Pakistan Economy: News & Discussion

[Indx TechStyle]

Fiscal health deteriorating sharply, half-year data shows

While defence expenditure went up, spending on the Public Sector Development Programme was reduced by 37pc. — File photo

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s fiscal deficit crossed 2.7 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) in the first half of this fiscal year – the highest in eight years – despite government’s claims to have put the house in order with greater fiscal discipline and austerity.

Almost all the major fiscal indicators – both on expenditure and revenue side – showed deterioration in first half of the current fiscal year when compared to same period of last year.

According to fiscal operations data released by the Ministry of Finance on Wednesday, the fiscal deficit in absolute terms amounted to Rs1.029 trillion in first half (July-December 2018) that was almost 30pc higher than same period of last year – the pre-election spending session of PML-N.

Fiscal operations report July-Dec 2018

For its part, the PTI government slashed development spending and net lending by a massive 36pc to rein in runaway spending in mark up payments and defence, posting an increase of 32pc and 22pc respectively.

The country has never posted such a higher fiscal deficit since 2010-11 when the gap between the government revenues and expenditure stood at 2.9pc of GDP or Rs490 billion in absolute terms. Nevertheless, the country’s fiscal deficit had stood 2.6pc in 2012-13 and 2.5pc twice in 2011-12 and 2016-17.

While defence expenditure went up, spending on the Public Sector Development Programme was reduced by 37pc.

The Ministry of Finance reported that defence expenditure and mark up payments also posted an upward journey as share of the size of the national economy (GDP), leaving little space for the government to spend on improvements in the living standards of the people in the form of infrastructure development and social sector spending.

Data showed the total mark up payments amounted to Rs877bn in first six months of the current fiscal year compared to Rs751bn of same period of last year, showing an increase of Rs126bn or 32pc. As percentage of GDP, mark up consumed 2.3pc compared to 2.1pc of GDP the same period last year.

The defence expenditure in first six months of current year stood at Rs479.6bn compared to Rs393bn of same period last year, showing a jump of 22pc or Rs87bn. Its share in GDP also inched up to 1.2pc this year against 1.1pc of GDP same period last year.

Unfortunately this led to a cut back in the Public Sector Development Programme (PSDP). The PSDP spending in first half of this year plummeted to Rs328bn compared to Rs520bn of same period last year, showing a reduction of 37pc or about Rs192bn. This is also evident from the fact that overall development spending and net lending dropped to a paltry 1pc of GDP compared to 1.6pc of GDP of last year.

The total expenditure in first half of CFY amounted to Rs3.36tr against Rs3.18tr of comparable period last year, showing an increase of 5.5pc. The trade off in spending between non-productive and productive sectors of economy helped contain FY19 total expenditure at 8.7pc of GDP compared to 8.9pc in FY18.

The current expenditure, however, remained out of control. For example, current expenditure in FY19 stood at Rs2.98tr compared to Rs2.55tr of FY18, showing an increase of Rs44bn or about 18pc. The current expenditure stood at 7.8pc of GDP during CFY, significantly higher than 7.1pc of GDP last year.

On the other hand, total revenue collection dropped to just 6.1pc of GDP in first half of current year compared to 6.6pc of GDP last fiscal. Tax revenue was also down to 5.4pc of GDP this year compared to 5.6pc of last year. The performance of non-tax revenue was no exception that stood at 0.6pc of GDP in first half of CFY compared to 1pc of GDP same period last year.

The revenue performance in absolute terms was no better either. For example, total revenue collection stood at Rs2.33tr in first half of current year compared to Rs2.38tr of last year, showing a reduction of Rs58bn or 2.43pc. This is perhaps a rare phenomenon that revenue collection has ever been lower than previous year.

Tax revenue amounted to Rs2.08tr in first half of current year compared to Rs2.03tr, showing a nominal increase of Rs55bn or 2.71pc. Normally, the tax revenue should increase every year at the cumulative rate of inflation and economic growth rate. That means the tax revenue should have automatically increased by at least 11pc (over 4pc GDP plus over 7pc inflation).

