UIDAI sets 1 million per day target for unique ID enrolment from Oct

UIDAI chairman Nandan Nilekani said plans are on track to issue Aadhaar numbers to 600 million people in three to three-and-half years

Bangalore: One million Indian residents are expected to enrol for unique identity (Aadhaar) number every day from this October, reports PTI quoting chairman of Unique Identity and Development Authority of India (UIDAI) Nandan M Nilekani.

"As UIDAI scales up the systems both at the back-end by adding more technologies and at the front by adding more enrolment stations, it is confident of achieving this goal," he said.

Speaking at a conference with the theme 'Next Generation Service Delivery-Enabled by Aadhaar', organised by NASSCOM and UIDAI, Mr Nilekani said as of now 95 lakh (9.5 million) people have been issued with Aadhaar numbers.

Another UIDAI official said the figure is expected to cross one crore today.

Mr Nilekani said plans are on track to issue Aadhaar numbers to 600 million (60 crore) people in three to three-and-half years. He said the entire enrolment infrastructure would stabilise in the next few months, adding, UIDAI has built a massive biometrics-based capabilities.

"We are very comfortable that in the next few months, we will have critical mass of people around the country who will have Aadhaar numbers with them," he said.

He said UIDAI would create for the first time in the country a national devices' infrastructure, which is inter-operable.

Mr Nilekani said devices compliant with Aadhaar standards-whether they are in bank branches, or kirana stores or post offices or in schools or public health centres or anywhere-would be inter-operable.

This means that one can withdraw money from a PC in post office from one's bank account elsewhere.

"This kind of inter-operability across different delivery points...is the first time it is going to happen (in the country)," Mr Nilekani said.

He said Aadhaar numbers would help people in having 'portable health records'-that logs their visits to hospitals-which can be 'locked and unlocked' only by them so that the privacy is maintained.

UIDAI would create a national online identity management platform. With Aadhaar numbers, people have online and 'portable' identity which can be authenticated and verified by across the internet and through mobile phones.

"Aadhaar will increasingly be the basic 'Know Your Customer' (KYC) for a wide variety of products and services," he said.

He said RBI and the finance ministry have already notified Aadhaar numbers to be KYC for opening bank accounts, The Department of Telecom has notified it to be KYC for getting SIM card or phone connection and Oil companies for LPG connection.

Sikkim and Tripura have notified that Aadhaar would be the basis for proof or identity, house address and for availing government services.

Increasingly in the next two-three years, Aadhaar would be the KYC to access a wide variety of products and services, Mr Nilekani said. "In other words, if you have Aadhaar number, that's sufficient proof of identity, sufficient proof of address and sufficient KYC to access that."

User

COMMENTS

RNandakumar

5 years ago

Sorry the word prevent should be replaced by enable. Thanks

RNandakumar

5 years ago

Congrats to Mr.Nilekani on UDAI. The AAdhaar numbers should be first distributed to East Bengal, Arunachal Pradesh and other border states first. This would prevent the respective state govts in identifying true Indians and reduce their burden on distributing the resources to really deserving persons of Indian Nationality.

REPLY

Ashok

In Reply to RNandakumar 5 years ago

Sorry to say, Nandakumar, but you failed to read between the lines. The UID numbers (not cards believe me) are being issued to all residents and not all Indian citiens. This means, anyone who is residing in India (including Bangla Deshi's, Pakistanis, Nepalese etc) can easily get the Aadhaar numbers and then using this can get a ration card, bank account and other benefits.

RNandakumar

In Reply to Ashok 5 years ago

Thanks Ashok. Will not the govt check whether one is a resident or a migrant before issuing such numbers?

Will incentives to mutual fund distributors have much of an effect on fund inflows?

It is not just banning entry loads in haste by SEBI that has led to reduced interest in mutual funds. There are many other reasons which exchanges and SEBI tend to ignore

In August 2009, then Securities and Exchange Board of India chief, CB Bhave, introduced the ban on entry load. Nearly two years later, after an outflow of Rs19,549 crores from equity funds (between August 2009 and May 2011) and a decline of 22.61 lakh equity-oriented mutual fund accounts (April 2009 to March 2011), the new SEBI chief, UK Sinha, is planning to incentivise distributors in order to provide "organised and sustainable growth of the mutual fund industry".

This 'experiment' by SEBI has cost the fund industry dearly. But incentivising distributors is just part of the solution to the problem of fund flows. The fact is, retail investors are not interested in equity markets for a variety of reasons, a fact that the stock exchanges and SEBI refuse to acknowledge. SEBI will have to look into other issues as well, attract investors to the fund industry and the securities market as a whole.

One of the main objectives of SEBI is to regulate and develop the securities market. But the apex body has fallen short in doing that and Mr Sinha has admitted as much.

