NEWSLETTER

Sign up to read weekly email newsletter

13 years 🥳 of Publication, 100k+ Stories, 30+ Countries

Legal Desire Media and Insights
Donate
Search
  • Law Firm & In-house Updates
  • Deals
  • Interviews
  • Insight
  • Read to know
  • Courses
Reading: Effect Of Demonetisation: Govt Claims Vs. Reality
Share
Aa
Legal Desire Media and InsightsLegal Desire Media and Insights
  • Law Firm & In-house Updates
  • Deals
  • Interviews
  • Insight
  • Read to know
  • Courses
Search
  • Law Firm & In-house Updates
  • Deals
  • Interviews
  • Insight
  • Read to know
  • Courses
Follow US
Legal Desire Media & Insights
Home » Blog » Effect Of Demonetisation: Govt Claims Vs. Reality
AnalysisArticles

Effect Of Demonetisation: Govt Claims Vs. Reality

By Legal Desire 8 Min Read
Share

On 8 November, 2016, Union government has announced demonetization of Rs 500 and Rs 1000 currency, which has been referred to as a masterstroke by many experts. Demonetisation is an act of stripping a currency unit of its status as a legal tender. In India, as per RBI, 87% of the transactions are cash transactions.

According to the government, the objectives of demonetisation were:

To curb rampant corruption, to unearth black money, to tackle counterfeit currency problem and to attack illicit trade and terrorist activities.

Government wanted to reduce the cash transactions and also control corruption and thereby move towards cashless society and digital India. But the Annual Report presented by RBI tells something else. The RBI Annual Report released on 30 September was much awaited by those who wanted to know the impact of last year’s demonetisation exercise.

The Annual Report by RBI shows that during the year 2016-’17, Rs 41.5 crores worth of fake currency notes in the form of old Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes were detected in the banking system. This is well above the Rs 27.4 crores of fake currency detected in these denominations in 2015-’16. It is safe to say that fake currency of Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 denominations was eliminated as those notes can no longer be used anywhere. However, fake currency of new Rs 2,000 and Rs500 notes are already being intercepted, which suggests that the elimination of fake currency is not a lasting benefit and perhaps alternative approaches are required to address this problem.

Impact On Black money:

On black money, the initial narrative by the government was that a large amount of demonetised currency will not find its way back into the system. But, The RBI Annual Report says:

“Subject to future corrections based on verification process when completed, the estimated value of SBNs received as on June 30, 2017 is 15.28 trillion.”

As the estimated value of demonetised notes was Rs 15.44 lakh crore, only about Rs 16,000 crore worth of demonetised notes did not come back. Even this may be an overestimate, as the notes to be received from Nepalese citizens, District Central Cooperative Banks and Financial Institutions are yet to be added to the total value of notes returned. So, this purported benefit did not materialise in any significant way. It cannot be said that significant losses have been inflicted upon those holding black money. From the stated objectives of demonetisation, the only variable that remains in the favour of government claim that it would lead to an increase in tax collection.

Impact on monetary policy:

The RBI formally became an inflation targeting central bank in 2016 but the liquidity surge in the banking system due to demonetisation complicated the conduct of monetary policy. There was a hike in incremental Cash Reserve Ratio – the percentage of cash deposits that banks must keep with the RBI– at 100% on deposits accrued between September 15 and November 11, and the increase in celling on the issuance of securities under Market Stabilisation Bonds.

While the increase in incremental Cash Reserve Ratio dented banks’ earnings as banks do not earn interest on the cash reserve parked with the RBI, the issuance of Market Stabilisation Bonds marked a departure from their traditional role. These bonds are generally issued to mop up the excess supply of rupees arising from the RBI’s intervention to purchase dollars. While the increase in these bonds represents an increase in quasi-fiscal to the government, the repeated auctioning of such bonds tends to push up the yields which may be contrary to the stance of monetary policy. The mopping up of the liquidity eroded the RBI’s earnings. Its expenditure on printing of currency doubled from last year. While its income for the year decreased by 23.46%, its expenditure increased by 106.8% resulting in a sharp decline in the RBI’s surplus.