Direct taxes also dropped to 1.8pc of GDP during CFY against 1.9pc of same time last year. Taxes on goods and properties also declined to 2.1pc of GDP compared to 2.2pc. The share of sales tax also dropped to 1.8pc of GDP from 1.9pc last year.

Non-tax revenue also dropped to Rs245bn in first six months compared to Rs358bn of same period last year, down by a massive Rs113bn or 32pc. Both the federal and provincial revenues contributed to poor tax revenue performance. Provincial revenue slightly increased in absolute terms to Rs188bn this year against Rs176bn of last year while federal revenue inched up to Rs1.89tr compared to Rs1.85tr of same period last year.

 

[suny6611]

so only the defense exp. were increased, even if revenue collection is dropping all over.

further increase in defense due to mobilization to Indian front ... any idea what amt. will be spent ?

 

[indiatester]

so only the defense exp. were increased, even if revenue collection is dropping all over.

further increase in defense due to mobilization to Indian front ... any idea what amt. will be spent ?

For Operation Parakram, it cost pakis 1.4 billion $'s in 2001. We had not really engaged them then.
Without engagement and considering simple inflation, it should be $12-$15 million per day at Operation Parakram level spending.
https://www.rediff.com/money/2003/jan/16defence.htm

However, if we consider intense engagement, it should go close to a billion a day (guesstimate based on cost of WWR https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...on-shortage/story-NKD9UTDuws4DWQYAyKPfIK.html)

If we add naval blockade, then things will get even more interesting.

 

[Mikesingh]

Mmkjho

No, USA has genuinely stopped giving aid to middle east affairs. USA was in alliance for petrodollar with middle east which is now falling apart. USA is now unable to buy PETROLEUM from their dollars due to middle east imposing some severe condition for exporting to USA. Other countries can still import oil using dollars but the oil can't be used for USA economy. USA will only get a small amount of oil a day as compensation for maintaining international bases in middle east till they are also withdrawn.

So, it happened that USA now wants to close down its economy and is unwilling to expend ita resources on foreign affairs. This includes troops deployment in Syria, Afghanistan, payment to Pakistan etc.

But Pakistan was always the stooge of KSA and not USA. Earlier USA used to pay Pakistan as an indirect way of paying by Saudi Arabia alliance. But niw Saudis are directly paying Pakistan without middleman of USA.

So, the omly difference from back then to now is that USA has lost its relevance significantly. But the significance of KSA, UAE etc remains intact. So, Pakistan will be continued to be paid, but by the Arabs directly instead of via USA

In this case grants from the Saudis are not free. Pak will have to pay back the amount with interest which was not the case with aid from the US. Even if the Pakis manage to borrow from the IMF, it will be under tough conditionalities. Payback time is when its going to hurt real bad. As it is, 80% of their borrowings goes into paying off previous loans and interest!!

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

In this case grants from the Saudis are not free. Pak will have to pay back the amount with interest which was not the case with aid from the US. Even if the Pakis manage to borrow from the IMF, it will be under tough conditionalities. Payback time is when its going to hurt real bad. As it is, 80% of their borrowings goes into paying off previous loans and interest!!

The recent 20 billion dollars is investment, not loan. Pakistan will have to repay politicallly like giving nuclear technology, giving missile technology etc.

