Pakistan has entered so many bailout programmes with the IMF that, by now, the bureaucrats at the finance ministry consider the Washington-based lender to be a serious source of regular funding instead of a lender of last resort that it is supposed to be. And they have grown increasingly more skilled at outright conning the IMF into imposing conditions that minimise the work the bureaucrats have to do, but also have the effect of sinking the country further into fiscal quicksand.
And this particular IMF programme has the Q Block babus’ fingerprints all over it. Consider, for example, the inexplicable condition that the Council on Common Interest somehow gets the consent of the provinces to run artificial surpluses in order to make the overall fiscal situation of the country look good. This is not a condition that originated in the IMF’s heads: it came from the finance ministry bureaucrats who loathe and despise the National Finance Commission award because it took away money – and therefore power – from them and gave it away to the provinces. They want it back, and they have managed to convince the IMF that this is a good way to reduce the budget deficit.
And therein lies the dirty little secret of the IMF bailouts: while the international lender has broad policy guidelines what it thinks is sound fiscal and economic policy, the detailed proposals for exactly how to achieve those goals are suggested mainly by bureaucrats in the finance ministry and the Federal Board of Revenue, with the occasional good idea wandering in from the State Bank of Pakistan or the Planning Commission.
So here is how this charade goes: the bureaucrats call in the IMF, because they do not want to actually do their job and collect taxes. They present a highly distorted picture of the problem which somehow omits just how flawed their own policies are and instead blame things that have nothing to do with the core of the government’s financial mismanagement problems.
This provincial budget surplus condition is a case in point. The NFC award is in no way responsible for the federal budget deficit, but the bureaucrats will not tell the IMF that. They will only show how much money gets transferred to the provinces, while neglecting to point out the fact that the deficit would shrink a lot faster if the government simply did what it is supposed to and cut back energy subsidies and privatise grossly mismanaged state-owned enterprises. That is where two-thirds of the deficit problem comes from.
Of course, the IMF is not stupid. They know they are being taken for a ride, but they also have no choice. They have sunk money into Pakistan and, much as one may hate them, it is the civil servants whose job it is to get that money back. So the IMF gives in on the provincial budget demand and in exchange demands that the deficit be reduced even more than the finance ministry’s original target and that the cuts come from subsidies.
Now, a fair deal would be for the bureaucracy to give the IMF what it wants in exchange for getting what they want. But the bureaucracy is not playing to be fair. They are playing to win. So the cuts may well come, but they will come from the development budget, which is the part of federal spending that does not pay for their perks and privileges. A small part of the development budget does provide perks to bureaucrats, but worry not: that is the part that will stay in.
Readers may have noticed by now that the finance minister has not been mentioned in any of this. There is a reason for that. If the repetitive cycle of IMF bailouts from 1989 has taught us anything, it is this: the finance minister may not be innocent in all of this, but at the end of the day, he is just a bystander, powerless in front of the mighty Civil Service of Pakistan.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 7th, 2013.
COMMENTS (26)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Very well written article. The first of its class about economics on ET. Its the same rent seeking behaviour that all country assessment reports of IMF about pakistan mentions. Plus Structural barriers to structural reforms ;-)
@Younus Ali: This is known as "spin" in newspeak.
This article left me entertained but confused.
To all the conspiracy theorists out there; this bailout package is not a bad deal for Pakistan given where we stand. The country has no money left thanks to the great economic management in the last 5 years, our foreign reserves have declined susbtantially over the same period, FDI has fallen and the economy is plagued with stagflation. Under such situation the country needs money to repay its debt, and if the government succeeds in taxing the affluent class in Pak then paying back $5.3bn is not a big deal for a country of our size!
Moreover, by taking on debt to repay existing debt does not increase your total debt and the (IMF) debt is at subsidised rate compared to what goverment of Pakistan borrows at in the bond markets. the spread is almost 6%, which is huge - although with currency depreciation it could rise - the effective rate on IMF debt may be around 6%/7% - however, if the currency improves, cost of servicing debt could fall.
So the situation in the country is still not that bad, relatively speaking, and we have time to pull up our socks and take responsibilities of our actions, or face what is Greece facing!!
@meekal a ahmed:
"In the US (and I am sure elsewhere), the states are required by law to balance their budgets."
While you are correct that states in the US (except Vermont) have different versions of balanced budget law/rules, in practice, these don't mean much. Presenting a balanced budget is often based on a lot of arbitrary assumptions on revenue and expenses that prove to be wrong. Many states have racked up huge accumulated debt from years of deficit. For example, California's long term debt is close to $1 Trillion adding all local and state indebtedness.
