Hi All,
Most debates and events in Pakistan re-strengthen my view – that gravest problems in Pakistan with respect to capabilities and attitudes are the lack of clarity in thinking and rule of passions. This discussion is no different in that respect. I see this lack of clarity and rule of passion in all quarters and all sectors of national domain - policymakers, implementers, thinkers, socio-religious leaders, politicians, you name it. Even in academia.
Mostly, I try to stay quiet but the above problem prompted me to participate. Here is an analysis.
The issue is a REPORTED suggestion of a CHANGE in a POLICY INSTRUMENT of our TAXATION policy.
Please allow me to generalize the process to some crude extent, and then address a few specific objections being raised here. Then will summarize to a conclusion.
Generalization
The policy measure is to give incentives to academicians of higher education institutions HEIs.
Target? To attract qualified teaching & research faculty (professors, teachers, researchers)
Objective: to foster quality in higher education and advanced meaningful research
Goal: among many goals, are to reap fruits of knowledge and advanced technology in nation building and national security, and to enhance public standard of living.
To clearly see the value of a policy measure or instrument,
· All policy measures should aim to enforce a policy target. Even the reversal of a policy measure should also have a clear target to achieve.
· All policy measures should be accompanied by monitoring mechanisms. Unchecked or unmonitored policy measures are loop-holes and lead to corrupt societies because they keep avenues of embezzlement open.
· Better monitoring instruments (studies, data, analytical measures, etc) are imperative to gauge clearly defined level of effectiveness.
· Quantitative assessments are more prone to objectivity than qualitative assessments. Therefore, we should preferably look for quantifiable impacts of any policy decision.
· As this issue is just a reported suggestion, so nothing has been formally claimed to be the goal of this decision. But most likely it would be increasing federal revenues.
The Underlying Idea:
The underlying idea behind this policy instrument is the recognition of dearth of meaningful technological manpower in our HEIs resulting into a lack of technical problem solving in our national affairs. (Reliable indicators should attest this notion. Like low number of publications, less terminal degree holders, less number of doctorates produced in advanced fields, too few patents, etc).
Obviously, these are my assessments and are not formal statements. But perhaps something of that sort is been what is recognized nationally.
Reversing any policy measure should be considered if;
1. There are serious impediments in proper and complete enforcement of a policy measure (implementation problems)
2. This incentive is not yielding what it was designed to yield (non-performance clause), or
3. If the goal has already been achieved (goal accomplishment) AND the goal is expected to stay unaffected by the discontinuity of this measure (emerging independence of this factor); or
4. Other alternatives exist that are less costly/ harming (better alternatives clause)
5. Other financial or administrative crisis prevents us from its continuity (unsustainability crisis)
Major objections that have been raised against this tax-incentive (measure)
Some folks have asked for its removal citing one or more of the following:
a) alleged financial corruption of its beneficiaries (I know those who take checks back from students .... class of allegations ….)
b) ineffectiveness (what's their productivity? ... type of chants)
c) equality should be ensured across the board in taxation (all should be taxed equally ... objections)
d) giving tax-incentives by challenging the worth of the work clause in deciding who deserve to get tax-incentives (my job is more important/ valuable/ holier/ I am an engineer… etc)
Analysis of Objections
Point a) cites implementation problems to argue against this tax-incentive. First, are these proven allegations? Secondly, has the implementation been that complete a failure?
b) Invokes non-performance clause. It should be substantiated with reliable objective data rather than pedestrian claims.
c) and d) completely ignore the underlying cause of this incentive - the dearth of highly qualified personnel in the country due to lack of qualified faculty. Instead they hit the target of this measure.
If we agree to the goal, and are convinced that the designed target will be effective to achieve this goal, then attacking the goal and/or the target is pointless.
c) asks for equality in a domain where we need to fix a dearth. Additionally, it fails to recognize that taxation in nowhere in the world follows one-size-fits-all methodology. In civilized world, you do not tax a poor citizen with the same rate as being taxed from a millionaire.
d) Invokes the significance-of-work clause which hinges on superiority/inferiority complexes of mind.
Conclusion
If we see a deficiency/dearth of quality faculty in higher education institutions, and if we believe that such a faculty is imperative for national growth and security, then we should evaluate ways of incentivizing this sector, as well as monitor the impacts of this incentive objectively and constantly. After all, this is not and should not be an eternal tax exemption to faculty in HEIs.
If we do not see any valid reason to reverse this measure, then we should think of keeping this incentive in place. However, effectiveness of this policy instrument can and should be evaluated and revisited constantly and more carefully.
Disclaimer---- I had never been nor will be a beneficiary of this incentive or of its removal. All the above is an informal personal assessment to clarify thoughts on this issue in this discussion thread. Pardon me for a rather long reply but you will only get what I mean completely if you read it all. Thank you for that.
