Government has approved a proposal to permit FDI, up to 51%, under
the Government approval route, in multi-brand retail trading, subject to
specified conditions. However, the decision has been suspended, in order to
evolve a broader consensus among various stakeholders.
Safeguards built into the policy decision are:
(i) FDI in Multi Brand Retail Trade may be permitted up to 51%,
with Government approval;
(ii) Fresh agricultural produce,
including fruits, vegetables,
flowers, grains, pulses,
fresh poultry, fishery and meat products, may be unbranded.
(iii) Minimum amount to be brought
in, as FDI, by the foreign investor, would be US $ 100 million.
(iv) At least 50% of total FDI
brought in shall be invested in `backend infrastructure`, where ‘back-end
infrastructure’ will include capital expenditure on all activities, excluding
that on front-end units; for instance, back-end infrastructure will include
investment made towards processing, manufacturing, distribution, design
improvement, quality control, packaging, logistics, storage, ware-house,
agriculture market produce infrastructure etc. Expenditure on land cost and
rentals, if any, will not be counted for purposes of backend infrastructure.
(v) At least 30% of the
procurement of manufactured/processed products
shall be sourced from Indian
`small industries` which have a total investment in plant & machinery not
exceeding US $ 1.00 million. This valuation refers to the value at the time of
installation, without providing for depreciation. Further, if at any point in
time, this valuation is exceeded, the industry shall not qualify as a `small
industry` for this purpose.
(vi) Self-certification
by the company, to ensure compliance of the condition at serial nos. (iii), (iv) and (v) above, which could be cross-checked as and when
required. Accordingly, the investors to maintain accounts,
duly certified by statutory auditors.
(vii) Retail sales locations may be
set up only in cities with a
population of more than 10
lakh as per 2011 Census and may also cover an area of
10 kms around the municipal/urban agglomeration
limits of such cities; retail locations will be restricted to conforming areas
as per the Master/Zonal Plans of the concerned cities and provision will be
made for requisite facilities such as transport connectivity and parking;
(viii) Government will have the first
right to procurement of agricultural products.
In July, 2010, the
Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion had released a Discussion Paper
on the subject of ‘Foreign Direct Investment in Multi-Brand Retail Trading’,
with the aim of generating informed discussion on the subject and obtaining the
views and comments of various stakeholders, including the States.
The States of Delhi
and Manipur and the Union
Territory of Daman & Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli, have expressed
support for the policy in writing. The Chief Ministers of Maharashtra, Assam, Haryana,
Uttarakhand, Andhra Pradesh and Jammu & Kashmir,
through their press statements, have publicly endorsed the policy and asked for
its implementation.
The Government had
instituted a study, on the subject of “Impact of Organized Retailing on the
Unorganized Sector”, through the Indian Council for Research on International
Economic Relations (ICRIER), which was submitted to Government in 2008.
Main findings of
the ICRIER study are at Annexure. No
time frame can be specified in this regard.
ANNEXURE REFERRED TO IN
REPLY TO PART (f) OF THE LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 541 FOR ANSWER ON
13th AUGUST, 2012.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ICRIER STUDY
The
real GDP is expected to grow at 8-10 per cent per annum in the next five years.
As a result, the consuming class with annual household incomes above Rs. 90,000 is expected to rise from about 370 million in
2006-07 to 620 million in 2011-12. Consequently, the retail business in India
is estimated to grow at 13 per cent annually from US$ 322 billion in 2006-07 to
US$ 590 billion in 2011-12. The study shows:
•
The
unorganized retail sector is expected to grow at about 10 per cent per annum
with sales rising from US$ 309 billion in 2006-07 to US$ 496 billion in 2011-12.
•
Given
the relatively weak financial state of unorganized retailers, and the physical
space constraints on their expansion prospects, this sector alone will not be
able to meet the growing demand for retail.
•
Hence,
organized retail which now constitutes a small four per cent of total retail
sector is likely to grow at a much faster pace of 45-50 per cent per annum and
quadruple its share in total retail trade to 16 per cent by 2011-12.
•
This
represents a positive sum game in which both unorganized and organized retail
not only coexist but also grow substantially in size.
•
The
majority of unorganized retailers surveyed in this study, indicated their
preference to continue in the business and compete rather than exit.