Pakistan will lose nothing in the process. This is funds from an Islamic viewpoint, not economic viewpoint

 

[IBRIS]

Pakistani government fails to secure $3.2 billion UAE oil facility

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has not been able to secure $3.2 billion oil on deferred payments facility from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) – a major development which may again bring under stress official foreign currency reserves that have so far been maintained with help of friendly countries. “Most probably, the UAE oil facility agreement will not materialise,” Finance Minister Asad Umar on Wednesday confirmed to The Express Tribune. But he hastily added that the government has made alternative arrangements to meet its external financing needs for this fiscal year. The reasons for cancellation of the $3.2 billion oil facility by the UAE could not be immediately ascertained. Last month, the UAE had also postponed a scheduled meeting of the Joint Ministerial Commission. The $3.2 billion oil facility was part of the $6.2 billion that the UAE had announced to give to Pakistan in December to help the country passing through difficult economic times. The UAE has already transferred $2 billion cash into the coffers of the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) and another $1 billion was expected very soon. During the visit of UAE crown prince, Pakistani authorities had hoped that the crown prince would announce the $3.2 billion credit oil facility following the same model of Saudi Arabia. Later on, the February deadline was given that was also missed. It will be a setback for the Finance Ministry that had declared fully bridging the financing gap on back of $14.5 billion financial support from the UAE, Saudi Arabia and China. So far, only Saudi Arabia has given $3 billion in cash and its oil facility on deferred payments has also been finalised. The development came amid a delay in finalisation of an agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The negotiations with the IMF are continued since October last year. Two ($2) billion dollar loans are also expected from China next week, said the Finance Ministry that tried to downplay the cancellation of $3.2 billion UAE oil facility. The $3.2 billion UAE oil facility was expected to take the pressure off from the foreign exchange market besides stabilising the official foreign currency reserves. Pakistan arranged $3 billion cash from Saudi Arabia at 3.2% interest rate. The UAE cash support has been secured for a period of two years at an interest rate of 3%, according to a written reply that Asad Umar submitted in the Senate last week. The official foreign currency reserves stood at $8.1 billion as of end of last week that is inclusive of Saudi Arabian, Chinese and UAE cash assistance. “The International Islamic Trade Finance Corporation (ITFC) deferred facility has already been operationalised, which will offset any impact of a delay or non-availability of the UAE facility,” said Dr Khaqan Najeeb, adviser and spokesperson of the Ministry of Finance. He said the government has worked diligently to ensure that $1 billion of the ITFC will be utilised in this fiscal year. The spokesperson said $3.2 billion Saudi oil deferred facility was being operationalised and all relevant agreements were in place. In addition, adequate financing was in place for current fiscal year and beyond, said Dr Najeeb. The government continues to follow a multipronged strategy to ensure continued stability in the country’s balance of payment (BOP) position. The strategy has included attracting more foreign direct investment, sale of assets and bilateral and multilateral flows, said Dr Khaqan Najeeb. He said as part of this strategy, all the maturing short-term commercial loans have either been refinanced or rolled over, which will help keep the pressure off from the reserves. It is assumed that the country’s net foreign exchange reserves are negative by close to $10 billion. Asad Umar on Wednesday did not disclose the exact figures of Net International Reserves (NIR) held by the SBP. While responding to a question during a meeting of the National Assembly Standing Committee on Finance, the finance minister said when the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government came into power, “We were effectively at default stage but I will not share further details.” To a question about slow disbursement from multilateral creditors especially from the World Bank, Umar said the delay in disbursement was an issue but measures have been taken to address the root causes. He said the policy loans from international creditors were suspended from the period of the last regime because of insufficient foreign currency reserves. The Finance Ministry spokesman said the government has also launched Pakistan Banao Certificate, a first ever retail offering to Pakistanis abroad that will help raise money for balance of support. He said the government is also working on diversifying its investor base through issuance of a Panda bond. Pakistan and the IMF negotiations remain inconclusive despite the urgency due to lack of external financing in the next fiscal year, starting from July. Asad Umar said the IMF is demanding free float of exchange rate but the government wants to move ahead towards this objective in a phased manner. “The timing and pace of adjustments on flexible exchange rate was a matter of difference but now the differences have narrowed down,” he said. The minister said increasing inflationary pressures is a big worry for the government as stabilisation under the IMF programme would require adjustments. He feared that the people will have to go through the pain as a result of these adjustments.

https://tribune.com.pk/story/1928920/2-govt-fails-secure-3-2b-uae-oil-facility/

 

[Indx TechStyle]

World Bank sees Pakistan’s potential to be a $2 trillion economy

Lender says four influential groups have frustrated efforts to bring reforms in country

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan could become a $2 trillion economy in the next 28 years if it remains steadfast in its reforms and manages to reduce its population growth rate to 1.2%.

