CSR Needs a Re-think

Modi Sarkar must junk UPA’s flawed approach

Narendra Modi’s government has sensibly extended the extremely restrictive scope of the corporate social responsibility (CSR) guidelines prescribed earlier by the ministry of corporate affairs (MCA). As with most decisions of the United Progressive Alliance (UPA), the ‘mandatory’ CSR rules were structured to drive a torrent of private corporate funds to a few narrow areas and entities selected by the government.

Although the UPA government stopped short of introducing penalties for failure to comply with the CSR rules, these would, undoubtedly, have come in an UPA3. After all, the structure for a perpetual and an expensive bureaucracy had already been put in place in through the National Foundation for CSR (NFCSR) under the Indian Institute of Corporate Affairs (IICA).

The NFCSR is a government-promoted NGO which will raise funds and spend them for capacity building and awards like any other industry body. The UPA found nothing incongruous in its establishment, or that of IICA, which is a separate and needless body that could as well do what the NFCSR plans to do.

Under UPA, IICA would probably have morphed into a regulator to prod and punish corporate India to spend a gigantic Rs30,000 crore of private sector profits for ‘socially responsible activities’.

Will Modi Sarkar put a stop to this ridiculous waste? Or is it too soon for an about turn, especially since lakhs of NGOs and thousands of consultants have their eye on the CSR gravy train? Although there is a crowd of vested interests eyeing this pool of funds, we believe that the government needs to pause and review rather than push forward with hasty implementation of mandatory CSR. I say this even though we have a sister entity called Moneylife Foundation that urgently needs to raise funds for its activities.

First, we need to step away from the UPA philosophy, where the government itself behaved like a large NGO which spread its benevolence in select areas and through select organisations. Second, the Intelligence Bureau (IB) report, as well as other data on the NGO sector, suggests that there is need for a massive clean-up before pumping valuable, post-tax money belonging to investors, into CSR.

According to a 2009 study commissioned by the government, India has a staggering 3.3 million active not-for-profit organisations. This translates to one NGO per 400 Indians—a multiple of the number of primary health centres or primary schools. Of these, an elite set of NGOs receives substantial foreign donations and, as the IB report suggests, some of these are being used for anti-national activities.

The government also is a big donor of land and money to NGOs. The Planning Commission has set aside Rs18,000 crore for the social sector in the XI Plan; in addition, NGOs receive funds from state governments and Union ministries. Further, various regulators, such as the Reserve Bank of India (Depositors Education & Awareness Fund), MCA (Investor Education & Protection Fund) and the capital market regulator have appropriated a few thousand crore rupees of unclaimed money belonging to investors and depositors.

It is common knowledge that a large chunk of this money is either mis-utilised or siphoned away. Isn’t it correct that we demand some transparency, disclosures and weeding out of a few million dubious, or defunct, NGOs before allowing the government to direct private sector funds to them?

More importantly, CSR ought to be defined by the core competency of the corporate donor, rather than funnel funds to areas selected by the government. On 18th June, MCA, in a welcome move, expanded the list of areas eligible for CSR funding. But this is patchwork. Domain knowledge ought to have a role in deciding what a company should consider ‘socially responsible’ work for itself. Here is what we mean.

What would CSR be for an advertising agency? Campaigns to spread awareness about road safety, or cancer, done free of cost for an NGO. Similarly, for an IT company, email or hosting services provided free, or the development of a socially useful app, is appropriate CSR.

Companies ought to have the freedom to direct CSR to the right causes, based on their expertise or area of operation.

Also, so long as an NGO is transparent about its activity and accounts, and meets the income-tax department’s criteria for tax exemptions, why should MCA decide whether or not it will be eligible for corporate funds under CSR? Hopefully a forward thinking Modi Sarkar will realise that CSR by coercion and fiat will only lead to leakage and diversion of funds and defeat its basic objective. What is worse, it will choke funding to many deserving activities and entities especially small and earnest start-ups in the not-for-profit sector.

  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.



    Nagesh Kini

    6 years ago

    The Union Budget 2014 envisages changes!


    6 years ago

    your writeup is basically concluding that CSR activity for a corporate is only circling down to donating money to NGOs. i doubt that is the vision behind it. Theso called responsibility bestowed upon the corporate sector is not just to spend but to undertake activities and showcase their effort to the public and not the govt. A corporate should have its own Social Agenda to wrok towards and NGOs ideally shouldnt feature in it as the dominant part. CSR spending should not be reduced to a mere bill payment exercise at the end of the year.


    Sucheta Dalal

    In Reply to sidsharma 6 years ago

    With due respect, your understanding is flawed and scary.
    First, a corporate according to UPA2 was any company that has a profit, irrespective of size.
    Second, a persons sets up a company for a specific purpose. They toil to make it run and under UPA2, it was a struggle to meet all the red tape and compliances. This included the tax torsion.
    It is extraordinary to tell a company that in addition to the business you run, you willa leo take up another activity by compulsion, from among a list of 20 or 30 selected by the government and will be held accountable for it, no matter whether you have the inclination, expertise or vision for it.
    This is ridiculous and undemocratic. You cannot force anybody to have a "social agenda" apart from the business they run. The minute you FORCE people, they will cut corners and it will dwindle into corrupt practices.
    Even in communist regimes, I doubt government can "force" people to undertake a "social agenda" that is outside their core competence.

