Sunday, July 12, 2020  | 20 ZUL-QAADAH, 1441
Samaa TV
Facebook Twitter Youtube
HOME > Opinion

Asad Umar and instant magic for Pakistan’s broken economy

SAMAA | - Posted: May 7, 2019 | Last Updated: 1 year ago
Posted: May 7, 2019 | Last Updated: 1 year ago
Asad Umar and instant magic for Pakistan’s broken economy

Asad Umar’s removal as finance minister has triggered a debate on his performance while in office. Is he really the failure he is being described as, or was it too early to expect results from him?
Did he really fail to give direction to the economy as many claim or are his critics being lazy and ignoring the strategy he devised?

The economy
In order to evaluate him fairly, we should first have a picture of the economy he inherited. As with more or less every government over the last three decades, the current one also inherited a nearly bankrupt economy and had to start by seeking a foreign bailout. This time, however, the scale of the bailout needed was much larger than any in the past. The reason for this is an out-of-control trade deficit in recent years, which hit a record figure of $37.7b in 2017-18.

One major reason the trade deficit reached such huge proportions, other than low productivity and our competitiveness, was Ishaq Dar’s policy to keep the rupee artificially over-valued.
Let’s say the country is running a big deficit between its foreign exchange earnings and expenditures, and the natural exchange rate based on the supply and demand for dollars should be Rs140 per dollar but the central bank artificially keeps it down at Rs100 per dollar by dumping dollars from its forex reserves in the market. This effectively means giving anyone who imports something worth a dollar a generous subsidy of Rs40. On the flip side, for someone exporting an item worth $1, this means the government is taking away Rs40, which is essentially like a tax.

This makes the country’s products more expensive for foreign buyers, undermining their cost-competitiveness. With imports becoming cheaper than they should be, naturally, people are able to easily buy more imported products, and this creates an artificial feeling of relative economic stability and well-being even while the country runs unsustainable trade deficits.

But this can only last until the central bank runs out of its dollar reserves, at which point, it cannot artificially maintain the exchange rate any more. The joyride then ends, the local currency comes crashing down with a painful adjustment, economic growth drastically shrinks, and in more severe cases, the economy even contracts. Being in a crisis, the country then has to seek a foreign bailout.

This is the kind of situation that was building up in Pakistan under Ishaq Dar. Even Miftah Ismail realized this, and allowed the rupee to partially devalue during his year as finance minister. But being in an election year, he left the inevitable fuller devaluation and run to the IMF for the post-election period, thus allowing the crisis to worsen.

Overall, our imports rose from $45b in 2012-3 to $60.9b in 2017-8. Exports fell from about $24.5b to $23.2b in the same period. Even after adjusting for foreign remittances, this left a current account deficit of about $18b in 2017-8 alone. Consequently, the new government inherited a major crisis, in which it now had to take some difficult steps like allowing the currency to fully devalue and seeking a foreign bailout.

Asad Umar’s strategy
It is against this backdrop that Asad Umar gave his strategy to turn the economy around. The salient features can be summarized as follows:

  1. Allow the rupee to depreciate to its real market value in order to curb imports and make exports more competitive according to standard exchange rate theory.
  2. Seek foreign assistance to plug the existing external deficit.
  3. Provide some relief by reducing the tax on oil in order to reduce the impact of high prices due to currency devaluation.
  4. Arrange for industry to get electricity at competitive rates in order to promote exports.
  5. Address the problem of withheld sales tax rebates for the textile industry. The previous government had been withholding over Rs100b of their funds.
  6. Announce major cuts in indirect taxes for several business sectors in the mini-budget given in January in order to revive economic growth, and hope that the loss of revenue from such measures would be offset by an improvement in direct tax collection and additional revenue generated from an increase in economic activity.
  7. Simplify government rules and regulations in order to make it easier to do business in the country.
  8. Bring in several reforms in tax collection including the simplification of procedures and tax forms, the use of technology to collect data, and a plan to separate tax collection from policy making. The reasoning behind the latter was that if FBR officials responsible for collection have a major role in shaping tax policy, they tend to resort to easy measures such as indirect taxes instead of working on improving direct tax collection.
  9. Create the so-called Sarmaya fund for the revival of state-owned corporations, which would create a buffer between the government and these organizations, thus allowing them to be professionally managed without undue political interference.

We should debate whether this is a good plan for the economy. We can disagree with it and shred it to bits with logic if we find flaws in it. We should also debate how Asad Umar was doing on implementing these strategies, or at least the ones that were under his purview. But repeating the mantra that he never gave a plan is like asking whether Majnoo was a boy or a girl, after a whole night’s narration of the Laila Majnoo story. Unfortunately, a large section of our media suffers from the Laila Majnoo syndrome, and what stands out most strongly about the majority of criticism directed at Asad Umar is the almost total absence of any specifics on what he was doing wrong or what should be done instead.

