Showing posts with label FDI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FDI. Show all posts

Saturday, July 6, 2013

Foreign Investment in India – Guidelines for calculation of total foreign investment in Indian companies, transfer of ownership and control of Indian companies and downstream investment by Indian companies

Foreign Investment in India – Guidelines for calculation of total foreign investment in Indian companies, transfer of ownership and control of Indian companies and downstream investment by Indian companies

Guidelines for calculation of total foreign investment in Indian companies, transfer of ownership and control of Indian companies and downstream investment by Indian companies
A. Definitions

1 (i) Ownership and Control

a) Company ‘Owned by resident Indian citizens’ shall be an Indian company if more than 50% of the capital in it is beneficially owned by resident Indian citizens and/or Indian companies, which are ultimately owned and controlled by resident Indian citizens; Company shall be considered ‘Controlled' by resident Indian citizens if the residents Indian citizens and Indian companies, which are owned and controlled by resident Indian citizens, have the power to appoint a majority of its directors in that company;

b) Company ‘Owned by non-residents’ means an Indian company where more than 50% of the capital in it is beneficially owned by non-residents; Company ‘Controlled by ‘non-residents ’ means an Indian company where non-residents have the power to appoint a majority of its directors in that company;

(ii) Direct foreign investment’ shall mean investment received by an Indian Company from non-resident entities regardless of whether the said investments have been made under Schedule 1, 2, 3, 6 and 8 of the Notification No. FEMA. 20/2000-RB dated May 3, 2000, as amended from time to time;
(iii) ‘Downstream investment’ means indirect foreign investment, by one Indian company into another Indian company, by way of subscription or acquisition;

(iv) 'Holding Company’ would have the same meaning as defined in Companies Act 1956;

(v) ‘Indian Company' means a company incorporated in India under the Companies Act, 1956;

(vi) ‘Indirect foreign investment’ means entire investment in other Indian companies by an Indian company (IC), having foreign investment in it provided IC is not ‘owned and controlled’ by resident Indian citizens and/or Indian Companies which are owned and controlled by resident Indian citizens or where the IC is owned or controlled by non-residents. However, as an exception, the indirect foreign investment in the 100% owned subsidiaries of operating-cum-investing/investing companies will be limited to the foreign investment in the operating-cum-investing/ investing company.

(vii) ‘Investing Company’ means an Indian Company holding only investments in other Indian company/ies directly or indirectly, other than for trading of such holdings/securities;

(viii) ‘Non-Resident Entity’ means ‘person resident outside India’ (as defined at Section 2(w) of FEMA, 1999);

(ix) ‘Resident Entity’ means ‘person resident in India’ (as defined at Section 2(v) of FEMA, 1999), excluding an individual;

(x) ‘Resident Indian citizen’ shall be interpreted in line with the definition of person resident in India as per FEMA, 1999, read in conjunction with the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955.

(xi) ‘Total foreign investment’ in an Indian Company would be the sum total of direct and indirect foreign investment.

B. Direct and indirect foreign investment in Indian companies – meaning

 
2. Investment in Indian companies can be made by both non-resident as well as resident Indian entities. Any non-resident investment in an Indian company is direct foreign investment. Investment by resident Indian entities could again comprise both resident and non-resident investments. Thus, such an Indian company would have indirect foreign investment if the Indian investing company has foreign investment in it. The indirect investment can also be a cascading investment, i.e. through multi-layered structure.

C. Guidelines for calculation of total foreign investment, i.e., direct and indirect foreign investment in an Indian company.
 

3.(i) Counting of Direct foreign investment:

All investments made directly by non-resident entities into the Indian company would be counted towards 'Direct foreign investment'.

(ii) Counting of indirect foreign Investment: The entire indirect foreign investment by the investing company into the other Indian Company would be considered for the purpose of computation of indirect foreign investment. However, as an exception, the indirect foreign investment in the 100% owned subsidiaries of operating-cum-investing/investing companies will be limited to the foreign investment in the operating-cum-investing/ investing company. This exception has been made since the downstream investment of a 100% owned subsidiary of the holding company is akin to investment made by the holding company and the downstream investment should be a mirror image of the holding company. This exception, however, is strictly for those cases where the entire capital of the downstream subsidiary is owned by the holding company.

(iii) The methodology for calculation of total foreign investment would apply at every stage of investment in Indian companies and thus in each and every Indian company.

