IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jda/journl/vol.51year2017issue1pp411-421.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Augmenting Revenues From User Charges in Indian Cities: A Case for Delhi

Author

Listed:
  • Simanti Bandyopadhyay
  • Debraj Bagchi

    (Shiv Nadar Universaity, India
    Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, India)

Abstract

User charges have often received significant attention in the literature on local government finances. From the High Powered Expert Committee Report on Indian Urban Infrastructure and Services (HPEC 2011) to the Fourteenth Finance Commission of India, all major policy documents have suggested that levy of user charges should be a major reform agenda for augmenting the revenues from the non-tax sources. Along these lines, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) in the budget of 2011 proposed revenue increases from six sources. While some of these relate to modifying the rates of the existing revenue components, there are also suggestions for certain new components to be introduced. Among the components for which hikes from the existing rates are proposed are "parking fees", "one-time street charges", "property taxes", "fees from mobile towers". Among the new components are the "conservancy charges" and the "congestion charges". However due to political unwillingness, none of these recommendations were implemented. This paper attempts to assess the potential financial gains that MCD would have realised, had these recommendations been implemented, even with moderation. Using a simulation based approach with MCD budget data, three scenarios are created: conservative, moderate and optimistic. In the "optimistic scenario", it is assumed that all the recommendations are implemented with goals of property tax reforms also being met, the moderate scenario conforms to the recommendations, and in the conservative scenario, it is assumed that the norms are implemented with some moderation. The simulated revenues and other key indicators of fiscal health in each scenario are compared with those derived from the data available. The main findings suggest that if the recommendations were implemented, MCD could have experienced an increase in the own revenues in the range of 19 to 21 per cent and an increase in the total revenues by around 13 to 15 per cent. Further, instead of meeting 70 per cent of current expenditures in the existing state, own revenues could have covered 77 to 85 per cent of current expenditures. Similarly, the capacity of the total revenues to meet the total expenditures would have also risen from 69 per cent (in the existing state) to about 74 to 80 per cent. Due to a rejection of these proposals, these gains could not be realised. However, in recent years it has been observed that the corporations in Delhi have been making efforts to implement some of these recommendations in varied forms. The hikes in the parking fees in 2014 and increases in the one time parking charges in 2015 in Delhi are examples of such initiatives taken by the corporations to augment their resources.

Suggested Citation

  • Simanti Bandyopadhyay & Debraj Bagchi, 2017. "Augmenting Revenues From User Charges in Indian Cities: A Case for Delhi," Journal of Developing Areas, Tennessee State University, College of Business, vol. 51(1), pages 411-421, January-M.
  • Handle: RePEc:jda:journl:vol.51:year:2017:issue1:pp:411-421
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://muse.jhu.edu/article/654415
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Urban Finance; User Charges; Property Tax; Revenue Potential; Expenditure Requirements; Service Delivery;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H7 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations
    • H71 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • H72 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Budget and Expenditures

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jda:journl:vol.51:year:2017:issue1:pp:411-421. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Abu N.M. Wahid (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cbtnsus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.