The funds, described by
SNB as ‘liabilities’ of Swiss banks or ‘amounts due to’ their clients, are the
official figures disclosed by the Swiss authorities and do not indicate towards
the quantum of the much-debated alleged black money held by Indians in the safe
havens of Switzerland.
Press Trust of India
 |
Chairman Justice (retd)
M.B. Shah and other SIT members come out after
the first high level meeting. A
data on Thursday said Indians’ money in
Swiss banks has risen to nearly Rs
14,000 crore, despite a global
clampdown against the famed secrecy wall of
Switzerland banking system.
File photo
|
Indians’ money in Swiss
banks has risen to over two billion Swiss francs (nearly Rs 14,000 crore),
despite a global clampdown against the famed secrecy wall of Switzerland
banking system.
The funds held by
Indians with banks in Switzerland rose by over 40 per cent during 2013, from
about 1.42 billion Swiss francs at the end of previous year, as per the latest
data released on Thursday by the country’s central banking authority Swiss
National Bank (SNB).
In contrast, the money
held in Swiss banks by their foreign clients from across the world continued to
decline and stood at a record low of 1.32 trillion Swiss francs (about $1.56
trillion or over Rs 90 lakh crore) at the end of 2013.
During 2012, the
Indians’ money in Swiss banks had fallen by over one-third to a record low
level.
The total Indian money
held in Swiss banks included 1.95 billion Swiss francs held directly by Indian
individuals and entities, and another 77.3 million Swiss francs through
’fiduciaries’ or wealth managers at the end of 2013.
The latest data from
Zurich-based SNB comes at a time when Switzerland is facing growing pressure
from India and many other countries to share foreign client details, while its
own lawmakers are resisting such measures.
India has also
constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe cases of alleged black
money of Indians, including funds stashed abroad in places like Switzerland.
The funds, described by
SNB as ‘liabilities’ of Swiss banks or ‘amounts due to’ their clients, are the
official figures disclosed by the Swiss authorities and do not indicate towards
the quantum of the much-debated alleged black money held by Indians in the safe
havens of Switzerland.
SNB’s official figures
also do not include the money that Indians or others might have in Swiss banks
in the names of entities from different countries.
The Swiss National Bank
said that the focus of banks in the country continues to shift away from
foreign clients to domestic business, as reflected in the decline in their
overall amounts due to overseas customers.
There are a total of
283 banks in Switzerland, down from nearly 300 at the beginning of 2013. This
include two banks (UBS and Credit Suisse) classified as big banks, while there
are 93 foreign-controlled banks operating in the country. A total of close to
1.25 lakh staff work at these banks.
According to the SNB
data, funds held by the US entities in Swiss banks also rose during 2013 --
from 189 billion Swiss francs to 193 billion Swiss francs -- despite a major
crackdown by the American authorities against the Swiss banks.
However, a number of
countries saw their exposure to Swiss banks decline during the year, resulting
in the overall funds held by foreign clients in Switzerland’s banking
institutions decline to 1.32 trillion Swiss francs, from 1.39 trillion Swiss
francs at the end of 2012.
With regard to the
money held by Indians in Swiss banks, it rose during 2013 after a sharp decline
in 2012. Prior to that, Indian money in Swiss banks had risen during 2011 also.
The quantum of Indian
funds in Swiss banks stood at a record high level of 6.5 billion Swiss francs
at the end of 2006, but it declined by more than 4 billion Swiss francs after
four straight years of fall till 2010.
For clients across the
world, total funds in Swiss banks stood at a record high level of 2.9 trillion
Swiss francs at the end of 2005, while the all-time high level in the US
currency was recorded in 2007 at $2.4 trillion.
Amid allegations of
Indians stashing huge amounts of illicit wealth abroad, including in Swiss
banks, the Indian government has been saying that it was making various efforts
to bring back the unaccounted money.
Keywords: Swiss bank
account, Indian money in Swiss accounts, black money issue
For the past decade,
especially after what are called the 9/11 wars, New Delhi has chosen to give up
its own say on matters of the Middle East to the big powers, either
piggybacking on their stands or being intimidated into adopting a hands-off
policy there
By Suhasini Haidar
For a small group in
the audience in Parliament, the omission seemed glaring. Yet, as President
Pranab Mukherjee completed his address to the joint session of Parliament on
June 9, outlining the policies of the new government, no one seemed to notice
the unhappiness of the Ambassadors of the Middle East or West Asia and North
African (WANA) and Gulf region who were special invitees. Unlike in the past,
the presidential address made no mention of India’s ties with their region.
Even last year, for example, Mr. Mukherjee had devoted a paragraph in his
speech — on “supporting efforts to promote peaceful settlements of regional
conflicts” in West Asia and political engagement with Africa. This year, the
address focussed on the subcontinent and the big powers, the United States,
Russia and China.
The omission is only a
symptom of the larger lack of understanding in the Indian establishment of the
value that lies in ties with West Asia; ties that have been slipping in the
past few years. For India, the disinterest has been enhanced by the growing
conflicts in the region, from Libya to Syria and Iraq. Every time a country in
the region erupts, India seems less willing to engage with it. As a result, the
only bilateral visit by Dr. Manmohan Singh in his tenure during UPA-II was to
Saudi Arabia in 2010. In his schedule of engagements for the remainder of this
year, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has made no mention of the region either.