(iv) Additional requirements

(A) The full details about the foreign investment including ownership details etc. in Indian company /ies and information about the control of the company /ies would be furnished by the Company /ies to the Government of India at the time of seeking approval.

(B) In any sector/activity, where Government approval is required for foreign investment and in cases where there are any inter-se agreements between/amongst share-holders which have an effect on the appointment of the Board of Directors or on the exercise of voting rights or of creating voting rights disproportionate to shareholding or any incidental matter thereof, such agreements will have to be informed to the approving authority. The approving authority will consider such inter-se agreements for determining ownership and control when considering the case for approval of foreign investment.

(C) In all sectors attracting sectoral caps, the balance equity i.e. beyond the sectoral foreign investment cap, would specifically be beneficially owned by/held with/in the hands of resident Indian citizens and Indian companies, owned and controlled by resident Indian citizens.

(D) In the I& B and Defence sectors where the sectoral cap is less than 49%, the company would need to be “owned and controlled” by resident Indian citizens and Indian companies, which are owned and controlled by resident Indian citizens.

(a) For this purpose, the equity held by the largest Indian shareholder would have to be at least 51% of the total equity, excluding the equity held by Public Sector Banks and Public Financial Institutions, as defined in Section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956. The term “largest Indian shareholder", used in this clause, will include any or a combination of the following:

(aa) In the case of an individual shareholder,
(aai) The individual shareholder,
(aaii) A relative of the shareholder within the meaning of Section 6 of the Companies Act, 1956.
(aaiii) A company/ group of companies in which the individual shareholder/HUF to which he belongs has management and controlling interest.
(ab) In the case of an Indian company,
(abi) The Indian company
(abii) A group of Indian companies under the same management and ownership control.
(b) For the purpose of this Clause, “Indian company” shall be a company which must have a resident Indian or a relative as defined under Section 6 of the Companies Act, 1956/ HUF, either singly or in combination holding at least 51% of the shares.

(c) Provided that, in case of a combination of all or any of the entities mentioned in sub-clauses (aa) and (ab) above, each of the parties shall have entered into a legally binding agreement to act as a single unit in managing the matters of the applicant company.

(E) If a declaration is made by persons as per section 187C of the Indian Companies Act about a beneficial interest being held by a non resident entity, then even though the investment may be made by a resident Indian citizen, the same shall be counted as foreign investment.

4. The above mentioned policy and methodology would be applicable for determining the total foreign investment in all sectors, except in sectors where it is specified in a statute or a rule there under. The above methodology of determining direct and indirect foreign investment therefore does not apply to the insurance sector which will continue to be governed by the relevant Regulation.

D. Guidelines for establishment of Indian companies/ transfer of ownership or control of Indian companies, from resident Indian citizens and Indian companies to non-resident entities, in sectors with caps.

5. In sectors/activities with caps, including, inter-alia, defence production, air transport services, ground handling services, asset reconstruction companies, private sector banking, broadcasting, commodity exchanges, credit information companies, insurance, print media, telecommunications and satellites, Government approval/FIPB approval would be required in all cases where:

(i) An Indian company is being established with foreign investment and is not owned by a resident entity or

(ii) An Indian company is being established with foreign investment and is not controlled by a resident entity or

(iii) The control of an existing Indian company, currently owned or controlled by resident Indian citizens and Indian companies, which are owned or controlled by resident Indian citizens, will be/is being transferred/passed on to a non-resident entity as a consequence of transfer of shares and/or fresh issue of shares to non-resident entities through amalgamation, merger/demerger, acquisition, etc. or

(iv) The ownership of an existing Indian company, currently owned or controlled by resident Indian citizens and Indian companies, which are owned or controlled by resident Indian citizens, will be/is being transferred/passed on to a non-resident entity as a consequence of transfer of shares and/or fresh issue of shares to non-resident entities through amalgamation, merger/demerger, acquisition, etc. or

(v) It is clarified that these guidelines will not apply to sectors/activities where there are no foreign investment caps, that is, where100% foreign investment is permitted under the automatic route.

