Rubbing it in

It can never be prudent to stoke the embers of discordant emotions. Unfortunately, that may be what the government sms circulated Thursday afternoon has achieved.  In between a combined but differentiated protest by teachers and students that led to unfortunate violence, a common ground of unity has been created. Teachers of private universities want a new pay scale; students want the 7.5 per cent value added tax (VAT) on tuition fees revoked. The government circular of the National Board of Revenue (NBR) clarifies the VAT is payable by the institutions and not by the students. Perhaps the NBR has missed out on the fact that there is enough study these days ink the VAT laws by they to whom such a circular is directed.  

Of greater worry is the loose bridles on discipline that have been snapped. Prior to this it had been English medium school children who had taken to the streets against VAT on tuition fees that was ultimately revoked. Encouraged by them and other violent protests by students elsewhere, appears to have driven the newer group to follow an example definitively not to be emulated. Progressing from the days when government and its media would simply deny existence of hartals, current strategy is highlighting the losses suffered by the economy.  It is a pity that no one is calculating the effect of the gridlock that Dhaka witnessed over the past two days and those of the great Dhaka deluge.

The current initiative in maximising revenue is another short-cut easy method to try and cover up the failure of the tax man in collecting revenue from curt sources. An obvious unsavoury mix of graft and errant behaviour leads to plenty of loopholes that can but will probably never be plugged. Social media reaction has been predictable; why penalise poor students who are already bending their backs in meeting the high tuition fees.

Another reaction was to scrutinise in greater detail the earnings of the businessmen behind the universities. Late President Zillur Rahman had exhorted businessmen to retain a modicum of respectability in the business of education. Education Minister Nurul Islam Nahid was a pathetic figure who won the hearts when he begged businessmen with folded hands not to profiteer with education. There were few to listen.

With honourable exceptions, the cost of education is such that deters many from further studies. Eight hundred thousand taka for a three-year degree is high in a country such as Bangladesh. While this does seem prohibitive one must assume these universities pay their taxes. Why education should be taxed is another pertinent question. Whether education is for those able or those meritorious also begs a proper response. Society's snobbishness continues and will do so.

Perhaps in the muddle of the economic tangle that the general public is currently facing, this is one move that could be repositioned for the future. With no vegetable available under Tk 50, with public transport hiking fares, with a looming fear of overinflated cattle prices ahead of Eid-ul-Azha and informal expenses on the rise tax bullets need to be sugar-coated if they ate to be fired at all, somewhat like the rubber bullets used. One image today of a Danish policeman playing with a refugee child will linger in the memory. Not one injury has been reported as the influx of people crossed European boundaries. That was about sovereignty. This one is about tax.

(The writer may be reached at mahmudrahman@gmail.com)