What to Read in Indian Express Editorial( Topic and Syllabus wise)

Editorial 1: GST 2.0: What Changes and Its Implications

Context:

The GST was restructured recently to two slab structure. It will help solving problems such as inverted duty structure, rate rationalization dispute reduction. Now the process for streamlining registration, returns and refunds needs to be undertaken.

Background:

• The Goods and Services Tax (GST), introduced in India in July 2017, was a landmark indirect tax reform aimed at unifying the fragmented tax system by subsuming multiple central and state taxes.
• Over the years, GST has undergone several revisions, with the most recent set of changes—often referred to as “GST 2.0”—focusing on making the system simpler, consumer-friendly, and more growth-oriented.
• While these changes promise to leave more disposable income in consumers’ hands and thereby spur consumption, challenges such as the inverted duty structure and compliance burden remain.

Key Changes in GST 2.0:

• Exemptions for Households and Health: Life insurance and health insurance premiums for individuals have been exempted from GST. Essential items such as hospital room rents up to ₹5,000 have been kept outside GST’s ambit. Preventive health checkups and gym/health club services continue to attract GST but at a reduced rate of 12% from the earlier 18%.
• Rate Revisions: Precious stones such as diamonds are taxed at 0.25%, while gold, silver, and platinum continue at 3%.Rough diamonds and processed diamonds are brought under a 1.5% slab. Food and beverages such as milk products, biscuits, and non-alcoholic drinks have seen rationalization. Footwear, packaged processed food, residential buildings, and non-luxury consumer goods fall under reduced rates.
• Wider Applicability: About 56 categories of goods, including mostly food items, agricultural machinery, and hydrogen vehicles, are included in lower or exempted slabs. Non-standard bricks and other essential inputs for construction remain within concessional rates. Luxury goods such as yachts and aircraft for personal use continue under higher tax brackets.
• Household Consumer Benefits: Items of everyday use—TVs, air-conditioners, footwear, and packaged food—witnessed tax cuts, boosting household budgets. As a result, disposable income is expected to rise, leading to increased consumption, especially in urban areas.

The Inverted Duty Structure Problem:

• One of the persisting issues in the GST regime is the inverted duty structure. This occurs when inputs used in production are taxed at higher rates than the finished goods, leading to accumulation of unused tax credits.
• For example: Inputs for bicycles and solar modules attract higher tax rates, while final products are placed in a lower GST slab.
• The government has promised to rationalize such cases gradually by increasing GST on the final product to match input levels.
• This issue particularly affects small businesses, exporters, and manufacturers who face working capital blockages.

Impacts of these changes:

• Boost to Consumption: Lower GST on daily-use items increases household purchasing power. By reducing the burden on essential goods and services, it aims to stimulate demand, which in turn boosts production and growth.
• Compliance Simplification: Taxpayers, especially small and medium businesses, expect reduced compliance costs due to clearer classification of goods and services. Rationalization of slabs also reduces disputes over interpretation and classification.
• Sectoral Impact:
• Healthcare: Relief to individuals through exemptions on insurance premiums and hospital rents.
• Real Estate: Rationalized rates on residential buildings likely to reduce construction costs.
• Agriculture:Reduced GST on farm equipment and inputs may support farmers.
• Luxury goods: Continued higher slabs ensure progressive taxation.
• Revenue Considerations: Though rate cuts may initially reduce government revenue, the expected increase in consumption and economic activity is projected to offset losses through higher tax buoyancy. According to data for FY 2024-25, the rate rationalization is expected to lead to the loss of Rs.40, 000 crores for the GST revenue.

Challenges and Concerns:

• Despite attempts, the GST structure remains unresolved for several items. Businesses face working capital shortages and inefficiencies.
• States worry about loss of revenue due to frequent tax cuts and exemptions. Compensation from the Centre may become contentious again.
• Effective relief requires timely notification, compliance systems, and clarity in interpretation. Many businesses, especially MSMEs, continue to struggle.

Way Forward:

• GST 2.0 reflects the government’s intent to simplify taxation, enhance consumer welfare, and boost economic growth. Exemptions in healthcare, rationalization of slabs, and reduced rates on essential goods will increase disposable income and consumption.
• However, challenges of inverted duty structures, state revenue concerns, and multiple slabs need systematic resolution.
• For India’s indirect tax system to fully realize its potential as a unified market mechanism, further reforms toward simplification, compliance ease, and fiscal balance are essential.