“With sustained reforms, Pakistan could be a $2 trillion economy when it will turn 100 in the next 28 years,” said the World Bank (WB) Country Director Patchamuthu Illangovan while sharing the main findings of the ‘Pakistan @100- Sharing the Future 2047′ report on Monday.

“The $2 trillion economy means an upper middle-income country where per capita income will be $5,702 but it will have to halve its population growth rate to 1.2% by 2047,” he added.

However, business, as usual, would mean that the size of Pakistan’s economy will be only $1 trillion and the per capita income will be just $2110. By 2047, Pakistan’s population will be 376 million at current growth rate, said the country director. The size of Pakistan’s economy is now only $275 billion.

The Washington-based lending agency released the report on Monday in a gathering of government functionaries, academia, diplomats and financial institutions. The report says the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) has been undermined by rent-seeking behaviour and complex security situation.

According to the report, Pakistan’s economy right now is captured by four influential groups that have frustrated efforts to bring reforms but the country now stands at a crossroad and it has to decide whether it wants to become an upper middle-income nation or stay poor.

It argues that in the 1960s, the chief economist of the Planning Commission, Mahbub-ul-Haq, claimed that 22 families controlled 66 per cent of the industrial wealth and 87 percent of banking and insurance.

“More recent analysis suggests that elite capture continues to constrain economic policymaking”. Since the 1980s, the share of industrialists in the National Assembly and parliament has doubled, blurring the barrier between politicians and businessmen.

It added policy uncertainty and a lack of trust in policy implementation affect firms’ reactions to reforms and may affect the effectiveness of otherwise well-designed and implemented policies.

“Elite capture in Pakistan has affected policymaking, as in certain circumstances political leaders lack incentives to formulate policies in response to citizens’ demands, or to work toward effective policy implementation,” says the report.

The WB report states that a unique feature of Pakistan’s history is that economic, social and security policies gave rise to various elite factions that sustain economic and political power until today.

While citing a reference of a study, the report underlines that “there exist at least four influential groups that gained power through historic events and continue to leverage their influence on the political system for personal gain”. These are civil servants, landowners, industrialists, and the military.

The WB states that there was evidence that Pakistan’s elites have used this power in the past to undermine reforms that would have reduced their influence.

For instance, landowners and industrialists have leveraged their political representation to oppose reforms that would have enhanced tax-revenue collection from agriculture and the private sector.

The influential military class favours a security-centric policy framework to maintain its influence and access to state resources, which reduces the scope for regional cooperation.

“While each group affects development differently, they share the common trait of having gained and retained influence throughout Pakistan’s history.”

The shortcomings of Pakistan’s institutional framework that have enabled elites to retain power persist today and are precisely those factors that prevent effective reform implementation.

It argues that instability in the political system has reduced accountability and skewed leaders’ incentives away from long-term reforms. The characteristics of Pakistan’s political system have weakened the link between citizens and political leaders that is so crucial to sustaining the triangular relationship.

First, frequent regime changes from civilian to military governments have highlighted the power of the military to sanction political leaders, competing with the sanctioning power of voters.

Second, Pakistan’s political system is characterised by an incumbency disadvantage, which means that incumbent politicians have a reduced likelihood of being re-elected.

As a result, the direct accountability between citizens and political leaders is undermined, as politicians face the risk of being sanctioned even if they implement citizens’ demands, simply because they are incumbents. This shortens leaders’ incentives and time horizon, leading them to prioritise short-term projects and making them more likely to engage in extractive behaviour.

