Makes no sense in terms of either equity or efficiency
Even if you ignore the controversy over whether or not the majority of economists present at the meeting with the finance minister on Monday wanted to levy a surcharge on the rich, the facts suggest little justification for the proposal—though it is undoubtedly true that, since these taxpayers are in the tax net anyway, a surcharge will likely fetch a tidy sum of money. The issue, however, is whether this is justified on grounds of equity and whether larger amounts can’t be got from other taxation—that is, whether the move makes sense on grounds of efficiency.
The fact that just 3.2 crore of 124 crore Indians pay personal income taxes, of course, shows just how far we have to go, and how poorly the tax network is growing—the number of direct tax assessees grew just 7.3% between FY07 and FY11 while tax collections grew exponentially due to the unprecedented economic boom, implying the taxman hasn’t done anywhere as much as he should have to increase the tax base. Under 1.8 million persons report an income of more than R10 lakh a year while over 5.2 million invested more than R2 lakh in mutual funds in FY12. A detailed look at individual taxpayers is even more instructive. While 89% of taxpayers in FY12 said they earned under R5 lakh a year, they paid around 10% of all personal income taxes (PIT) in the year; 5.5% of taxpayers reported annual incomes of between R5-10 lakh and they paid around 15% of total PIT; another 4.3% of taxpayers reported annual incomes of R10-20 lakh (the quasi-rich) and they accounted for 12% of PIT; the rich, those with incomes of over R20 lakh, accounted for just 1.3% of taxpayers and they paid 63% of all PIT. So, the rich are paying a lot of taxes. In the US, by way of comparison, the top 1% taxpayers paid 37% of income taxes and the top 5% paid 57% of income taxes.
Drill a bit deeper, and you find that while the rich (the R20 lakh-plus persons) paid an