The issue in the US, as is the case in Pakistan and also in India, is the uncontrolled government spending that far exceed revenues.
Good analysis Farooq. You may want to think about the following: (1) enourmous perks that State Bank officials (Officer Grade 5 and above) are enjoying (2) that state bank officers at higher levels are not pakistani nationals (even Governor is American) (3) that why big bank's treasury officers visit State Bank before the announcement of monetary policy statement These are all open secrets but unfortunately our people are ignorant and are unable to understand the billion dollar game being played on the name of interest rate decisions and IMF packages.
The writer and some who have commented above are missing an important point.
There will be no fiscal discipline in Pakistan, IMF or no IMF, until the provinces are reined in and some "fiscal rules" apply. They won't raise their own resources but run amuck when it comes to spending (wastefully).
Whatever they commit to in the NEC (the highest decision-making body in the country), carries no weight. The record shows that they have consistently violated their so-called commitment, with impunity.
To use a much-maligned word, the provinces need to be subject to "conditionality". If they violate that conditionality, the federal government should with-hold transfers (just as they say they will deduct unpaid power bills at source -- although we have not seen this happen yet).
I am all for fiscal devolution. But there have to be some rules. In the US (and I am sure elsewhere), the states are required by law to balance their budgets.
There is only one political leader with the will power to take this beaurucracy head on, and he's Imran Khan, because he comes into power on his own strength, not the blessing of tax evaders like Nawaz. . Nothing will change in Pakistan under PMLN.
@Zaka, you have got to be kidding me, Musharaff put us in this mess to begin with, remember the balance of payments crisis, current account deficit of 2007-2008 to cover which PPP govt. went into IMF program?
@ Zaka Come out of the "conspiracy theories". Who told you that General Musharraf didn't borrow from IMF? Or he got rid of IMF?? You better do some research before posting such comments. It was dictator Musharraf who raised Pakistan's external debt from US$ 17 Billion to US$ 50 billion when he left the economy in shambles. Not that the dictator didn't add much to the Motorways network in Pakistan, he mortgaged the existing Motorway (M2) to borrow more than US$ 500 million through Sukuk bonds in 2005 http://pakistannews.blogdrive.com/comments?id=2 You should be knowing who had built the Motorway. The budget deficit had ballooned so much during Mush era that Pakistan had to borrow US$ 7.6 Billion (highest-ever in the history) immediately after the dictator's departure in 2008.
Solute to Musharraf who got us rid off IMF, for which he is being punished. Indeed he is a great leader - miss you Musharraf.
if all the people like Dar,Altaf Bhai,Sharif bhai other who kept their money should make a own small IMF for Pakistan rather using American iron hand to collapse economies of others.
This is what a beardie led revolutionist has to say. Farooq grow up and get out of your slumber and research before you write anything.
@ Mahmood. The ':' in the third para is correct.
@Mahmood: Third paragraph. :)
':' is unnecessary in the second para, it should be ';' :)
This is a flawed analysis. This bailout is front loader loan. What it means is all previous due payments will be deducted first from the 5.3 Billion. This also means Pakistan did not had any spare cash to payoff previous due payments and without bailout package country would have defaulted.. A big chunck of 5.3 B will be used up in due payments. No room for either minister or bureaucrats to maneuver.
The second flaw in analysis is that it is implied that it is not Minister's fault. In democracy Buck stops at the Ministers desk. The bureaucrats work at the pleasure of the Minister. If they do not follow the ORDERS than they are management issues.
Third Billions of Dollars received from US and NATO were never used to pay of the IMF debt. What that money was used for is for another day.
Ha ha ha what about ALL WEATHER FRIEND?? how many billion they offers????????? 18 Billion?? enough money.is not it??????///
"So here is how this charade goes: the bureaucrats call in the IMF, because they do not want to actually do their job and collect taxes." This is true about these Babus.
The Confirmatory test for your analysis is...... +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ that Pakistan will be again knocking at the doors of the IMF for settling the current borrowing.....!
Mr Tirmiji is my candidate for the post of FM +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Sir I am waiting for your analysis of the economic benefits of PMs China Visit. Thru your anlysis you are serving Pakistan !
Please someone let me know what this article conveys? It just goes round and round
If everyone paid taxes we wouldn't be in this situation. But NO one is willing to pay TAX.
This was a economic blast.