The WB also highlights the role of industrialists in financing political campaigns. It says campaign financing regulations in Pakistan provide a key channel for elites to gain political influence.

Pakistan lacks a transparent and public mechanism to fund political campaigns and instead requires candidates and parties to privately finance campaigns. As a result, in many instances parties must rely on wealthy patrons to fund their campaigns.

This means that it is not just electoral support from citizens that matter for the selection of politicians, but also who provides financial support.

To obtain this financial support, parties tailor their programmes explicitly or implicitly to the demands of financiers, which in many instances involves safeguarding preferential legislation and slowing down reforms.

At the same time, campaign financing regulations provide a barrier to entry for political alternatives, further limiting political competition and reducing political leaders’ accountability to citizens.

“Pakistan can boost its growth by investing in people, improving productivity, reforming institutions and protecting the natural environment,” said the WB Group Vice President South Asian Region Hartwig Schafer.

The decisions over the next decade will determine Pakistan’s future where it will stand in 2047. Will Pakistan rise to the challenges ahead and transform its economy or will Pakistan continue with the mixed record of reform implementation, failing to address the key constraints to growth, while another generation of Pakistanis sees limited welfare improvements, says the WB.

Pakistan’s high birthrate, the highest among neighbouring countries, also threatens to overwhelm education and health services that are already overstretched.

The WB also notes that Pakistan’s macroeconomic challenges are structural in nature, unlike the impression given that these are cyclical problems.

These structural problems are that the revenue system is unable to meet the government’s financing needs and consumption-led growth is putting pressure on external sector.

The economic growth has declined because the country is not investing enough in either physical or human capital, and because misguided economic policies mean that limited resources are not used in the most productive way.

The limited fiscal space, the result of rigid current expenditures and low revenue mobilisation, has given rise to low public investment levels. The low tax revenues and high current expenditures leave limited space for public investments. The WB says the current expenditures exhibit structural rigidities due to high debt-servicing costs, high defence expenditures, and significant subsidies, salaries, and wages.

The WB recommends broadening the tax net by including the agriculture sector, which accounts for over 20 per cent of the GDP but generates a meager 0.22 per cent of total direct tax revenue. The tax system is also riddled with legal loopholes that facilitate tax evasion and need to be rectified.

The WB also emphasises opening of Pakistan’s economy. It says the well-connected industries and firms are often protected from foreign and domestic competition in a variety of ways, limiting the positive impact that increased competition has on productivity.

“Productivity is also affected by weak public services provision—whether it be energy, livable cities, a healthy and educated population, or security,” the report adds.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

“The $2 trillion economy means an upper middle-income country where per capita income will be $5,702 but it will have to halve its population growth rate to 1.2% by 2047,” he added.

$5,702 in 2047 will not be the characteristic of an upper middle income economy but a lower middle income economy means status will remain same as that of today.

However, business, as usual, would mean that the size of Pakistan’s economy will be only $1 trillion and the per capita income will be just $2110. By 2047, Pakistan’s population will be 376 million at current growth rate, said the country director. The size of Pakistan’s economy is now only $275 billion.

$2,110 per capita GDP in 2047 will make Pakistan one of poorest nations on the planet, poorer than Afghanistan. Not a lower middle income but a low income country in the league of poorest one's in Sub Sahara Africa.

 

[aditya10r]

World Bank sees Pakistan’s potential to be a $2 trillion economy

Lender says four influential groups have frustrated efforts to bring reforms in country

Yaar konsa wala gaanja hai yeh??????

_________________________________________

 

[tsunami]

By this chart Pakistan will have to increase in Doing business ranking from 136 in 2017 to 50 in 2023, LOL.
Increase water productivity by 5 times in just 6 years. Amazing
Tax revenue from 13% to 18% in just 6 years... Kuch bhi.
Population growth from 2.4% to 2%. Difficult.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Yaar konsa wala gaanja hai yeh??????