    What I am arguing is that asking them to extend their regular business for social causes.
    Try running a business in India. We do. When we have no accountant the govt does not care. There is draconian penalty.

    The TV18 group sacked 300 people. Did the government care? What about social responsibility to the employees who are out without a pension? Does anyone care? Certainly not the UPA2 which dreamt up mandatory CSR. Imagine the anguish of a TV18 employee who cannot pay EMI to know that 2% of net profit will go to all kinds of social causes that the government ought to have take care of -- as its duty -- while he/she have no job?
    This is the private sector we are talking about. Try to think about what you are saying when you talk compulsion.

    Simple Indian

    In Reply to Sucheta Dalal 6 years ago

    I agree with your arguments against compulsory CSR thrust on corporate sector by the earlier UPA govt. The corporate sector is essentially profit-oriented and is responsible for maximising profits for its shareholders. Hence, no private enterprise should be 'forced' to contribute to CSR activities. In fact, thousands of NGOs have sprung up in India due to govt's irresponsibility and inability to meet social welfare needs. As in the case of RTE thrust on private non-govt funded schools, 'forced' CSR is undesirable and should be discontinued forthwith.


    In Reply to Sucheta Dalal 6 years ago

    Firstly, sorry for offending you. My opinion on your article, as ridiculous as it may sound to you, was restricted to the fact that NGOs do not become the main and only means of CSR spending. You dont mention anything in that aspect in your reply though.
    Coming to your reply now, without exciting your temper, a corporate is not any company who declares profit, irrespective of its size. You say irrespective of its size and then you quote a scenario of TV18 group which declared a net profit of 39.5 crore. The size of the company which is mandated to spend is DEFINED. Your confidence reflects the success of your business when you suggest me to try and run a business in India. I sincerely hope your company would come in that ambit.
    If that is the sense prevailing then the CGR( Corporate Governance reporting) is also a big sham.
    I also dont understand your point about the accountant, as a company is actually mandated to have all its reporting attested by a Chartered Accountant.
    Your argument about extending the regular business practice towards social benefit is ideal. But tell me how is it different from what TV18 did when both the decisions are driven with a profit motive, or expansion motive or cost cutting motive.
    Nobody is forcing anybody mam. The penalty which will be imposed will be much less than the 2 % to be spent, so the corporate can just pay off the penalty and move on. There arnt any 20-30 things given by the govt. There is a schedule(schedule 7) which only suggests the activities that one can take up. According to me, it is an opportunity for a corporate to build its brand, connect with not just shareholders but also the stakeholders present in the society which matters to a company once it reaches that stature. And if it comes as a mandate or a tax benefit then even better. But our argument, I guess, is the main dilemma in the situation. Passion and profit dont always go together.

    Nagesh Kini

    In Reply to Sucheta Dalal 6 years ago

    I entirely agree. The scheme as its stands now is half-baked and extremely opaque and calls for a thorough overhaul. Best put it across for a full public debate and rewrite it de novo.

    Nagesh Kini

    6 years ago

    The time has come to thoroughly revamp the entire NGO sector to weed out the thousands masquerading as do-gooders siphoning funds and cheating donors.
    There has to be a simple mandatory registration-cum-monitoring process to replace the present multiple authorities like offices of the Charity Commissioner under a state act, the office of the Commissioner of Income Tax under the Union MOF and FCRA under MOH. The left hand doesn't know what the right is doing! Yet operating freely for years are many politically connected ones as 'social organisations'.


    Suiketu Shah

    In Reply to Nagesh Kini 6 years ago

    Its an open secret lots of trusts and NGO's are to convert white into black(no charity etc whichi s all hogwash).The reason.Industrialists wish to avoid taxThis is why what Dr ASwamy states is 100% right.Just stop ITax,STax,excise-charge everyoen based on bank transaction tax.No ITax,no harassment,no 1000 companies by industrialists to avoid tax,no complication,no nothing.Only progress,progress and progress.Cynics wl say this wl encourage black money but black money already is a major component of the economy and this wl only come down.


    6 years ago

    I agree with Sucheta's analysis. As the study shows, lakhs of NGOs are simply for name sake. No mass based uplifting activities or quality inputs for down trodden is given by them. Lakhs of rupees which they receive as donations are used mainly for the trustee's own or their family /relative or friends benefits. Accounts can be fudged easily and they comply with the basic requirement of filing the 'Audited Accounts' which has become a financial jugglery for them .
    Before the CSR benefits are extended to them, let here first be a Probe to expose what kind of 'Social activities they indulge in for splurging public money.