Disproportionate with
stakes
The gradual decline in
India’s ties with the region is baffling. Even if you discount our obvious
dependence on the region for oil — about 70 per cent of all oil imports, not to
mention the bulk of trade that is conducted through this region via the Suez
Canal, there is still the staggering fact — of the numbers of Indians employed
in the countries there. Nearly seven million Indians now live and work in the
Gulf and WANA, sending home about half of the $65 billion India earns in global
remittances. These are Indians who will not be granted anything more than work
permits, and their welfare will remain India’s responsibility. At seven
million, this group of overseas workers is an integral part of India’s
relations with the WANA-Gulf region, forming the equivalent of India’s “30th
State,” with a population almost the equivalent of that of Himachal Pradesh and
Uttarakhand.
The missing workers and
stranded nurses of Tikrit and Mosul have now brought this community into the
spotlight again, but the focus, as in the past, is fleeting. Indians working in
these countries suffer, just as bilateral relations do, from a lack of interest
by India. Activists say that everyday in the Gulf, two Indians commit suicide
on an average. They work gruelling hours for unregulated agencies, being
shipped around, as the construction workers were from the United Arab Emirates
to Iraq, without India speaking up for them. And one part of the problem is
that India’s voice doesn’t carry the weight it once did in the region.
Fading diplomatic
stance
For the past decade,
especially after what are called the 9/11 wars (Iraq and Afghanistan), India
has chosen to give up its own say on matters of the Middle East to the big
powers. On matters of conflict, Iraq, Syria, Libya, the government has chosen
to piggyback on Russia and China’s stand at the United Nations, or to be
intimidated by the U.S. and Europe into adopting a hands-off policy there.
Take the Libyan
intervention for example. India went with Russia and China to abstain on the
U.N. vote invoking the Right to Protect for strikes on Libya, but didn’t raise
its voice against the U.S. and the European Union (EU) countries that turned
that mandate into a licence for regime change and the ultimate removal of Col.
Qadhafi. It isn’t as if India did not have stakes in Libya: thousands of
doctors, teachers, engineers and construction workers worked there, and India
hoped for a share of Libya’s “sweet crude” in due course. As India’s influence
and goodwill was enough at the time it was one of the few countries that was
allowed landing rights to evacuate its citizens by air, and Qadhafi permitted
an Indian warship to enter Tripoli’s waters; even Chinese and Russian ships
were made to stay in international waters. Even so, as the situation
deteriorated — today, it’s anarchy — India has been absent in voicing any
concerns for a country it once had a special relationship with.
On Syria too, India has
followed a perilously confused path, voting with the U.S. and the EU against
the Assad regime on a Security Council vote that Russia and China eventually
vetoed, but then turning around against the West on others. With each
successive flip-flop voting at the U.N. and the UNHRC, (two for, three against,
three abstentions), India’s voice has lost its timbre. More significantly,
India never vocally opposed the U.S. Congress’ approval for the Obama
administration’s decision to fund and arm Syrian rebels, despite the fact that
non-interference in a sovereign state is a principle of India’s foreign policy,
not to mention the bitter lessons India had to learn after a similar funding of
Taliban rebels in Afghanistan.
The U.S.’ argument that
it would fund only moderate groups was simply unworkable, given that the Syrian
Opposition is wholly controlled by jihadi and al-Qaeda affiliated militant
groups. It is these groups of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant
(ISIS/ISIL) that are today seeking to carve out an Islamist state from Iraq and
Syria, and beginning a chilling offensive by overrunning the towns of Tikrit
and Mosul last week, slaughtering soldiers on the way. India, with more than
15,000 nationals working there, hundreds of whom face real danger, has been
left a bystander to the frightening pace of events there.
Engaging the GCC
Another reason for this
is that India has restricted dialogue on the issues of Libya, Syria and Iraq
and others to its conversations with the two most powerful ‘influencers’ in the
region: the U.S. and Russia. However, given that it is Arab-Persian rivalries
that are playing out more than Cold War ones, it is imperative that the new
government finds ways of initiating dialogue on West Asian conflicts with the
GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council), mainly Saudi Arabia and with Iran as well.
Once India shows its
intent to engage, officials will find that their voice is heard very quickly.
As any Indian traveller to the region will tell you, India occupies a very high
place in these countries, dating back from the civilisational ties it shared
with Egypt, Syria and Mesopotamia (Iraq). From Cairo to Baghdad, vendors still
have a “special discount” for visitors from Al-Hind; in Syria, mention of India
invokes talk about the old Damascus-Bombay trade routes, and in Tripoli, before
the air strikes in 2011, there was a building covered with a poster of pictures
of Pandit Nehru and Indira Gandhi. That goodwill has only been enhanced by the
diligent and disciplined Indian expatriate, who is now an influential figure in
many a Gulf and WANA country. Engaging with these countries and with its own
population there will put India back on the pedestal it once occupied. For a
start, as Mr. Modi criss-crosses over to South America in July, and then to the
U.S. in September, he may want to rediscover those old ties with a stopover
somewhere in the region, and in the process, for India to rediscover its voice
there.
suhasini.h@thehindu.co.in