_________________________________________

Nahi pata, $2 trillions from $300 billions in 30 years isn't a great achievement if compare with other emerging countries of Asia.
It is just that Pakistan's status as a lower middle income country isn't going to change and per capita income with respect to global average even despite the fact that they are growing faster than global average. Their population eats entire little growth they had.

Some economists of their country just realized that and doing campaigns right now. But at a moment when they are locked in a war like situation.
For a prosperous Pakistan in 2047, invest in human capital now

Shaping Pakistan’s future

 

[aditya10r]

Nahi pata, $2 trillions from $300 billions in 30 years isn't a great achievement if compare with other emerging countries of Asia.
It is just that Pakistan's status as a lower middle income country isn't going to change and per capita income with respect to global average even despite the fact that they are growing faster than global average. Their population eats entire little growth they had.

Some economists of their country just realized that and doing campaigns right now. But at a moment when they are locked in a war like situation.
For a prosperous Pakistan in 2047, invest in human capital now

Shaping Pakistan’s future

Even the most conservative estimate for India will be 45 TRILLION in 2049.

From 3 to 45 trillion is 15x growth over 30 years is great jump.Chinese and amreeki economy size will still be bigger but a 45 trillion economy even in 2049.

Going from 300 billion to 2 trillion(highly doubtful) is meh.Given a humongous population of 30 crore a straight 42% jump from current 21 crore.They are surely gonna remain a very backward low income country while we will be a proper middle income country with per capita income close to global average in nominal terms.

At this rate I bet even Bangladesh will surpass them in 5-6 years in nominal GDP.

I have some serious doubts wether Pakistan can even sustain itself or not.Every 5 years they seek a bailout,energy prices make industries unviable,water scarcity coupled with zilch agriculture tech and mechanisation makes good case for food insecurity and not to forget a good population of jehadis.War torn regions and pretty much no research and development.

 

[aditya10r]

By this chart Pakistan will have to increase in Doing business ranking from 136 in 2017 to 50 in 2023, LOL.
Increase water productivity by 5 times in just 6 years. Amazing
Tax revenue from 13% to 18% in just 6 years... Kuch bhi.
Population growth from 2.4% to 2%. Difficult.

Your comment summed up in one picture.

_________________________________________

 

[aarav]

Up to 145pc rise in gas prices sought

SNGPL) and SSGCL have filed their petitions for tariff increase at a time when PTI government is still grappling with the political fallout of the 35pc increase it had allowed in October 2018. — Reuters/File

ISLAMABAD: Up to 145 per cent increase in prescribed gas prices with effect from July 1, 2019 has been sought to meet revenue requirements of the gas utilities for the next financial year, it emerged on Sunday.

The Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Limited (SNGPL) and the Sui Southern Gas Company Limited (SSGCL) have filed their petitions for tariff increase at a time when the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) government was still grappling with the political fallout of the 35pc increase it had allowed in October 2018.

In the process, four managing directors of the two companies have since been removed.

The Lahore-based SNGPL that serves Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has demanded an average increase of Rs723 to Rs1,224 per MMBTU (Million British Thermal Unit), suggesting a rise of almost 144pc with effect from July 1 for the financial year 2019-20, said an announcement by the Oil & Gas Regulatory Authority (Ogra).

Ogra receives petitions from gas utilities seeking increase in prices from July 1

The regulator said the SNGPL had submitted the revised petition on March 19 with the request for an “increase of Rs722.51 per MMBTU in its normal business of natural gas w.e.f July 1, 2019”. As such, the SNGPL’s average prescribed price per unit would rise to Rs1,224 from its existing rate of Rs501.19.

On top of this, the company has also demanded about Rs111.32 per MMBTU under the head of diversion of RLNG to domestic consumers and Rs6,086 per MMBTU on account of LPG business.

Interestingly, the cost of SNGPL’s gas has increased by Rs66 per unit to reach Rs566.97 per unit or about 14pc when compared to its existing average prescribed price of Rs501 per unit but it was trying to recover shortfalls in revenue requirements of two years, including that of the current fiscal year.