(vi) For the purpose of computation of indirect foreign investment, foreign investment shall include all types of direct foreign investments in the Indian company making downstream investment. For this purpose portfolio investments either by FIIs, NRIs or QFIs holding as on March 31 of the previous year would be taken into account. e.g. for monitoring foreign investment for the financial year 2011-12, investment as on March 31, 2011 would be taken into account. Besides, investments in the form of Foreign Direct Investment, Foreign Venture Capital investment, investments in ADRs/GDRs, Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds (FCCB) will also be taken in account. Thus, regardless of the investments having been made under Schedule 1, 2, 3, 6 and 8 of the Notification No.FEMA. 20/2000-RB dated May 3, 2000, as amended from time to time will be taken into account.
E. Downstream investment by an Indian company which is not owned and/or controlled by resident entity/ies.
 
6. (i) Downstream investment by an Indian company, which is not owned and/ or controlled by resident entity/ies, into another Indian company, would be in accordance/compliance with the relevant sectoral conditions on entry route, conditionality and caps, with regard to the sectors in which the latter Indian company is operating.

Note: with effect from 31st day of July 2012 Downstream investment/s made by a banking company, as defined in clause (c) of Section 5 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, incorporated in India, which is owned and/or controlled by non-residents/ a non-resident entity/non-resident entities, under Corporate Debt Restructuring (CDR), or other loan restructuring mechanism, or in trading books, or for acquisition of shares due to defaults in loans, shall not count towards indirect foreign investment. However, their 'strategic downstream investment' shall count towards indirect foreign investment. For this purpose, 'strategic downstream investments' would mean investment by these banking companies in their subsidiaries, joint ventures and associates.

(ii) Downstream investments by Indian companies will be subject to the following conditions:

(a) Such a company has to notify Secretariat for Industrial Assistance, DIPP and FIPB of its downstream investment in the form available at http://www.fipbindia.com within 30 days of such investment, even if capital instruments have not been allotted along with the modality of investment in new/existing ventures (with/without expansion programme);

(b) downstream investment by way of induction of foreign equity in an existing Indian Company to be duly supported by a resolution of its Board of Directors as also a Shareholders’ Agreement, if any;

(c) issue/transfer/pricing/valuation of shares shall continue to be in accordance with extant SEBI/RBI guidelines;

(d) For the purpose of downstream investment, the Indian companies making the downstream investments would have to bring in requisite funds from abroad and not use funds borrowed in the domestic market. This would, however, not preclude downstream operating companies, from raising debt in the domestic market. Downstream investments through internal accruals are permissible by an Indian company engaged only in activity of investing in the capital of another Indian company/ies, subject to the provisions above and as also elaborated below:
  • Foreign investment into an Indian company, engaged only in the activity of investing in the capital of other Indian company /ies, will require prior Government/FIPB approval, regardless of the amount or extent of foreign investment. Foreign investment into Non-Banking Finance Companies (NBFCs), carrying on activities approved for FDI, will be subject to the conditions specified in Annex-B of Schedule 1 of FEMA Notification No. 20 dated May 3, 2000 as amended from time to time;
  • Those companies, which are Core Investment Companies (CICs), will have to additionally follow RBI‟s Regulatory Framework for CICs.
  • For infusion of foreign investment into an Indian company which does not have any operations and also does not have any downstream investments, Government/FIPB approval would be required, regardless of the amount or extent of foreign investment. Further, as and when such a company commences business(s) or makes downstream investment, it will have to comply with the relevant sectoral conditions on entry route, conditionality and caps.
Note: Foreign investment into other Indian companies would be in accordance/ compliance with the relevant sectoral conditions on entry route, conditionality and caps.

(e) The FDI recipient Indian company at the first level which is responsible for ensuring compliance with the FDI conditionality like no indirect foreign investment in prohibited sector, entry route, sectoral cap/conditionality, etc. for the downstream investment made by in the subsidiary companies at second level and so on and so forth would obtain a certificate to this effect from its statutory auditor on an annual basis as regards status of compliance with the instructions on downstream investment and compliance with FEMA provisions. The fact that statutory auditor has certified that the company is in compliance with the regulations as regards downstream investment and other FEMA prescriptions will be duly mentioned in the Director’s report in the Annual Report of the Indian company. In case statutory auditor has given a qualified report, the same shall be immediately brought to the notice of the Reserve Bank of India, Foreign Exchange Department (FED), Regional Office (RO) of the Reserve Bank in whose jurisdiction the Registered Office of the company is located and shall also obtain acknowledgement from the RO of having intimated it of the qualified auditor report. RO shall file the action taken report to the Chief General Manager-in-Charge, Foreign Exchange Department, Reserve Bank of India, Central Office, Central Office Building, Shahid Bhagat Singh Road, Mumbai 400001.

