Gujarat NRE Coke Ltd, which has two operational mines in Australia, is looking at expanding its mining operations in the country. It is confident that the proposed Australian Bill taxing mining operations may not be passed in its current form
Industry analysts from the mining sector are closely studying the impact of the proposed super tax on mining profits on Australian mines. However, Gujarat NRE Coke Ltd, an Indian player with a strong Australian presence, is confident the law in the present form is unlikely to be implemented.
“We think that is a very early stage proposal. Within a few weeks it has attracted a lot of debate. Indications are that the Bill will have to be put on the backburner in the current form or it will have to be modified substantially for it to become acceptable,” said Arun Kumar Jagatramka, chairman and managing director (CMD), Gujarat NRE Coke, on the sidelines of a CII conference held on Monday. He also is an honorary Sydney ambassador to India.
Mr Jagatramka is of the opinion that it is quite early to discuss the issue, which has attracted a lot of attention. “Actually this is not a proposal, this was simply a committee recommendation and needs to be discussed,” said Mr Jagatramka.
The suggested resource super profit tax is on mines operating in Australia. The tax is likely to be applicable on the profits a company generates from each of its mines in Australia. Gujarat NRE Coke, through its Australian subsidiary Gujarat NRE Coking Coal Ltd (GNCCL), owns and operates two coal mines in Australia.
Going forward, the company plans to invest around $500 million in acquiring Australian mines in order to ramp up production in that country.
Overall, the company plans to increase its metallurgical (met) coke production up to 4 mtpa (million tonnes per annum) in the coming years from the present 1.25 mtpa. It also plans to increase its coking coal production from Australian mines to 6 mtpa from the current 1.2 mtpa.
National Mineral Development Corporation (NMDC) and Coal India Ltd (CIL) are among a number of other mining companies in India looking at mining opportunities in Australia.
The current crisis has thrown open the debate on the need for a new global reserve currency in case the US economy fails to make a significant turnaround and the weakness of the dollar persists
A study by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has mooted the idea of floating the rupee as a global currency, but asked the government to carefully assess the pros and cons of such action, as it may increase volatility in forex markets, reports PTI.
The idea was mooted after the global financial crisis and weakening of the US dollar triggered a debate about an alternative global currency.
The study titled, "Internationalisation of Currency: The case of the Indian Rupee and the Chinese Renminbi", also said it is quite unlikely that the dollar will lose its predominance as the global reserve currency in the foreseeable future.
"The current crisis has, however, thrown open the debate on the need for a new global reserve currency in case the US economy fails to make a significant turnaround and the weakness of the US dollar persists," it added.
The recommendations were made in a study, authored by RBI director Rajiv Ranjan and assistant advisor Anand Prakash, which said that among emerging market currencies, the yuan and the rupee are natural contenders for international currency status.
However, while China is "far from ready" to achieve global reserve currency status at the moment, India needs to meet "all the necessary preconditions...before (it) could proceed further," it said.
"There are, however, problems associated with internationalisation of the rupee as it could increase volatility of its exchange rate," the study said.
Outlining the difficulty in positioning the Indian currency as a global reserve, the study said that unlike China, which has a large current account surplus, India has a significant trade and current account deficit.
Current account balance broadly relates to exports and imports of goods and services and investment income from global trade.
Withdrawal of short-term funds and portfolio investments by non-residents could also be a major potential risk of internationalisation of the Indian rupee, it added.
"The Indian rupee is rarely being used for invoicing of international trade," the study pointed out.
It further noted that the strength exhibited by the Indian rupee in recent months and continued good performance of the Indian economy have raised the issue of greater internationalisation of the Indian rupee and India needs to proactively take steps to increase the role of the domestic currency in the region.
Internationalisation of rupee would also require India to make the rupee fully convertible. This means that rupee could be exchanged against other currencies freely. There are currently curbs on such convertibility, so far as capital accounts like stocks are concerned.
The study said, "India has so far followed a calibrated approach towards capital account liberalisation. India, at present, does not permit the rupee to be officially used for international transactions, except those with Nepal and Bhutan, though there are indications of the Indian rupee gaining acceptability in other countries.
While ostensibly towing the line on SEBI regulations, broking firms do not clearly outline alternative options to potential customers, leading them to believe that signing a general PoA is the only way to trade
Yesterday, Moneylife discussed the procedure for opening a trading account and how there is a contradiction between a company’s official stance and what their customer service executives tell potential clients.
While the earlier article was concerned with 3-in-1 bank accounts, this article concentrates on the issue of Power of Attorney (PoA).
PoA gives brokers the power to debit and credit an account and sell or buy shares in the account holder’s name without their express approval. While the firms claim that it is just a precautionary measure so that they can automatically debit or credit an account or sell shares if the client buys them without having the necessary funds, it is possible for them to trade their clients’ shares lying in demat accounts without their permission to take advantage of movement in stock prices, use the client’s money to fund the margin obligation of another, or run up large number of trades to generate higher commissions.
While the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has concrete rules on the matter that state that PoAs cover specific areas only, most brokers get clients to sign general PoAs, giving wide powers to access shares and funds of their clients.
Moneylife decided to do a survey of ten top broking firms, all of whom offered online accounts (ICICIDirect, ShareKhan, Geojit BNP Paribas, Kotak Securities, HDFC Securities, HSBC InvestDirect, Prabhudas Liladhar, SMC, Angel Broking and Indiabulls) to see which of them would let us open a trading account—either online or offline—without signing a PoA.
Online trading allows you to log on to your account from your home or office and trade shares, which automatically reflect in a bank account that is linked to the trading account and shares are deposited or taken out of a similarly linked demat account.
Offline trading involves contacting the broker or their agent, either directly through a branch or on the phone, where you have to sign an authorisation or instruction slip for each trade. It therefore cannot be misused by the broker.
However, the main problem with this type of trading is that it lacks the features offered in the online accounts such as performance trackers and real-time quotes. It is also a more cumbersome process and poses problems for people who live in remote areas where contacting the broker is an issue.
Brokerage for offline trading may be marginally higher as in the case of Geojit as the process is slightly more complicated than online trading.
Though SEBI has made it clear that brokers cannot refuse services to clients who do not sign PoAs in their favour, all the companies that Moneylife approached refused to open an online account without signing a PoA, the only option being to open an offline account. The only exception was Angel Broking, who informed us that we did not need to sign a PoA to open an online account.
While the issue of signing a PoA for an online account is debatable itself, our main concern was that we were only informed of the offline account after much prodding and arguing, with some companies not even informing us of it until we brought it up ourselves.
“A customer is free to open a bank account without a PoA. However, PoA is a regulatory requirement for online broking services,” said a spokesperson from ICICIDirect. While this statement is in tandem with SEBI guidelines, the option of an offline account is never highlighted unless aggressively pushed for by the customer, and the PoA signed for the online account is usually a general one.
The issue of general versus specific PoAs was explicitly highlighted in a SEBI circular issued on 22 April 2010 where the market watchdog took a firm stand stating several conditions and restrictions on PoAs made in favour of stockbrokers.
Among the activities that the circular prohibited were transfers of securities for off-market trades, transfer of funds from the bank account of the clients for trades executed by the clients through another stock broker, executing trades in the client’s name without their consent, and specifically, merging of a client’s balances to cover a debit in another client’s account.
While all these terms and conditions look good on paper, they can only be effective if they are enforced correctly, something which is lacking mainly due to the simple fact that investors often do not even bother to fully read the documents that they are signing.
Until investors become more aware of their rights and SEBI cracks the whip on errant brokers, no amount of circulars and notices can stop investors from being taken for a ride.