Main
Findings
Impact
on Unorganized Retailers
•
Unorganized
retailers in the vicinity of organized retailers experienced a decline in their
volume of business and profit in the initial years after the entry of large
organized retailers.
•
The
adverse impact on sales and profit weakens over time.
•
There
was no evidence of a decline in overall employment in the unorganized sector as
a result of the entry of organized retailers.
•
There
is some decline in employment in the North and West regions which, however,
also weakens over time.
•
The
rate of closure of unorganized retail shops in gross terms is found to be 4.2
per cent per annum which is much lower than the international rate of closure
of small businesses.
•
The
rate of closure on account of competition from organized retail is lower still
at 1.7 per cent per annum.
•
There
is competitive response from traditional retailers through improved business
practices and technology upgradation.
•
A
majority of unorganized retailers is keen to stay in the business and compete,
while also wanting the next generation to continue likewise.
•
Small
retailers have been extending more credit to attract and retain customers.
•
However,
only 12 per cent of unorganized retailers have access to institutional credit
and 37 per cent felt the need for better access to commercial bank credit.
•
Most
unorganized retailers are committed to remaining independent and barely 10 per
cent preferred to become franchisees of organized retailers.
Impact
on Consumers
•
Consumers
have definitely gained from organized retail on multiple counts.
•
Overall
consumer spending has increased with the entry of the organized retail.
•
While
all income groups saved through organized retail purchases, the survey revealed
that lower income consumers saved more. Thus, organized retail is relatively
more beneficial to the less well-off consumers.
•
Proximity
is a major comparative advantage of unorganized outlets.
•
Unorganized
retailers have significant competitive strengths that include consumer
goodwill, credit sales, amenability to bargaining,
ability to sell loose items, convenient timings, and home delivery.
Impact on Intermediaries
•
The
study did not find any evidence so far of adverse impact of organized retail on
intermediaries.
•
There
is, however, some adverse impact on turnover and profit of intermediaries
dealing in products such as, fruit, vegetables, and apparel.
•
Over
two-thirds of the intermediaries plan to expand their businesses in response to
increased business opportunities opened by the expansion of retail.
•
Only
22 per cent do not want the next generation to enter the same business.
Impact on Farmers
•
Farmers
benefit significantly from the option of direct sales to organized retailers.
•
Average
price realization for cauliflower farmers selling directly to organized retail
is about 25 per cent higher than their proceeds from sale to regulated
government mandi.
•
Profit
realization for farmers selling directly to organized retailers is about 60 per
cent higher than that received from selling in the mandi
•
The
difference is even larger when the amount charged by the commission agent
(usually 10 per cent of sale price) in the mandi is
taken into account.
Impact on Manufacturers
•
Large
manufacturers have started feeling the competitive impact of organized retail
through price and payment pressures.
•
Manufacturers
have responded through building and reinforcing their brand strength,
increasing their own retail presence, ‘adopting’ small retailers, and setting
up dedicated teams to deal with modern retailers.
•
Entry
of organized retail is transforming the logistics industry. This will create
significant positive externalities across the economy.
•
Small
manufacturers did not report any significant impact of organized retail.
Policy Recommendations
On the basis of the results of the
surveys and the review of international retail experience, the study makes the
following major recommendations:
1. Modernization of wet markets through
public-private partnerships.
2. Facilitate cash-and-carry outlets,
like Metro, for sale to unorganized retail and procurement from farmers, as in China.
3. Encourage co-operatives and associations
of unorganized retailers for direct procurement from suppliers and farmers.
4. Ensure better credit availability to
unorganized retailers from banks and micro-credit institutions through
innovative banking solutions.
5. Facilitate the formation of farmers’
co-operatives to directly sell to organized retailers.
6. Encourage formulation of “private codes
of conduct” by organized retail for dealing with small suppliers. These may
then be incorporated into enforceable legislation.
7. Simplification of the licensing and
permit regime for organized retail and move towards a nationwide uniform
licensing regime in the states to facilitate modern retail.
8. Strengthening the Competition
Commission’s role for enforcing rules against collusion and predatory pricing.
9. Modernization of APMC markets as modelled
on the National Dairy Development Board (NDDB) Safal
market in Bangalore.
This
information was given by the Minister of State for Commerce & Industry Shri Jyotiraditya
M. Scindia in
written reply to a question in Lok Sabha today.
DS/GK