Submit your Article

 Rupandehi’s Siddhart­hanagar municipality has been accused of impos­ing ‘unscientific taxes’. It is indeed curious that the retail vegetable sellers are being charged more than estab­lished businesses

.The municipality has recently set a new tax rate for the current fiscal. According to the new list, the munici­pality will charge Rs 7.65 daily (Rs 2,800 a year) from food wholesalers. In comparison, vegetable sellers in the local farmers’ market have to pay Rs 37 daily. As the farmers’ market is held twice a week, their total yearly tax outlay comes to Rs 3,640. But other industries and businesses which earn profits in lakhs are having to fork out much less.

In most areas of the municipality, tax rates have increased, by as much as 900 percent. While the taxes imposed on Lumbini Rana Ambika Eye Hospital of ward number 3 has not increased, the municipality has increased taxes on a private medical col­lege by a whopping 900 per­cent. The medical college had to pay Rs 5,000 last year; this year, it pays Rs 50,000.

Similarly, wholesale cloth­ing stores that had to pay Rs 1,000 last year will now have to pay Rs 5,000, an increase of 400 percent. Likewise, last year, the retail clothing stores had to pay Rs 600. After taxes levied on them increased by 317 percent, they now will have to pay Rs 2,500.

Those who sell vegetables in baskets at the farmers’ mar­ket will now have to pay Rs 30, compared to Rs 25 earlier. For other vegetable sellers the levy has gone up from Rs 30 to Rs 35. Sellers in farmers’ mar­ket rue that even though the taxes have increased, there has been no improvement in the facilities provided by the municipality to improve the market.

Abadh Bihari, who sells veg­etables, complains that high taxes have created problems for him. He says he is paying as much as Rs 120 in daily taxes, even though the municipality claims it is collecting only Rs 35 a day from such sellers.

Ramu Kandu has a similar story. For his daily quota of 15 kilos of garlic he has to pay Rs 100 in taxes. “I do not even earn a profit of Rs 100!” he complains.

The increased municipal taxes have been met with growing protests, being orga­nized by big and small busi­nesses alike. The main Rupan­dehi trade body has even sent a memorandum to the mayor of the municipality. Organiza­tion chairman Narayan Prasad Bhandari expressed his ire at the increase of taxes for small businessmen by 400-500 per­cent. He said the municipality had ignored their suggestion to limit tax increase to 20-25 percent. The businessmen have warned that they would have to start an anti-tax move­ment if adjustments are not made soon.

 The foreign affairs experts and former diplomats have said one of the major focuses of the BIMSTEC could be the reduction of climate change effects. During a discussion organized at Foreign Ministry on August 22, former ambassadors and diplomats also argued that time has come to link all members of the BIMSTEC through air, land and sea routes, which, they said, was essen­tial for trade promotion.

Minister for Foreign Affairs Pradeep Kumar Gyawali said the major agenda of the forthcoming fourth BIMSTEC summit would be the establishment of BIMSTEC development fund for the holistic development of member states, formulation of charter, and the schemes to steer the member states towards peace, prosperity and sustainability along with the elimination of poverty.

According to him, Nepal, as the BIM­STEC Chair and the country hosting the event, has equally prioritized the finalization of the draft of the Kathman­du Declaration, making the organiza­tion effective and result-oriented and expanding the areas of cooperation. The 14 areas of cooperation of BIMSTEC could be cut down and concentrated on poverty alleviation, the minister added.

BIMSTEC was established 22 years ago and currently has Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka and Thailand as its members.

All seven member states have confirmed their participation in what will be the fourth BIMSTEC summit, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. President Bidya Devi Bhandari will meet leaders of BIMSTEC mem­ber states and host a luncheon in their honor on August 30. PM Oli will host a dinner for them on the same eve­ning. On August 31, the leaders will witness the signing of the legal instru­ment of BIMSTEC and consider the draft Kathmandu Declaration

 There is much debate about what exactly the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is. The BRI is, in my view, a way for China to make profit and not an aid of any kind. Some developing countries such as Sir Lanka and the Maldives have actually fallen into debt traps while trying to repay BRI loans. Although Chinese President Xi Jinping has famous­ly said that China is a peaceful nation and will not interfere in the affairs of any other country, the case of Sir Lanka, which has been forced to effectively sell one of its important ports to the Chinese, tells a different story. Pakistan, where China has already poured $60 billion into the China-Pa­kistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), is yet another example of coun­tries in South Asia that have faced turmoil shortly after embarking on China-led BRI projects. This is not to stigmatize the project but only to remind the Nepali stakeholders that we have to be mindful of our nation­al interest while getting involved in such mega projects.