 

Editorial 2: Too Loud to Ignore: Why Indians Should Care About Noise Pollution in Cities

Context:

Noise pollution is increasingly becoming an urban health crisis in India. With rapid urbanization, rising vehicle density, and a booming construction sector, Indian cities are witnessing unprecedented levels of sound that exceed permissible limits.

Understanding Noise Pollution:

• Noise pollution is defined as unwanted or harmful sound that disrupts human or animal life. It is defined as an air pollutant under Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981.
• The World Health Organization (WHO) identifies noise as one of the major environmental pollutants, linking it to various health issues ranging from hearing loss to cardiovascular disorders.  WHO recommends residential daytime exposure not exceeds 55 Decibel.
• India’s Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000have set limits from 55 dB from 6 am to 10 pm and 45 dB at night.  Traffic pollution in India often crosses 70 dB.
• Despite its growing impact, noise pollution often remains an overlooked dimension of urban governance and public health planning.
• Unlike air or water pollution, which has visible markers, noise pollution is largely intangible, making it less perceptible but equally damaging. It arises from multiple sources—vehicular traffic, industrial operations, loudspeakers, construction activities, and urban nightlife.
• The cumulative effect of these sources has made many Indian cities, particularly metros, hotspots of high decibel exposure.
• The health implications of noise pollution are profound. Prolonged exposure can lead to auditory issues such as tinnitus and permanent hearing loss.
• Beyond hearing, noise acts as a chronic stressor. Studies have linked elevated noise levels to hypertension, heart disease, sleep disturbances, and impaired cognitive development in children.
• In addition, it can reduce productivity, exacerbate mental health problems, and diminish overall quality of life.

Three Failures:

• The Noise monitoring and enforcement mechanisms are weak, and responsibility scatters across multiple authorities. There are no structural reforms; just symbolic gestures such as noise reduction limits in Green zones are adopted. This results in a chronic, unaddressed public health crisis.
• Noise levels are not properly monitored Air pollution is effectively monitored using satellites and low cost sensors. Such measurements of noise data are sporadic, reactive, and incomplete.
• Noise pollution persists and it is increased due to structural and cultural barriers. Unlike air pollutants such as Smog, Noise is even not regarded as harmful. Many citizens even tolerate and participate in noise pollution by carrying out religious processions, noisy celebrations.
• Noise pollution governance is fragmentedin India with piecemeal approach. Pollution control boards, municipalities, and police all have partial jurisdiction, limited resources, and they have weak incentives to act.

Path Ahead:

• Addressing urban noise pollution requires a multi-pronged approach.
• First, robust monitoring systems, including real-time decibel mapping and mobile applications for public reporting, are essential.
• Second, stricter enforcement of noise regulations, along with graduated penalties for repeated violations, will deter excessive noise generation.
• Third, urban planning must integrate noise mitigation measures, such as buffer zones, green belts, and soundproofing in schools and hospitals.
• Fourth, public awareness campaignsshould emphasize the health risks of noise and promote community participation in reducing exposure.
• Finally, technological innovationscan play a pivotal role. Electric vehicles, quieter construction machinery, soundproofing materials, and intelligent traffic management systems can all help reduce urban noise.
• Equally important is a cultural shift toward respecting community sound norms, particularly during festivals and public events.

Equity in Noise pollution control policy:

• The Right to quiet must be a baseline of public health. It must not be treated as a privilege.
• The neglect of air pollution has magnified the harm and widened the inequity. This has exacerbated the health, mental conditions. Air purifiers are treated as luxury.
• The equity must be upheld while framing interventions to tackle noise pollution. Those most exposed to noise must have means to protect themselves.
• There must be political will and civil efforts to curb this menace. The law already named it as an air pollutant.
• We must integrate the noise pollution measures into clean air agendas, embedded in urban planning, and must be made the priority for public health.  We must reclaim the basic human right to quiet.

Way Forward:

Noise pollution is a silent yet pervasive urban threat. Unlike other environmental hazards, its effects are often invisible but insidious, gradually undermining human health and well-being. Concerted efforts by policymakers, urban planners, industry stakeholders, and citizens are essential to reclaim urban sound escapes and safeguard the health and quality of life of city dwellers.