The entry load for mutual funds was banned in order to make it fairer. The move was intended to reduce the cost for investors. But, was the cost for starting investing the only reason for the lack of retail participation? Unfortunately, the SEBI board failed to look at other factors. Among some of the other factors that deter retail investors from putting money in the markets are the unexplained volatility in the market, manipulation of IPOs, poor performance of 40% of funds, several counts of mis-selling, lethargic complaint redressal and lack of financial awareness. A majority of the population, therefore, finds it safer to keep cash lying in savings accounts or fixed deposits. In 1990-91, 32% of household savings was invested in bank deposits. Now that figure has climbed to 51%.

SEBI made the decision to ban entry load in haste, without adequate research, survey or discussions with investors. It failed to judge the cause of the problem. Will SEBI make the same mistake all over again?

We know that the number of equity folios has declined along with the huge redemption of funds, but is the lack of incentives to distributors the main cause for this? Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive research to support the case. For sure, this is one of the reasons, but the board has to address other issues as well.

The SEBI chief also plans to look into the regulation of distributors, disclosure of track record of fund managers by asset management companies, the break-up of institutional and retail money of fund houses and simplifying the KYC norms across its domain. These are good signs that the board intends to take active steps towards regulating the market. But whether the implementation of these plans will attract retail investors back is to be seen.

Moneylife has published numerous articles pointing out the declining retail participation in mutual funds. You may be interested to read: ("Retail interest in equity mutual funds is shrinking";) ("Huge mutual fund outflow points to a much deeper malaise")

User

COMMENTS

Krishna Gopal Gupta

5 years ago

It is true and well established fact that regulators like SEBI, IRDA are biased ones and are making decisions in favour of institutes such as banks, post? How these regulators will control the mis-selling is yet to be seen. But majority of mis-selling is happening at banks only. They wish to collect fees from distributors and to make them week financially had enhanced fees and renewal fees many folds. They do not listen to the voices raised by individual distributors. It is really a joke that most of the insurance companies have been established by banks (Owners), wish to remain in the business of distribution (Distributors) and wish to avail services of independent distributors at FREE of COST as majority of the plans do not have any commission beyond 5 years and he has to serve the customer, how? No body seems to be bothered. I had heard that commission in developed countries are more due to toughest job of selling insurance but in India, it is just opposite. No adequate reward for selling insurance.

Suhas Varadkar

5 years ago

Exactly Stancy. They dont want retail to join Stock Market & Mutual Fund Industry and Finance Ministry wants the retail to stay with Banks/RBI Bonds/Insurance /postOffice, so that Govt can get easy/cheap/disturbance free money. Thats why all these hassles for MF industry / Investors / Distributors. These useless policy changes will surely kill the morale of die hard investors/distrubutors.

Stany Dsouza

5 years ago

I don't think AMCs will get their business back even if they start entry load and pay commission to distributors because ofter the entry load ban many distributors started to sell other financial products. Some of them are happy with their present business. For mere 2.5% upfront commission they may not sell mutual Fund products again.

REPLY

rajivahuja

In Reply to Stany Dsouza 5 years ago

I think you are correct in your observation that mere entry load is not going to solve MF's problems.They should be accountable as well then.

Suhas Varadkar

5 years ago

SEBI was too fast in its act to abolish commission for MF Distributors, whereas it did not considered the fact that MF products are the most difficult to sale considering non guarantee of return of capital or returns. On the top of that it wants distributors to charge for such advice, which itself is a joke, especially when there is loads of commission paid in othe financial products like Insurance/Post Office etc. Requirement of KYC is another hurdle is selling MF products, there is no level playing field if u consider other financial products. How can retail investors turn to market/MF with such tactics?

Roopsingh

5 years ago


Roopsingh 7 seconds ago in reply to Rajivahuja
Dear sir Rajiv ahuja,why u blaming mutual fund advisors for selling ULIPS when debate is for entry load which exists in MF industry-why dont u ask IRDA to remove commission from LIC policies?
and why u blaming all MF advisors as culprits when SEBI has no gudelines for fund managers and their performance?better ask SEBI to make similar guidelines of preformance based renumeration for AMC guys and not to target distributors-
again u have been talking about commission as not a legitimate right of distributors-dear sirji please tell me a single product in the world where a professional or businessguy asks for 2 different cheques for a single service or product-have u ever paid 2 cheques to mobile shopwala one for Nokia co and other for shop owner?
have useen any salaried person asking his employers not to pay him salary but should go and ask his customers to pay him salary or service charge(i am not talking about undertable bribe).
if not anywhere in the world such system exists then why everyone asking to remove entry load-
and though MF advisors have not objected for dual system of direct and through distributor route-then why you bent on removal of entry load-
do you want to take all lunches free of cost (only for MF and you will pay all fees for other financial or professional services?)

