top of page

By:

Correspondent

21 August 2024 at 10:20:16 am

Fee Signal

The government’s decision to create a legal framework for levying charges on UPI transactions has understandably triggered concern, even though it insists that ordinary users and small merchants will continue to enjoy free payments. The proposed amendment does not impose a fee on UPI today. But it removes the statutory barrier to one being imposed in the future, making the government’s reassurance less than the final word. The government argues that this is a measure for UPI’s long-term...

Fee Signal

The government’s decision to create a legal framework for levying charges on UPI transactions has understandably triggered concern, even though it insists that ordinary users and small merchants will continue to enjoy free payments. The proposed amendment does not impose a fee on UPI today. But it removes the statutory barrier to one being imposed in the future, making the government’s reassurance less than the final word. The government argues that this is a measure for UPI’s long-term sustainability. The world’s largest real-time payments system, which processed 2,366 crore transactions worth Rs. 29.9 lakh crore in July alone, cannot indefinitely depend on subsidies as transaction volumes, cybersecurity requirements and infrastructure costs rise. A nominal Merchant Discount Rate on larger merchant transactions, it says, would help create a more sustainable ecosystem without burdening ordinary users. That argument has merit. But so does the concern that a payment system which became a national habit precisely because it was cheap and frictionless should not slowly acquire a price tag. Once the legal machinery for charging exists, there is no guarantee that the boundary between large merchants and small ones, or between merchants and consumers, will remain permanently fixed. The Finance Minister has clarified that any Merchant Discount Rate will apply only to a limited set of merchant transactions above a threshold and will be nominal, well below card-payment rates. The details will eventually be decided by the UPI and Services Steering Committee headed by the National Payments Corporation of India. In other words, there is no charge on the table for the ordinary UPI user today. But there is now a legal mechanism for charges to be introduced tomorrow. That is precisely why any alarm, though exaggerated, cannot simply be dismissed. The government, through its clarification, has reassured that UPI’s free-to-consumer model remains intact. The important issue is whether its financing model can evolve without undermining the habits that made it revolutionary. UPI succeeded partly because it made digital payments cheaper and simpler than alternatives. There is also a larger principle at stake. UPI is not merely another commercial payments platform. It is the product of public investment, regulatory architecture and private innovation. The state should therefore be wary of treating its sustainability as an ordinary market problem. The sensible answer lies between free-for-all subsidies and indiscriminate fees: transparent thresholds, genuinely low MDRs, strong protection for small merchants and an absolute firewall around ordinary consumers. The government should publish the economic case for any future charge, including its effect on merchants and consumers. UPI was built on trust as much as technology. The government is right to protect its remarkable achievement. It should remember that keeping UPI free is not merely a political promise. It is part of the product.

Maharashtra-Andhra play ‘cupid’ to lone tiger

Mumbai: In a warm gesture, the Maharashtra government has ‘in principle’ agreed to translocate two tigresses to the Papikonda National Park (PNP) in Andhra Pradesh, subject to clearance from the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), official sources said.

 

The PNP is located in the Papi Hills of Eluru and Polavaram districts, and Maharashtra has responded positively to a request from the AP Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan.

 

On Feb. 19, Kalyan, who holds the Environment & Forests departments, had made a formal written request to Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, seeking two tigresses from the Tadoba-Andhari Tiger Reserve (TATR) of Chandrapur district.

 

Citing the backgrounder, Kalyan said that on Jan. 20, a dispersing tiger from central India had entered AP state through the eco-sensitive zone of PNP tiger reserve, after traversing through Telangana.

 

‘Dispersing’ is the natural behaviour of young and independent tigers to leave their birthplace to carve their own territories, find mates and establish a new home. This prevents inbreeding, reduces competition on resources with their parents and enables genetic health of the larger tiger population in the wilds.

 

The migrant tiger traversed over 650-kms through Eluru, East Godavari and Konaseema districts for nearly three weeks mostly through human dominated landscapes, when it was hunting for food also.

 

“Though there were 20-22 instances of livestock depredation, no human injury was reported,” informed Kalyan, adding that the tiger passed through three States.

 

Explaining the purpose for seeking two tigresses, Kalyan contended that it would boost inter-state wildlife conservation and sustainable tiger conservation in the Eastern Ghats landscape.

 

Considering public safety and the NTCA’s Standard Operating Procedures the migrant tiger was tranquilized and safely captured on Feb. 6, 2026 through coordinated efforts of AP Forest Department, veterinarians and wildlife experts, he said.

 

To keep track of his further movements, the tiger was fitted with a Satellite Radio Collar (SRC) and released in the PNP. Thereafter, the AP’s Expert Committee suggested release of two female tigers to facilitate breeding and territorial stability.

 

After examining the issue in detail, Maharashtra’s Chief Wildlife Warden & Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) Marthala Shrinivasa Reddy informed Additional Chief Secretary (Forest), that the proposal may be considered ‘in principle’, subject to formal proposal by AP government to NTCA and approvals from the latter and preparations of a mutually agreed translocation and post-release monitoring.

 

“The translocation of tigers from Maharashtra to another state involves inter-State transfer of Schedule-I wildlife and requires prior approval of NTCA and other competent authorities as prescribed under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and relevant guidelines,” Reddy informed.

 

Reddy said that while the male-female ratio in TATR is comparatively low, but the adjoining Chandrapur Forest circle possesses an adequate female tiger population, from where two suitable females could be considered for translocation after all statutory approvals and procedures are completed.

 

After Reddy’s green signal, the state Deputy Secretary (Forests) Niketa Pande wrote to the AP’s Principal Secretary (Environment and Forest) about Maharashtra’s ‘in-principle’ approval, and requested to complete all other formalities at the earliest to provide mates for the solo tiger in PNP.

Comments

bottom of page