A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No.01 dated July 04, 2013

Sunday, June 30, 2013

VARIOUS MASTER CIRCULARS ISSUED BY RBI ON 1st JULY 2013

VARIOUS MASTER CIRCULARS ISSUED BY RBI ON 1st JULY 2013


Dear Friends,


RBI , today , has updated its various master circulars and the same is given under for your reference:


11.       Master Circular on Miscellaneous Remittances from India – Facilities for Residents


2.       Master Circular on Foreign Investment in India- (FDI)


3.       Master Circular on Import of Goods and Services


4. Master Circular on Exports of Goods and Services


5.Master Circular on External Commercial Borrowings and Trade Credits


6. Master Circular on Direct Investment by Residents in Joint Venture (JV) /Wholly Owned Subsidiary (WOS) Abroad

7. Master Circular on Compounding of Contraventions under FEMA, 1999

8. Master Circular on Establishment of Liaison / Branch / Project Offices in India by Foreign Entities

9. Master Circular on Remittance Facilities for Non-Resident Indians / Persons of Indian Origin / Foreign Nationals

10. Master Circular on Acquisition and Transfer of Immovable Property in India by NRIs/PIOs/Foreign Nationals of Non-Indian Origin



Saturday, September 25, 2010

CAP on FDI in India and Procedures to be observed on receipt of FDI by an Investee Company:

CAP on FDI in India and Procedures to be observed on receipt of FDI by an Investee Company:


In majority of cases , 100% FDI is permitted without any prior approval from RBI or FIPB.

However , Approval is required for licensed industries such as hazardous chemicals and defense equipment .

Some Sectors have FDI cap which is detailed below :

Sector FDI Cap
• Private Banking 74%
• Telecom 74%
• Civil Aviation 49%
• Insurance 26%
• Single Brand Retail 51%
• News Media 26%
• Defense Sector 26%
  • Development of Townships , Housing , Built-up infrastructure and Construction -development projects- 100% 
Prohibited Sectors

• Agriculture with some exceptions
• Gambling & Lottery
• Retail (except Single Brand retail)
• REAL estate - Real Estate Business or Construction of Farm Houses
• Tobacco Products
Chitfund
Nidhi Company
Trading in Transferable Development Rights (TDRs).
Reserved For Government Sector only
• Atomic Energy
• Railways

Reporting of FDI to RBI –Procedures

In case of FDI only , allotment has to be made within 180 days of receipt of funds in India and investee company has to report to RBI within 30 days on receipt of funds. There is a separate form for this and it is known as “ Foreign Inward Remittance Reporting Form “. After filing this , RBI will allot a UIN (Unique Identification Number ) for each FDI reported to RBI. Allotment has to be made within 180 days of receipt of funds and Form FC-GPR is to be filed with your regional RBI within 30 days of allotment through your authorised dealer ( banker).
Along with the Form FC-GPR , the following certificates will have to be enclosed:
• A certificate from the Company Secretary of the company accepting investment from persons resident outside India certifying that
o All the requirements of the Companies Act, 1956 have been complied with;
o Terms and conditions of the Government approval, if any, have been complied with;
o The company is eligible to issue shares under these Regulations, and
o The company has all original certificates issued by Authorized Dealers in India evidencing receipt of amount of consideration.
• A certificate from Statutory Auditors or a Chartered Accountant indicating the manner of arriving at the price of the shares issued to the persons resident outside India.

In case of issue of bonus shares by an Indian company , even though there is no inflow of funds and but , the company has to file Form FC-GPR within 30 days of allotment of bonus shares to a foreign company through its authorised dealer.

R.V.Seckar

Friday, September 24, 2010

WHY INDIA IS LACKING IN ATTRACTING FDI AS COMPARED TO CHINA, BRAZIL, MEXICO, RUSSIA?

R.V.Seckar, M.Com, F.C.S, I.C.S.A (UK), LLB.
Company Secretary, Chandra Group of Companies

(This research article has been published in the 35th Regional Conference conducted by Institute of Company Secretaries of India , Chennai ( Southern) region on 23rd and 24th of July in Chennai .This article has secured 5 star ranking in SCRBD website.)