Seeking increase in average prescribed price, the SNGPL gave a break up saying it be compensated for Rs62.3 per MMBTU, Rs98 per unit for operating cost, Rs70 per unit for guaranteed return on assets and Rs23per unit for late payment surcharge and short-term borrowing. The company demanded Rs381.54 per unit shortfall during fiscal year 2017-18 and Rs56.95 per unit for shortfall in 2018-19.

Separately, the other gas company, the SSGCL, has sought about Rs106.54 increase in its average prescribed price of Rs591.67 per unit to reach Rs698.21.

The cost of SSGCL’s gas has estimated an increase of about Rs50 per unit to Rs642 per unit from its existing prescribed price of Rs592 per unit. It sought an increase of Rs64 per unit increase in operating cost, Rs17 per unit depreciation and Rs22 per unit increase for return on assets.

Domestic gas prices are linked to international oil prices under various petroleum policies.

Prime Minister Imran Khan has repeatedly said the gas companies were losing more than Rs50 billion to theft and mismanagement.

Under the law, the regulator is required to hold public hearings on the request of gas companies and then forward its determination to the government latest by May 20.

The government is required under the law to seek any change, if it considers so, to the proposed increase for various consumer categories within 40 days to Ogra for notification with effect from July 1 but without affecting the overall determined revenues.

The gas prices are changed twice a year – on the first of July and January. Because of political transition, the last gas price increase came into effect on September 27, 2018 instead of July 1. The 35pc average price increase of September was affected with a target to recover additional revenue of Rs116 billion, while high-consumption domestic consumers faced the highest 143pc increase.

Ogra had originally recommended an 186pc increase for the first two slabs of domestic consumers and a 30pc increase for most of other categories in industry, commercial, power sectors, etc. The government, however, diverted the burden from domestic consumers to electricity, industry, commercial and fertiliser sectors that would indirectly spread out to all consumers and categories.

 

[suny6611]

all changes + all increase in prices ...etc r in PAK currency

BUT

all loans r in USD,

how do they pay up ?

1) default
2) begging
3) sell (pak) assets to sadis or UAE or china
4) become a province of china

any other way out?

 

[Chinmoy]

all changes + all increase in prices ...etc r in PAK currency

BUT

all loans r in USD,

how do they pay up ?

1) default
2) begging
3) sell (pak) assets to sadis or UAE or china
4) become a province of china

any other way out?

Yeah.... By doing this in front of everyone.

 

[mayfair]

all changes + all increase in prices ...etc r in PAK currency

BUT

all loans r in USD,

how do they pay up ?

1) default
2) begging
3) sell (pak) assets to sadis or UAE or china
4) become a province of china

any other way out?

5) All of the above and much more......

 

[suny6611]

https://www.dawn.com/news/1469153/total-debt-jumps-to-rs27tr

http://www.sbp.org.pk/ecodata/Profile.pdf

any 1 of sadis or UAE or china could easily finance the total current $ needs of pak single handily.

but they did not ...................... y

$ r not for,to be thrown in a bottom less pit !!!

the probability of any more from these countries is very low

so next will be a 99 year lease to run pak by china >>>> that will lead to WAR (within paK) against china



we all will lose a stupidity channel of entertainment next door

 

[john70]

https://www.dawn.com/news/1472344



A delegation of the Asia-Pacific Group (APG) on money laundering, a regional affiliate of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), has expressed serious reservations over insufficient physical actions on ground against proscribed organisations (POs) to block flow of funds and activities and is likely to issue a formal warning before its departure on Thursday (today).

Pakistan economy #KMKB ~ grey to black ?? In June

 

[Butter Chicken]

Interest rate increased by SBP by 50bps to 10.75% Dollar gains 49 paisa against rupee in inter bank market. Let’s take a moment of silence for the economy of Pakistan.