There is criticism from some quarters that Asad Umar created too much uncertainty by delaying the IMF. Yes, he didn’t immediately go to the IMF. There were two reasons behind this: (a) our overall populist narrative on the IMF to which the PTI itself has irresponsibly contributed over the years; and (b), the very genuine concern that the IMF will demand measures that will depress growth and result in more hardship for people.

So the idea was to get some funding from elsewhere first and then approach the IMF in a stronger bargaining position in order to secure better terms. Now, there is definitely room for legitimate difference of opinion on whether this was a better choice than going for an IMF bailout immediately, but it cannot be called a lack of policy. Also, it’s hard to imagine that this was Asad Umar’s decision alone and not that of Imran Khan himself. It is also clear that many of the people bashing Asad Umar for the whole crisis and baying for his blood would have been doing the same had he gone to the IMF immediately. Then they would have been blaming him for the harsh austerity measures demanded by the IMF.

In any case, the claim that the IMF delay seriously hurt investment sentiment by creating too much uncertainty is very hard to justify considering that the delay was only for a few months, and by and large, it was clear that they are going to the IMF. Those making this assertion do not offer any plausible argument or evidence to show that many investors were holding off on their plans for business expansion or new ventures just because the government delayed the IMF. Also, it is not as if the government was doing nothing in this period; it did secure funds from Saudi Arabia, China and the UAE while it was taking longer with the IMF. In the larger scheme of things, the real issue is whether the government is able to carry out some of the badly needed reforms to put the economy on a sustainable growth trajectory, and not engage in some pointless nitpicking over an insignificant delay in rushing to the IMF.

From the point of view of achieving sustainable growth, Asad Umar’s announced strategy, which was summarized above, is fairly reasonable, though there are also some aspects that can be legitimately questioned. What we need is a shift from an economy running on unsustainable consumption fueled by an overvalued currency to one centered on investment. The devaluation of the currency, the cuts in indirect taxes on businesses in the mini-budget announced in January, and the promise of providing energy at competitive rates to industry, are steps in the right direction to this end. These measures represent a bold attempt to make a departure from the usual script that focuses on austerity and indirect taxes in order to make up for the state’s inability to collect direct taxes. The success or failure of this strategy will, however, ultimately depend on whether the government succeeds in improving direct tax collection and reducing unproductive spending in areas such as defense or the losses of state-owned enterprises. And there is absolutely no case for making Asad Umar the punching bag or fall guy based on any of these items, and that too so soon.

There is, of course, room for legitimate debate and criticism on the Sarmaya fund and whether that is a better option than privatization. My opinion is that if the PTI government has decided to have a go at reviving them within the public sector, then it is welcome to give it a try. But then, it should clearly announce that if these corporations do not show improvement according to some clear benchmarks by a certain deadline, then they are being privatized. That said, privatization itself has been a tough nut to crack, and will inevitably come laden with controversy and layoffs. In either case, it is again hard to imagine that the decision not to pursue privatization is Asad Umar’s personal decision alone, and not that of Imran Khan. There are also some valid criticisms concerning the way this government has gone back and forth on whether tax non-filers can purchase real estate and large cars, or the announcement of the recent amnesty scheme. But again, these are not on Asad Umar alone, and in either case, are not significant enough to warrant his removal.

What about the performance of the economy under his watch? To be honest, eight months is too soon for us to expect a quick turnaround. So naturally, the results are somewhat mixed at this point. For example, imports have decreased due to currency devaluation, but exports have not responded yet. Whether this is because of a time lag or due to some other issues, is again too soon to tell. Besides, the more fundamental structural problems of our industry cannot be fixed instantly.

There are some reports of improved optimism and new investments coming up in the textile sector. But again, whether it represents a temporary phase or the start of something more solid and long-term, is premature. The FBR is having some difficulty meeting its tax targets. The government has explained this in terms of the decrease in imports, leading to a fall in taxes associated with imported products, and the cut in tax on items like oil in order to partially offset the effect of rupee devaluation. Whether this adequately accounts for the failure to meet targets, and whether the measures to reform the FBR and improve tax collection eventually work, is again, too early to tell. In any case, Asad Umar was not in charge of the FBR, so ultimately its performance cannot be laid at his door.

Overall, the results thus far are certainly not a complete failure as partisan critics would have us believe. Those who have been portraying Asad Umar as an unmitigated disaster have done the country no favours, whether they are motivated by vested interests, political point-scoring or some other bias against the PTI, media ratings, or the desire for immediate results. They have offered no set of intelligent benchmarks against which he was supposedly failing and the next finance minister is expected to deliver within a few months.