Many may recall the economy of India was in bad shape before 1991 as it had to pledge its entire gold reserves with World Bank when Mr. Chandra Sekhar was the Prime Minister of India to avail IMF loan and to poise its balance of trade.
No doubt, the economic liberalization introduced when Mr.ManMohan Singh was the finance minister in 1991 under then Mr.Narasimha Rao government had contributed acceleration in economic growth which has created substantial employment and reduced the poverty levels. India’s economic reform is supported by flow of FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) both into and outside India. However, India has to introduce further economic reforms to accomplish the government’s development goals like reducing inequality and poverty and increasing employment. In this research essay, I wish to emphasise the need for further reforms to attract more FDI to make India as economic super power by the turn of 2020.
Since 1991, economic reforms are being introduced in many phases. As a first step to attract more foreign investment, industrial licensing was abolished for all except 18 industries under the Industries Act of 1951. Further, in 1991, the number of sectors reserved for the public sector was reduced to eight as government wanted to have control only in railway, atomic energy, defense and other core sectors. Further, no prior
permission was needed to be obtained for investment in MRTP –designated companies in India since 1991.
To accelerate industrial growth and economic development, quantitative restrictions on imports have been virtually abolished and tariffs were reduced. The peak custom’s duty rate was reduced in FY 1991-92 from 150% to just 35% in 2001 and it was further reduced to just 10 % in 2007. India achieved current –account convertibility in 1994 by removing exchange controls on current-account transactions.
Since 1991, both FDI and portfolio investment have been liberalised. Foreign Institutional Investors (FIIs) have been permitted to invest in shares of listed companies in the Indian stock market from 1993 onwards.
In 1991, automatic approval for FDI projects with up to 51% of foreign equity in 34 specified sectors was introduced. Now, FDI is being allowed in almost in all sectors except gambling, lottery, retail trade (except single brand), defense, atomic energy and railways. Now, many sectors have opened for 100% foreign ownership without Indian government prior approval. Since 1991, as balance of payments has improved, Indian government has gradually relaxed its foreign-exchange restrictions on foreign investments.
In the post reform phase, India recorded an average economic growth rate of 6.5% per annum which included growth acceleration to 8.9% per annum since FY 2003-04. Further, poverty rate in India decreased from 26.1% in 1991 to 21.8% in 2007. It is to be noted that services sector, led by insurance, communication and information technology services which has outperformed other sectors.
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)

FDI increased by ten percent in December 2009 to $1.5 billion as compared to $1.36 billion in December 2008. This is the third consecutive month that FDI inflows have posted a vibrant year-on-year increases. (NASSCOM Mint Report 2010).
BPO Industry performance and FDI in BPO Sector in India.

year Exports (USD bn) Domestic (INR bn)
FY 08-09 47.1 590
FY 09-10 49.7 662
FY 10-11 (outlook) 56-57 761-775

BPO sector has accounted for over 10 percent of the total FDI investment in India in the last decade alone.


Source: http://www.nasscom.in/Nasscom/templates/NormalPage.aspx?id=58639

Outflow Foreign Direct Investment (OFDI)

Since 2000, India has been accumulating its OFDI (Outward Foreign Direct Investment) stocks. As of March 2008, India had invested about USD 49.8 billion in overseas stock which is a landmark development as considering just USD 3.7 billion in 2000. Though, in global level, India occupied 36th rank in OFDI in 2008 having 0.3% in 2008, among developing nations, India has gradually enhanced its dominance thereby becoming 13th largest nation in terms of OFDI stock in 2007. The lion’s share of India’s OFDI was parked in the developed countries and in 2006 about 32.3% was invested in stocks of developed nations. The major OFDI investment in developed nations by India mirrors trade-backing OFDI projects in these developed nations and acquisition of strategic assets have become a vital strategy for many Indian companies to enhance their competitiveness in an ever increasing competing environment.
Bilateral Investment Promotion Agreements (BIPAs)

With the help of BIPAs and double taxation avoidance agreements, government is able to increase the flow of FDI into India. Foreign investors in India have been offered strong guarantees in the post –establishment phase on fair and equitable treatment, national treatment, and non-expropriation without fair compensation, free repatriation of capital and profits and access to International arbitration. Further, to encourage more flow of FDI, double taxation agreement has removed tax disadvantages for MNCs functioning in India.
India is the largest recipient among developing economies in 2007
India has recorded a 3.6 times higher FDI in FY 2006-07 alone as compared to in the year 2003-04. An inflow of USD 34.4 billion in FY 2007 -08 which was in excess of government targeted figure of USD25 billion. It is to be noted that the aggregate of FDI inflows both to the whole world and to the developing world almost tripled from 2003 to 2007, in India, FDI inflows have rose more than five times during the analogues period. India was ranked in the 8th place in the size of FDI flows among developing nations with four percent of total FDI flows to developing economies.
Statistics of FDI inflows in India

CUMULATIVE FDI FLOWS INTO INDIA (1991 -2010).