IMPACT ON TERROR AND CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES

It is difficult to explain how the decision may have affected terror and criminal activities. Those scholar or people commenting that demonetisation has had a negative impact on these activities are mainly relying on anecdotal reports. It is possible that cash-based terror and criminal activities may have been disrupted for some time, as did cash-based legitimate activity, but from the data on terror-related casualties, it is not clear that there has been a significant disruption or not.

What Government claim versus reality?
Government Claim: Demonetisation will result in at least Rs 3 lakh crore not returning in the system (as it may be destroyed) by the tax evaders because they won’t be able to account for it.

Reality: 99.3% of all the old currency has been returned. But report says that Rs 15.44 lakh crore demonetised versuss Rs 15.28 lakh crore returned.

 

Government Claim:  Demonetisation of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 notes will end fake currency, and the new Rs 2000 and Rs 500 note will have inimitable exceptional security features.

Reality: The number of fake notes caught has risen by 20% since demonetization, but the total number of counterfeits account for 0.0007% of total currency in circulation. Also, 637 new Rs 2000 notes were found to be fake, breaking the myth around security features.

 

Government Claim: The demonetisation exercise was always intended to get cash into the banking system. The number of taxpayers and amount of tax collection will rise significantly.

Reality: The number of new tax filers increased by 24%. But this is not the first such instance — there have been years in the past when new tax registrations rose by up to 27%. Total income tax collections rose 20% in the financial year (FY) 2017, and over 16% in FY 2015. Demonetisation hasn’t really been a game-changer.

CONCLUSION

Demonetisation served as a negative shock to the economy, it was not very helpful as per RBI report. Growth in the quarter following demonetisation slowed to 6.1%, and to 5.7% in the next quarter (April-June). Number of small-scale businesses was adversely affected specially in unorganised sector. The lessons are clear: effective monitoring of suspicious transactions and tax reforms are a better alternative for addressing the issues that the policy-makers sought to fix through demonetisation.

Written By:

Ankesh Kumar, Campus Ambassador at Legal Desire

 

You Might Also Like

The Intersection of NFTS and Copyright: Clarifying Ownership of Digital Art

Music Sampling, Remix Culture, and the Future of Copyright Law

Why You Should Consult a Lawyer for Worker’s Compensation Claims

Tips for Dealing with a Criminal Charge: How to Protect Yourself

How Legal Regulations Affect Your Rights as an Employee

Subscribe

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!

Don’t miss out on new posts, Subscribe to newsletter Get our latest posts and announcements in your inbox.

TAGGED: demonetisation conclusion, demonetisation effect, demonetisation in india, demonetisation of currency, demonetisation result, Effect Of Demonetisation: Govt Claims Vs Reality, impact of demonetisation

Sign Up For Daily Newsletter

Be keep up! Get the latest breaking news delivered straight to your inbox.

Don’t miss out on new posts, Subscribe to newsletter Get our latest posts and announcements in your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Use and acknowledge the data practices in our Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Legal Desire September 15, 2017
Share this Article
Facebook Twitter Email Copy Link Print
Leave a comment Leave a comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

The Intersection of NFTS and Copyright: Clarifying Ownership of Digital Art

The emergence of non-fungible tokens (NFTS) provides a unique perspective in the digital art world, creating new monetisation verticals for…

Articles
May 7, 2025

Music Sampling, Remix Culture, and the Future of Copyright Law

In an era where creativity thrives through digital remixing, music sampling and remix culture are pushing copyright law into uncharted…

Articles
May 6, 2025

Why You Should Consult a Lawyer for Worker’s Compensation Claims

Workplace injuries can be both physically and emotionally overwhelming. When you suffer an injury on the job, your primary concern…

ArticlesRead to Know
October 10, 2024

Tips for Dealing with a Criminal Charge: How to Protect Yourself

Facing a criminal charge can be one of the most daunting experiences in a person's life. The stakes are high,…

Articles
September 30, 2024

For over 10 years, Legal Desire provides credible legal industry updates and insights across the globe.

  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Legal Marketing Service for Law Firms and Lawyers
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Condition
  • Cancellation/Refund Policy

Follow US: 

Legal Desire Media & Insights

For Submissions/feedbacks/sponsorships/advertisement/syndication: office@legaldesire.com

Legal Desire Media & Insights 2023

✖
Cleantalk Pixel

Removed from reading list

Undo
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Lost your password?