There is no quick fix, and no matter who is in charge, we are in for a painful period for at least the next two to three years. Then, if the government is able to address some of the structural problems, might we start seeing a revival of the economy in a way that is sustainable, and does not end in another crisis in the next government’s lap like Dar’s window-dressed economy. Whether they achieve this or not, is the ultimate yardstick for the success or failure of this government on the economy. The yardstick cannot be whether they deliver some instant magic.

The writer has a PhD in particle physics from Harvard University. @AqilSajjad


FaceBook WhatsApp


  1. Anonymous  May 7, 2019 8:23 pm/ Reply

    You know nothing about the economy. Stick to physics.

    • G N Jarwar  May 8, 2019 11:31 am/ Reply

      So dear what ever you know , plz explain or bring counter argument , with all indicators & possibilities…! I think SAMA editorial will appreciate your opinion otherwise this is unethical way to comment.

  2. Adv G N Jarwar Hyderabad  May 8, 2019 12:55 am/ Reply

    Calculated & very rationally based article, i think Asad Umar flaw was that his priorities were focus on work not addressing the issues bluntly on media, like N leagues used to do,being experienced in this beat & other thing was that , he reversed with decisions without marking the impact at public at large. Appreciated article without any doubt.. well done . Thanx Samaa to bring such rational write up on record.

  3. Ali Asgher  May 8, 2019 3:09 am/ Reply

    Steering the debate in the right direction!

    Couldn’t have been more accurate. These incompetent anchors, so called media experts, writers and columnists are ruining the whole concept of debate, arguments and constructive criticism. Today, our biggest source of information comprises of nothing but loud agenda driven shows devoid of any substance. We desperately need more voices to point these discussions towards the right issues the country is facing and where we can improve.

  4. Khalid Mahmood  May 8, 2019 7:30 am/ Reply

    Good thinking

  5. Ch. KA Nye  May 8, 2019 2:56 pm/ Reply

    Of course, Jiyalas and Patwaris will continue to criticise for the sake of being critical and to justify their own corruption.

  6. uuy  May 8, 2019 7:15 pm/ Reply

    dude i just got a huge impression gained for samaa, excellent article.

  7. Aamir Chaudry  May 8, 2019 10:27 pm/ Reply

    Best analysis on Asad performance , above political divide.

  8. Atif Hamid Khan  May 9, 2019 8:12 am/ Reply

    Particle physics expert explains economy, beyond my understanding……prove a link ?.

    • Indian  May 11, 2019 11:16 am/ Reply

      I can mention three links:
      1. He went to school
      2. He has common sense

      Of course, I did not mention that, as a particle physicist, he is well trained to drill down the granularities of any subject matter and offer a rational conclusion.

  9. Tanvir Mahmud  May 9, 2019 10:37 pm/ Reply

    The article should be judged on merit and not on the basis of authors credentials … shows a lack of understanding of research and scholarship … the way the author also has a degree in business administration and economics and politics of Pakistan is his passion ……by this warped logic the great Dr pervez hoodbhoy should also only talk about physics only but he is a passionate Pakistani who laments the lack of enlightenment and scholarship and above all a strong sense of not understanding an alternate view point which may not necessarily coincide with ones thinking …….despite their individual views that may be parochial universities in the west are great because in the academic environment everyone is free to put forward his views which will be accepted if adequate research and logic has gone in to it ……right to disagree but only on the basis of logic …not otherwise

  10. Tariq Khalil  May 10, 2019 6:32 am/ Reply

    A good analysis
    Asad was on right track but vested interests wanted him to cut down both PPP and MLN
    Eight months is no time

  11. Anonymous  May 10, 2019 2:30 pm/ Reply

    Good and in-depth analysis

  12. AFCS  May 21, 2019 2:30 am/ Reply

    Today ArcelorMittal made a INR 42K crore (US$6 billion) bid for distressed assets of Bankrupt Essar Steel. Loose change for Laxmi Mittal. What does this say about the begging bowl size of PAK economy and school children trying to play politics with 200 million peoples lives. Just hot air.Cry and shame.

  13. Akbar Hayat  July 10, 2019 3:39 am/ Reply

    As a layman,I appreciate your analysis of the whole situation.I hope you propose some practical solutions for improving the economy.In my view,privatisation is not good rather it’s unjust and criminal.hope you will write an article on privatisation

Tell us what you think:

Your email address will not be published.

FaceBook WhatsApp

About Us   |   Anchor Profiles   |   Online Advertising   |   Contact Us   |   Feedback   |   Apps   |   FAQs   |   Authors   |   Comment Policy
Facebook   |   Twitter   |   Instagram   |   YouTube   |   WhatsApp