally enacted the Land (Restrictions on Alienation) Act No. 38 of 2014 in October 2014. This banned the sale of land to foreigners and companies where 50% or more of the shares were held by foreigners. Foreigners were allowed to lease land but a 15% tax was to be imposed on the lease rental for the entire term of the lease.

If a firm entered into a 99 year lease, it would be required to pay 15% of the total lease rental payable over the 99 years immediately as tax. In effect the firm would be asked to pay 15 years rent, up front as tax. Moreover, the tax was applied retrospectively, from January 2013.

On a short term lease of a year or two, a 15% tax may be tolerable but for any investor who is here for the long term, the type of investor that the country needs, the tax is prohibitive. Should investment slow there may be knock-on effects on areas such as tourism. Boutique hotels, being small, sell through word of mouth, to friends and associates of the owners. If foreigners are made to feel unwelcome they, along with their friends and family, are likely to start looking elsewhere for their annual holidays and winter escapes.

The spirit of the new Act appears aimed at restricting the access to land for foreigners, first by outright prohibition on sale and second by imposing an extortionate tax on leases, creating an effective barrier to investment.

Inconsistent with such a restrictive law is provision for the Minister with the approval of cabinet to grant exemptions to the Act. Therefore in practice foreigners can buy whatever they want, provided they have the blessings of the appropriate politicians and government officials. Analysts say that such wide discretion is designed to encourage what economists call 'rent-seeking' behaviour or in common parlance, corruption. Similarly confusing are the visa rules. On one hand the country wants to attract talent from overseas, initiatives such as Work In Sri Lanka have been launched to encourage skilled people from overseas to relocate but the country still denies work visas to foreign spouses of citizens. These are foreigners already resident in the country, many have skills that can be utilised productively, yet they are denied the right to work.

Although the sale of land is restricted, the Government still seems interested in promoting the sale of flats in high rises to foreigners-flats situated on or above the fourth floor of a building are specifically exempt from the restriction on the sale of land to foreigners. It does not seem to have struck anyone in authority that foreigners may not be interested in buying flats if residency visas and dual citizenship are hard to get. If the foreign spouse of a Sri Lankan has to give up a career in order to relocate the attractiveness of the country will diminish.

Some countries do restrict ownership of land and work permits are required almost everywhere but the rules need to be sensible investment is not to be deterred. Coherence, consistency and simplicity in policy will promote investment. 

---

Ravi Ratnasabapathy trained as a management accountant and has broad industry experience in finance. He is interested in economic policy and governance issues.