RNandakumar

5 years ago

There was no real intention of helping the investors. Otherwise then SEBI chairman would not have experimented with a budding industry that was trying to wean investors away from the boring products of National Savings and Insurance into an Equity Oriented ,most transparent and and fairly safe investments. Instead of controlling the asset managers SEBI negatively targeted mutual fund distributors. And is paying the price for it now. SEBI in effect has killed the initial and enthusiam and vigour of the whole tribe of distributors many of whom had to adopt alternative source of revenue going away from mutual fund distribution. SEBI had killed the proverbial golden egg laying duck.

PANKAJ

5 years ago

Sebi will learnt lot in due course. They will start with say 100 per form and term it as transaction cost. If an honest person wants to sell mf ... he has to book 5 clients to earn 500/- a day. Damage is already done and crack has already been created. Now let them take stand as how this is incentivised. I await who pays this incentive fund house or investor. If it is left to investor we are back to square one. Mfs can't pay per transaction. Let's see how things move.

manoja

5 years ago

Will incentive to mutual fund distributors have much of an effect on fund inflows??? If ever there is a contest for dumb questions, this would be contending for the top spot!!!

Any moron will tell that when there is an incentive for performance, the performance will improve. Same applies to mutual fund industry too. Unless the guy who goes out in the market to sell the funds gets his dues, you can see no performance from him. Why should he? He is making the investor rich, mutual fund houses rich, the fund manager rich but he is left with nothing!!! Is there any other situation as skewed as this??

I still remember the time when entry load was abolished. I had recruited 6 fresh MBAs to market financial products in my firm. But unfortunately, even before they could join, I had to write regret letters informing that I could not take them on since there was no revenue generation from this activity. With Rs.15,000 as monthly salary plus the incentive, there was no way I could afford to take them in my company without relevant commission payouts. Consequently, 6 jobs that could have been created was lost.

Even now I am not hopeful about the incentive structure the SEBI Chairman is talking about. Once you make people used to free lunches, they do not want to pay for the same at a later date. Interesting scenarios in coming times. Let us wait and watch.

REPLY

rajivahuja

In Reply to manoja 5 years ago

Is 2.25% entry load justified.? I think SEBI did the right thing by banning them.

Pankaj

In Reply to rajivahuja 5 years ago

Rajivji do u know 2% / 4% commission on postal RD ( a debt product ) Return (IRR ) Last 15 Year is 1996 to 2000 is 9.76% , 2001 to 2005 7.31% & 2006 to 2010 6.54 % Vs Mutual Fund SIP same period return ( IRR )is 20.68% 70.26% 21.50%

manoja

In Reply to rajivahuja 5 years ago

The question of justification can be debated endlessly. For instance, what is the justification for yearly increments to salaried people when they continue to do the same job? Are they bringing anything new to the table? Or for that matter, what is the justification for the year end bonus? Are they not getting salary to perform their duty? Why extra incentive at the end of the year? Another question. Every salaried employee gets a certain number of days of paid leave in a year. Why should he be paid when he has taken leave?? Employee benefits, right??

From where is this money coming to pay the salary & other benefits to the employees? From the consumers who pay for the product, right? Why not cut down the salaries & benefits so that the final product price is reduced thereby passing on the benefit to the end user???

Everyone needs to be compensated for the work they are doing. Somebody gets it in the form of Salary and some body gets it in the form of commission or brokerage.

rajivahuja

In Reply to manoja 5 years ago

Is entry load equaliant to employee benefit?

Santosh Pawar

In Reply to manoja 5 years ago

I dont agree with you on what you say as Free Lunch. You must be knowing that Mutual Funds charge something called Expense Ratio on investments made via them, no matter if I get positive or negative returns.

Manoja

In Reply to Santosh Pawar 5 years ago

Santosh,

When I said Free Lunch, the context was the free service given by the distributors to the investors. As of now, if I come to you to sell a mutual fund, I dont get any money from you directly. Entire amount of investment you do will get into the fund. When people are used to this free service, any fee based service, they will definitely oppose.

Expense ratio is altogether a different thing. The expenses incurred to run the fund house is setoff has to come from somewhere? Since investors are getting the benefit of the investment, it is only natural that they have to bear the expenses.

Roopsingh

5 years ago

I am amazed to read a SOFT tone for Mr U K Sinha in this article-he is in the office since last 4 months-but still nothing concrete has been done so far-everything is in dolldrums-if he really intended o revive things he can do them without much debate-he can reinvent the idea of entry load along with direct investing without entry load(who will question him for his moves?),IRDA never removed the commission for insurance selling,neither corporate bonds-then why all SADHUS (godman) accumulated in SEBI and that too only to benifit investors of mutual funds only(as if mutual funds are run for charity of small people only) and that IFAs should give only SEVA to them.