1 Cumulative Amount of FDI Flows into India
[from April 2000 to March 2010]
(Equity inflows + including data on “Re-invested earnings ‘& Other Capital “which is available from April 2000 onwards. These are the estimates on an average basis, based upon data for the previous two years, published by RBI in their Monthly Bulletin. In INR In USD

USD 1,61,546 million
2 Cumulative Amount of FDI Equity Inflows
( from August 1991 to March 2010) Rs 5,77,108 Crores USD 1,32,428 million
Note: FDI inflows include amount received on account of advance pending for issuing of shares for the year 1999 to 2004.

Source: DIPP, March, 2010
Year –wise FDI Equity Inflows in to India – A comparison

In Rupees in Crores In USD million
2009-10 ( Up to March 2010 ) 123,377 25,888
2008-09 ( Up to March 2009) 123,025 27,331
% of growth over last year (+ ) 03% (-) 05 %
Source: DIPP, March, 2010
Current Position of country wise FDI flow into India

Ranks Country Cumulative Inflows
( April 2000 to March 2010 )
Rupees in crores Cumulative Inflows
( April 2000 to March 2010 )
USD in millions % to total inflows ( in terms of US $)
1 Mauritius 210,906
47,240 43%
2 Singapore 45,147
10,190 9%
3 U.S.A 37,190
8,278) 8%
4 U.K 25,998
5,884 5%
5 Netherlands 20,126
4487 4%
6 Cyprus 17,777
3899 4%
7 Japan 16,895
3714 3%
8 Germany 12,468
2799 3%
9 U.A.E 7,023
1,549 1%
10 France 6,919
1,530 1%
Total FDI Inflows into India 516,503
115,728
Source: DIPP, March, 2010

Note: (i) Indicates inflows under NRI Scheme of RBI, stock swapped and advances pending for issue of shares.
(ii) Cumulative Country –wise FDI equity inflows (from April 2000 to March 2010) – Annex A
( iii) % worked out in US$ terms and FDI inflows received through FIPB / SIA + RBI’s Automatic Route + acquisition of existing shares only.



Sector wise FDI Investment in India

Ranks Sector Cumulative Inflows
( April 2000 to March 2010 )
Rupees in crores Cumulative Inflows
( April 2000 to March 2010 )
USD in millions % to total inflows ( in terms of US $)
1 Service Sector
( financial & non-financial) 105,411
23,640 21%
2 Computer Software and Hardware 43,846
9872
9%
3 Telecommunications
( radio, paging ,cellular mobile , basic telephone services) 40,706 8931 8%
4 Housing & Real Estate 37,369 8357 8%
5 Construction Activities
(including roads & Highways) 35,721 8059 7%
6 Power 20,919 4,627 4%
7 Automobile Industry 20,677 4,565 4%
8 Metallurgical Industries 13,440 3,130 3%
9 Petroleum & Natural Gas 11,504 2,666 2%
10 Chemicals ( other than fertilizers) 11,274 2,496 2%

Source: DIPP, March, 2010




However, FDI inflows in India do not play a pivotal role in capital formation. FDI in India constituted about 4.7% of gross fixed capital formation over 2004-06 which is much lower than the 10.6 percent found in developing Asia , 12.4% in developing nations and 10.4% in the globe as whole. However, India stood at 35th and 13th largest destination for FDI stock which reached USD 118.3 billion in March 2008. India’s FDI stock accounted for 0.5% of aggregate of stocks in the world and 1.5% of FDI stocks in the developing nation.
India’s FDIs stock increased to 10.4% in FY 2007-08 as a ratio to GDP but this number is much lesser than the average ratio of 27.8% in the world as a whole and 29.2% in the developing world in 2007.
Bottlenecks in attracting FDI into India

Statistics about FDI flows to developing nations in 2007

China 14%
Hong Kong ( China) 10%
Russia 9%
Brazil 6%
Mexico 4.2%
Saudi Arabia 4.2%
Singapore 4.1%
India 4%

Why India is in 10th place in attracting FDI into India? Why it has been relegated to the 10th place in attracting FDI. Definitely it is due to rigorous administrative procedures that a recipient company has to follow in case of receipt of foreign investment in India.