With Kind regards,
Khayal Naqvi
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Dr. Asad Naeem <asadnaeem@yahoo.com> wrote:
I donx27;t know where People get their facts from.
Pointing fingers at able gentlemen when the reason for incomplete projects maybe far from lack of competency.
I donx27;t have anything against engineers, I am one as well, But engineering graduates and phd professors have different roles if one looks closely (industry and academia). You can tax both or not tax them ,that I donx27;t care about, we are not here for tax breaks to be honest.
Lastly
Try getting an ICT project and you will be surprised at the level of checks and balances, and the level of expert scrutiny (both internal and external) of the proposal before it even comes near acceptance.
I think ICT is a breath of fresh air for all of us, itx27;s sad to see people so carelessly speaking ill of it.
Regards
Asad Naeem (PhD)
Hod CS
Air University
Islamabad
From: ali mahmud <alimahmud402@yahoo.com>;
To: pakgrid@yahoogroups.com <pakgrid@yahoogroups.com>;
Subject: Re: [pakgrid] Withdrawal of tax exemption: Teachers, researchers berate decisionSent: Fri, Jun 21, 2013 12:14:08 PM
-First of all, every common man is not paying tax. Get your figures right. There are more than 3 Million eligible tax payers who are not paying their taxes according to FBR.
- If all of the University Teachers according to you are businessmen then based on the current proposed business friendly budget, they should be considered as businessmen and treated as such.
- How much exactly is that "Huge Amount" from ICT funded projects? Would you like to give us some actual figures? Realistically speaking, a lot of the teachers still prefer to give classes in other Universities and get even a higher amount compared to what they get if they would opt to involve themselves in the hassle of project management.
- People working on ICT funded projects do not get by any means amounts of 15000 - 20000. I have seen project staff getting salaries in excess of 65000 Rs/ month on the basis of an MS degree. You can check the HR remuneration document on the website of National ICT R & D Fund. If you were getting an amount of 15000 Rs. then there might have been serious issues of competency at your end or maybe you hold an MS in Accounting.
- As far as strict checks on the project outcomes is required, I agree with that point. However, i will seriously encourage you to submit a viable proposal to ICT R & D and if successful, try to run a project yourself. You will get to know how well the wheel rolls.
Lastly, I would advise you to act a bit maturely and not to paint everyone with the same brush. There are good and bad people in every fraternity, may it be teachers or anyone else. So spare us your sanctimonious platitudes and empty rhetoric and do a little better homework with some facts and figures if you are in the mood to malign an entire community in the future.
From: Afzal Khan <kafzal599@yahoo.com>
To: "pakgrid@yahoogroups.com" <pakgrid@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: [pakgrid] Withdrawal of tax exemption: Teachers, researchers berate decision
AOA All,
First of all if every common man is paying tax, than it is greater responsibility of teachers to pay tax in full also.
I had worked in the university infrastructures also and my conclusion is "These days these so called university teachers are no more than businessmen, who do business on the basis of their profession(which is considered pure)".
According to government policy, if some one is working in an government organization, then he can not work in any other. But this groups gets pays from the universities and beside this, they get huge amount from projects being funded by ICT or other organizations. Beside this, the people working on those projects merely receive 15000 to 20000 Rs and that too after being an MS graduate. If these people demand such concessions from government, then there should also a minimum level being set the people working on the projects.
The major part of the amount dedicated for the projects, goes to the corrupt people(who are sitting in every other university). There should also be strict check on the fulfillment of the project requirements. Like the university, from which Dr Amir Hayat belongs, a project with the title Software Defined Radio of worth approx 15million was assigned to it in 2008. Had it completed yet. Similarly, in 2009 same university got the USB project of worth 35 million, had it completed. and there are many other examples like these.
Similarly, many of the Project Directors are reported to illegally transfer project's amount in some students accounts and then getting it back in form checks. The point is that teachers have to set high moral examples, not like these.
Regards,
From: Sheikh Usman N. <usman.nadeem@gmail.com>
To: pakgrid@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: [pakgrid] Withdrawal of tax exemption: Teachers, researchers berate decision
Absolutely! I even go one step further. Engineers are more susceptible to brain drain than teachers. If this is the logic, then we also need tax break.On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 2:39 PM, SHEIKH IMRAN-UL- HAQUE <sihaque@engro.com> wrote:It has a different meaningU should pay ur dues to have the right to vote and be representedAll need to taxed fairlyTeachers, lawyers, engineers , business and agriculturist
Imran
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 7:00 PM, SHEIKH IMRAN-UL- HAQUE
<sihaque@engro.com> wrote:
>
> No representation without taxes
Didn't you vote last month?
--
Sheikh Usman N.
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight with you, then you win"
-Gandhi
http://sheikhusman.blogspot.com/
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (40) |
No comments:
Post a Comment