REPLY

Vikas Gupta

In Reply to Roopsingh 5 years ago

I also agree that Rules for all Financial Products should be similar whether it is Life Insurance Policies, Mutual Funds or Postal Schemes. The Persons buying/ selling these products should get similar incentives & Services.

Pankaj Khandelwal

In Reply to Vikas Gupta 5 years ago

Mr.U.K.Sinha pls be note that 2% & 4% commission on Postal RD ( a dabt product ) PLS STOP THAT IMMEDIATELY IF U CAN

Krishna Gopal Gupta

5 years ago

I agree in full for all the reasons mentioned herein. Besides this, the entry fee and renewal fee to be a distributor has been enhanced many folds. It pinches a lot when the business is not there. Further, AMFI does not force to recognise the distributors ID by RTAs. RTAs harass distributors and ask to produce written consent from the client each and every time even if the business is sourced by them. KYD was another irritant for distributors as if they were criminals. Nothing has been done to make the performance based fee to fund managers. They are enjoying even if they are damaging the wealth and the distributor have to bear the burnt of the client for no fault of him.

REPLY

Vikas Gupta

In Reply to Krishna Gopal Gupta 5 years ago

I totally agree with ur views. Firstly The service Standards from RTAs towards Investors as well as Distributors should be monitered. Secondly, Fund Managers should be paid as per their performance only.

Michael Duarte

5 years ago

In Aug 2009 when SEBI came with the mindless decision of doing away with entry load the whole Financial Media welcomed it as a Good move in the interest of the small investor. As if the Distributor getting commission to bring in business, was the ONLY culprit of mal-practice in the industry.
Distributors cried themselves hoarse that this was not the solution but you (the financial press) along with the Fund Houses chose not to see sense and ignored our voice.
Today when this move has back fired on the industry, Why are you still looking for other excuses to justify why the Mutual Fund Industry is bleeding?
Test the waters – Pay the distributor his rightful commission to get business (money back into the industry) then address the other issues.
The patient is in the ICU friend…Revive him first rather than have useless discussions around the coffee machine in the Hospital waiting room !!!

REPLY

rajivahuja

In Reply to Michael Duarte 5 years ago

I think Sharad is right.

sharad

In Reply to Michael Duarte 5 years ago

You seem to be new here. Before shooting your mouth off, pls go back and read moneylife articles on the topic. start with this
http://www.moneylife.in/article/cleaning...


Michael

In Reply to sharad 5 years ago

This article came in Dec 2009 4 months after exit loads were abolished. By then everyone knew the move was not a good one.

Distributors were trying to make this point all along but no one supported thinking they were only addressing their personal income loss.

Just highlighting a bigger reality...
Not trying to run down "ML" Agree that it is one of the sane voices in the Financial Press

Monsoon shortfall does not pose too much threat to inflation: RBI deputy governor

RBI deputy governor Subir Gokarn stated that food inflation has become a significant negative feature of today’s economic environment, adding that food supply needs to be increased rapidly to tackle the persistent demand-supply imbalances

Chennai: The forecast of ‘below normal’ monsoon rains does not pose ‘too much threat’ to food inflation so long as the country's central part receives close to normal rains, reports PTI quoting a top Reserve Bank of India (RBI) official.

“The central part is where there is lot of concentration of pulses and cereals... If rainfall in that part of the country remains close to normal, I do not think there will be any pressure,” RBI deputy governor Subir Gokarn told reporters at the sidelines of a function here.

He said the Met Department’s prediction of 95% rainfall this year does not pose too much of a threat in terms of its impact on food inflation, adding that the RBI was keeping a close watch on cereals, oilseeds and pulses.

He, however, said it was too early to speculate on the impact of the monsoon on food inflation. The IMD has said monsoon rainfall is likely to be below normal at 95% of the Long Period Average, triggering concerns of a serious fallout on agricultural input. However, allaying the fears, Union finance minister Pranab Mukherjee has said the projections are only a shade below the annual average.

Earlier, in his address at the 175th Annual General Meeting of the Madras Chamber of Commerce here, Mr Gokarn said food inflation, human capital, infrastructure and financial inclusion hold the key to India's sustainable growth.

Pointing to reforms measures taken in many areas for achieving sustainable growth, he, however, said action needs to be taken in many more areas on the basis of credible supporting evidence.

Food inflation has become a significant negative feature of today’s economic environment, he said, adding that food supply needs to be increased rapidly to tackle the persistent demand-supply imbalances.

“Production of relevant (food) items has to be increased... Cultivation risk has to be mitigated for farmers to find these products more attractive. Transportation, storage and distribution efficiency has to be increased to keep losses and distribution margins down,” he said.

User

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)