Foreign investors wanted to know whether their investments would be safe in India and whether they could rely on the local legal system for redress of grievances. Unlike China, India is a democracy and there is the rule of the law in India. However, there is lack of an effective and expeditious alternative dispute resolution mechanism which India should strengthen in this gamut of law.
Further, in India, administrative procedure is more cumbersome and stringent. On receipt of FDI, investee has to report to RBI through his banker within 30 days and allotment has to be made within six months of receipt of funds. Non-observance of this procedure lands a recipient company in a serious trouble. As RBI officials are toothed with extraordinary authority to levy penalty for simple, non-intentional failure to report to RBI, fine to the tune of three or four times of FDI received are levied by RBI officials arbitrarily.
According to Chartered Accountant’s Association, Mumbai, in one case, an OCB invested in India rupees 8.5 crores (approximately) with the prior approval of FIPB. The OCB wanted to set up a power plant in Chhattisgarh. There was a condition of local participation up to 40per cent. For four years they ran from pillar to post for several Government permissions.
Neither they got Government permission nor could they find a local investor. Ultimately, they were frustrated and gave up the project. Hence they transferred the funds to a sister company where the OCB already had some investments. The Company delayed in filing intimation. The Company could not allot shares to OCB as it could not locate a local
investor which was a pre-condition of FIPB approval. In the meanwhile, RBI issued Circular No. 20 dated 14.12.2007 prohibiting allotment of shares beyond 180 days of receipt of funds.
For these offenses, RBI imposed a Compounding sum of more than Rs. 3 crores! Company admits the violations of non-intimation, non-filing of forms; and step down investment. Still, such a stiff penalty for all procedural violations where there is no foreign exchange loss and nothing illegal or immoral!!!
Policy Changes to attract more FDI into India
To be at par with China in attracting FDI, Indian government should introduce the following policy changes in FDI policy;
• Indian government should come forward to relax the FDI sector gaps in the sectors like retail trade ,insurance and banking and should review regularly the remaining FDI limitations to evaluate whether their cost do not overshadow their anticipated advantages.
• As a basis for cross-state monitoring of FDI performance, India should develop a system of comparable FDI statistics for union territories and states.
• Indian government should carry out a detailed study into the design of mechanisms that can be used by it to stimulate states to strengthen the investment approval procedures.
• By employing OECD’s Checklists for FDI incentive policies as a reference, Indian government should convene a study and or establishing an inter-state forum to evaluate the benefits and costs of investment incentive, their openness and their effect on other states.
• Fortifying implementation of measures to enhance the corporate responsibility and transparency to fine tune India more closely with internationally –acknowledged practices and standards.
Conclusion
RBI has issued a new circular for compounding under FEMA - RBI/2009-10/ 56 A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 56 dated June 28, 2010. With this the directions contained in the compounding of contravention/s issued vide A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No.31 dated February 1, 2005 are superseded by this circular. However, Government should come forward to liberalise further by taking bold steps for compounding of non-intentional, non-pecuniary reporting offenses by investee companies under FEMA.
If India really wants to have maximum economic development and to attain the status of economic super power by the year 2020, it should ease the FDI norms and should further liberalise its FDI reporting procedures. An investee company should be allowed to report to RBI within 6 months of receipt of FDI and allotment has to be made within one year from receipt of funds. Further, a separate ombudsman like appellate authority should be created for the redressal of grievances in case of lapse or failure to report the receipt of FDI .In case of non-intentional, non-mens rea lapses, mere warning should be given to the erring investee companies rather than levying hefty fines which is unwarranted. Government should send a study team to China, Hongkong, Brazil, Mexico etc to have a glimpse over their procedures for FDI in these nations and on basis of recommendation of such committee, India should liberalise further its procedures for attracting more FDI in par with the China so that it could be turn itself as economic superpower by the turn of 2020.


List of References
OECD (2010). OECD Investment Policy Reviews: India 2009. New York: OECD Publications.
Nasscom. (4 February 2010) Mint Report from Nasscom. Available from http://www.nasscom.in/Nasscom/templates/NormalPage.aspx?id=58649
Nasscom. (4 February 2010). Indian IT-BPO Industry Exports Touches USD 50 Billion. Available from http://www.nasscom.in/Nasscom/templates/NormalPage.aspx?id=58639