Although some analysts have labelled the BRI “China’s Marshall Plan,” that is not the right label. The Marshall Plan was introduced to rebuild the Western Europe dev­astated after the Second World War. Whereas BRI, “the project of the 21st century,” is the brainchild of Chinese President Jinping advertised as a ‘common benefit’ model.

The Marshall Plan of the Amer­icans had sought to control the recipient countries politically and economically. The BRI, on the other hand, does not push communist ideology onto participating countries. Even so countries such as Nepal, which have an ever-grow­ing trade deficit with China, need to clearly spell out what changes they would like to see in their relationship with China during the implementation of the BRI.

The BRI brings about a new con­cept of regional and global devel­opment; every bilateral agreement China has had with individual coun­tries is unique. What all agreements do have in common is that they are negotiated and finalized in a way that fosters mutual trust and a win-win spirit. This facilitates pooling of financial risk and brings about differ­ent forms of cooperation.

Nepal can benefit from this ini­tiative, not the least by reducing its over-dependence on India. Before growing economically closer with China, however, Nepal needs to address some issues first.

The BRI, if implemented well, has the potential to take trade rela­tions between Nepal and China to new heights. However, the trade balance heavily favors China. According to the Trade and Export Promotion Center (TEPC), China has surpassed India in trade with Nepal. Since 2006, Chinese trade with Nepal has grown 17 times faster than trade with India.

Yet Nepal’s trade with China in the past year shows that Nepal’s exports have decreased by 22.6 percent while imports have jumped by 13.8 percent (TEPC, 2017). Nepal hasn’t been able to decrease its trade deficit despite the removal of tariffs for nearly 900 Nepali prod­ucts in China. The government of Nepal still appears unprepared and unclear on this issue.

The main objective of BRI is infra­structure and connectivity. China has ample things to export. But what are we going to export to China? Or is our joining BRI limited to importing more Chinese goods and tourists? BRI will help us only if we can re-cus­tomize it to our benefit.

China and India are the only neighbors of Nepal. We have no choice but to befriend them. But to end the asymmetric dependence of Nepal on India, China is only a slightly better choice.

It is true that Nepal wants to escape from political, economic and even psychological hegemony of India. But we should not see China as an alternate to India. Nepal needs to take urgent steps to correct the policy course from ‘equidistance’ to ‘equi-proximity’ with two neighbors.

If we don’t undertake proper homework in the near future, BRI could be next World Trade Organi­zation for Nepal. The country has not been able to do much with its membership of the WTO since it joined in 2004 

The author is with Annapurna Post’s foreign affairs bureau

 Yemen’s 31-year-old Gadam Yahuya Ali Mohammed’s Nepali visa had expired on January 24. When he went to get his visa renewed, six months after its expiry, he was arrested by the Immigration Office Pokhara and sent back to his home country. Similarly, Russia’s Yevg­eny Fedorov, Japan’s Isu Hashimoto and Sweden’s Martinson Torebhairat were also found to have overstayed their visa. From Pokhara, they were first sent to Kath­mandu from where they were deported. 

In the fiscal 2017-18, Pokha­ra’s Immigration Office has sent nine such foreigners to Kathmandu. Although many foreigners are stay­ing illegally in Nepal, sel­dom are they apprehended and punished.

According to tourism entre­preneurs in Pokhara, for­eigners who overstay, beg or sell trinkets on footpaths are mostly poor. Although many locals know about them, they are seldom reported.

“Only when they some­times fight or destroy hotel property do people bother to inform the police,” says Lal Bahadur Thapa, a police officer with the Tourist Police Unit of Pokhara. “And only then is the real status of their visa known.” He also informs that there has till date been no concerted effort to search for illegal immigrants