GST Rise in India For Multinationals
India is a country where multinationals usually find their future quite uncertain and rapidly changing. Given the democracy that India is, with a government that considers regulation as its strong suit, such a thing can be expected. In the latest turn of events, the tax department in India has targeted or rather pointed towards the new regime of taxes that can be levied on the multinational fast food and hotel chains and tech companies. These are those multinationals or tech companies that effectively operate through the model of the franchisee in India.
But what part of their income has come under the taxmen’s lenses this time? Under scrutiny, this time is the royalty income of such multinationals. Here, the indirect tax department has emphatically raised questions on the pertinent nature of the agreement of these multinationals with their franchisees. It is here to be noted that the income tax department is effectively demanding higher GST given the nature of agreements that have been signed between the multinationals and the franchise.
But this might give rise to a pertinent question how is a multinational different from its own franchise? The answer is that it isn’t. it is here to be noted that under these franchisee models the multinationals allow Indian companies to actually operate them. These could lead to the management of hotels, entities, and stores by Indian companies under their global brand name. Against this arrangement or franchise model, these multinational companies charge a percentage of profit or you can effectively call them royalty or any other income.
But is this amount paid invariably? Not quite. This royalty tax that is being earned by these multinationals comes under the regulatory ambit of the Indian authorities. According to reports, most multinationals pay up to 12% Goods and Services Tax on such royalties. But, given the present scrutinization, the tax department is emphatically is trying to impose an 18% GST on such royalties.
Why such scrutinization?
The alleged revised GST collection of tax leads to a pertinent question what gave rise to such an analysis? It is to be noted that higher tax is being sought as the GST for payments that come under the “right to use” of the brand name is a mere 12 percent, but when this is compared to “transfer of the right to use”, the GST tax rate is actually18 percent. Thus, all the multinationals that were paying the applicable GST of 12% were because they claimed that they had not transferred the brand name or had effectively allowed the Indian entities to use their brand name permanently.
This mainly comes due to the controversy that prevails between the terms ’use rights’ and ’transfer of use rights. What actually leads to the discrepancy is that the tax department actually considers taxing both categories differently.
It is to be also noted that in India, not one but several multinational companies effectively operate under varied franchise models.
One other characteristic that is responsible for the taxman’s lenses on the multinationals is that most multinational chains mainly fast-food chains, tend to operate in grant microgeographic-based exclusivity. This effectively means that various franchise stalls can be installed at various geographical locations. Not only the fast-food franchise works or operates on this model, but mobile phone companies also try to adopt similar franchise models in terms of “exclusive brand stores” or “app stores”.
The tax department alleges that such models that are usually adopted by multinationals are used to essentially save taxes and escape the tax ambit of India. On the other hand, the tax department effectively wants to want to scrutinize the multinationals using the hardcore principles of “entity over form”.
As per the reports the newer taxes can also be levied on the software companies. Such a tax that can be levied on the multinationals will effectively lead to ambiguity in the Indian tax law that cannot be too accommodative for foreign investments. Given that India is currently recuperating from the covid debacle, FDIs are crucial for momentum.
What makes this matter even more intricate is that in this situation it is very crucial to firstly distinguish between goods, effectively known as permanent transfer, and service, known as a temporary transfer.
As aforementioned, this could materialize into a thorny issue as tax applicability is a sensitive issue for the multinationals that effectively operate in countries where such high taxes can be skipped. India being the most sought-after investment destination can put many multinationals in troubled waters with its uncertain tax laws regulating them.
It is not the first time that the Indian tax department has touched upon this sensitive issue. Previously, the Indirect Tax Department had beseeched or inquired some multinational corporations and foreign banks whether they will allow their entities and subsidiaries to use the brand name. Consequently, in the interest of the Indian entities, the inquiry was made into whether compensation had been duly paid for the use of the brand by a subsidiary.
For a long time, now many multinational companies and foreign banks have been under the tax department scanners. However, the issue was not carried forward due to the pandemic disrupting the functioning of the department. But with now the situation stabilized, the Income Tax department is ready for its sleuthing. What will be the future of the multinationals in India will be something we will decipher only in the future.
Tags: gst rise, tax department in india, new tax regime, income tax department, royalty tax, gst tax rate, gst percentage, tax regime, gst rise in india, gst slabs, gst for multinationals
It is to be noted that with increasing Competition law regulation, the system has become reductant and crippling. It with its regulatory authority has started to emphatically affect the tech companies in big ways in order to regulate their size and market dominance.
Though the pandemic might have crippled the service-oriented sector like the hospitality sector quite immensely, it is to be noted that the second source of woes in the sector is related to the government. This is due to the Government’s interventions that are significantly leading to uncertainty in the business. It can be rightly stated that given the government’s policies to revive the economy, there has been a great deal of ambiguity in the market.
Thus in pursuit of a successful partnership, NEO banks will have to definitely upgrade their systems so that safer services can be provided. Lastly, the most important cornerstone of the whole structure is data privacy. It is to be noted that for secure online transactions and payment systems, ensuring data privacy is the key.
But, as every coin has two sides, this does too. Given the rise of the BNPL sector in the finance world, it can be seen that the credit bubble in the economy is rising. This needs to be rectified by the government authorities if another economic and financial debacle is to be tackled and averted. Given, that no credit checks are being carried out in the industry, this strategy will work in the short run and will be quite accommodative to financially worse off people. But any downturn will definitely lead to defaulting and havoc in the economy.
In addition to court proceedings, another potential discouragement that has come for various other investors is that Kumar Mangalam Birla has stepped down as non-executive director and non-executive chairman of Vodafone Idea. Additionally, much to the dismay of the telecom giant and its investors, he has offered the government to buy out Aditya Birla’s group’s stake in the 
However, banks that are already marred with a huge number of defaulters like PNB will not be highly affected by such a debacle. This is due to the fact that PNB’s stake in the company is not very high, thus, it is not going to impact PNB’s balance sheet.
It is to be noted that due to the recent amendments, existing investment restrictions in investable funds of VCFs will be happily done away with. As per the newer regulations, Social Venture Funds that lead to the minimum amount of grant of 
Also, such joint accountability will lead to AIF’s compliance with the regulations. This will also help in doable compliance with the private placement memorandum and the applicable law.
Thus, in order to adequately support the COVID-19 crisis management in the current scenario and in the future, the developing governments should definitely reconsider their odious or rather authoritative broader regulatory requirements. It should be done to effectively remove any unnecessary barriers that might plague or mitigate the effectiveness of the business operations. In addition, it should be done complementary to safeguarding public goods like the environment and the overall health of human resources. 
Also in order to effectively and emphatically eliminate the unnecessary patient contact and to reduce the arduous burden on the healthcare sector, relaxation of the norms provision of telemedicine services can be done.