    R Balakrishnan

    6 years ago

    Compulsory CSR is the refuge of a bankrupt and immoral government. Paying extortionist income taxes itself is more than enough give back to society. With enough indirect taxes, income taxes and CSR is a penalty for efficiency and enterprise.
    Wonder if the Modi chap and his RSS team will have the courage to roll this back.

    Supreme Court says Shariat courts, fatwas have no legal sanctity

    The Supreme Court while saying that no religion, including Islam, allows punishing innocent persons, ordered that no 'Darul Qaza' should give verdict which affects rights of a person who is not before it

    Disapproving of a Shariat court issuing fatwa and order against a person who is not before it, the Supreme Court on Monday said it (the Shairat court and fatwa) has no sanction of law and has no legal status.


    The apex court said there is "no doubt" that such a court has no legal status while noting that in some cases, orders were being passed by them which violate human rights and punish innocent persons.


    A bench headed by Justice CK Prasad said that no religion, including Islam, allows punishing innocent persons and ordered that no 'Darul Qaza' should give verdict which affects rights of a person who is not before it.


    The court passed the verdict on a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by advocate Vishwa Lochan Madam questioning the constitutional validity of Shariat courts which allegedly run a parallel judicial system in the country.


    All India Personal Law Board (AIPLB) had earlier submitted that fatwa was not binding on people and it was just an opinion of a 'mufti' (cleric) and he has no power and authority to implement it.


    The counsel, appearing for the Board, had said if a fatwa was sought to be implemented against the wish of the person concerned, then he could approach the court of law against it.


    The petitioner had submitted that the fundamental rights of Muslims could not be controlled and curtailed through fatwas issued by 'qazis' and 'muftis' appointed by Muslim organizations.

  • User 


    suman chakraborty

    6 years ago

    Supreme court should enjoy its moment in the sun. Till India has 50% rational people population, after than Supreme Court will have no sanctity.

    Activist urge Maharashtra governor not to give nod to new Police Bill

    According to citizens and activists, the Maharashtra Police Bill formalises the very practices of unwarranted political interference with everyday police management that the Supreme Court has sought to reduce

    A delegation of concerned citizens recently met Maharashtra governor K Sankarnarayan urging him not to give his assent to the Maharashtra Police Bill.

    The Maharashtra Police (Amendment) Act (MPA), 2014, was  passed by both houses of the state legislature on 14  June 2014. The government says they aimed to give capable and well managed police.

    Earlier this week a delegation of citizens and activists, led by JF Ribeiro, former Commissioner of Mumbai Police, met the governor requesting him not to give his assent to the Bill, which they allege was passed in haste without due consideration.

    After the meeting, Maja Daruwala, director of Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), told reporters that, “We have only been trying to press on the governor to use his powers under Article 200 of the Constitution to withhold his assent to this extremely bad Bill".

    Dolphy D'Souza, convener of Police Reforms Watch in Maharashtra, said the Bill formalises the very practices of unwarranted political interference with everyday police management that the Supreme Court has sought to reduce. Hence, it must be overhauled to be made fit for purpose.

    Even Prakash Singh, former director general of Police, in a letter, had mentioned that this law is important for decide the direction of policing in the state for future decades, however, the government has pushed it in little hurry without any public consultation. The citizen activists also forwarded this letter to the governor.

    “Under the guise of complying with the Supreme Court’s directives on police reforms, the new Bill defeats the objective of giving the public a capable, well-managed and accountable police. It has diluted and even subverted each one of the six directions of the Court. The Bill in fact formalises the very practices of unwarranted political interference with every day police management which the Court had sought to reduce,” Singh had said in his letter.

    Maharashtra Police (Amendment) Bill, 2014, passed by the Assembly, is to replace an ordinance which made amendments to the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, to set the state on the path of police reforms. It is meant to incorporate the directives of the Supreme Court on police reforms.

  • User 


    Dhanaji Kenjle

    6 years ago

    When we see how Banana Republics evovled in the South & Central Americas,the requisite conditions are prevalent today in our country, and one of the main conditions....the blatant interference of unscruplous
    politicians in the working of the
    police & judiciary, which will be
    enhanced by the Maharashtra Police Amendment Bill. It may be the final nail in the coffin of a fair,free,transparent and democartic way of Life, which the
    common citizen aspires.
    Capt Kenjle

    We are listening!

    Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.

    To continue

    Sign Up or Sign In


    To continue

    Sign Up or Sign In



    online financial advisory
    Pathbreakers 1 & Pathbreakers 2 contain deep insights, unknown facts and captivating events in the life of 51 top achievers, in their own words.
    online financia advisory
    The Scam
    24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
    Moneylife Online Magazine
    Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
    financial magazines online
    Stockletters in 3 Flavours
    Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
    financial magazines in india
    MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
    (Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)
    FREE: Your Complete Family Record Book
    Keep all the Personal and Financial Details of You & Your Family. In One Place So That`s Its Easy for Anyone to Find Anytime
    We promise not to share your email id with anyone