Latest news with #SteelMinistry
Time of India
07-07-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Centre may relax quality control compliance window for steel intermediates
The centre is likely to give a 15-20-day window before enforcing wider compliance to quality control orders (QCO) on intermediate material for manufacturing final steel products. Sources said a call on the relaxation was taken by the Steel Ministry after multiple stakeholders flagged concerns over the less time they were given to comply with the enhanced quality control mandate which was issued in June. The Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) defines the quality norms that need to be met by products. 'Companies will be given additional time to clear inventory of any non-BIS compliant steel intermediates,' a senior official told ET while adding a call on giving the relaxation was taken during a stakeholder consultation on BIS certification under the QCO framework Monday. 'The core concern revolves around BIS certification requirements, particularly for imports with specific focus on Chinese-origin products entering India through Vietnam,' the official said. The steel ministry has also constituted a Technical Committee to examine issues of substandard imports bypassing quality control regulations. Officials said most cast iron (CI) and stainless-steel imports coming from Vietnam are essentially of Chinese origin. Live Events 'Vietnam has seen large-scale Chinese investment, and many of the manufacturing units there are fully or partially Chinese-owned. Due to a Free Trade Agreement (FTA), there is no import duty on goods coming from Vietnam, making it an easy backdoor for Chinese products to enter India,' the official added. Non-BIS compliant products cannot be sold or imported in the country once a QCO is enforced. In June this year, the Steel Ministry decided that intermediate materials used for manufacturing final products under the QCO regime need to comply with BIS norms as well. This was strictly opposed by micro, small, and medium enterprises, and other producers of finished steel products. According to the Steel Ministry, there is a very high possibility of cheap steel getting pushed into the Indian market unless adequate measures are put in place for import of quality steel. 'It is to be noted that if intermediate inputs (which form the core of finished products like HR coil, CR coil or coated steel) are not BIS compliant and are substandard, the final product cannot be BIS compliant,' the ministry added.
The Print
01-07-2025
- Business
- The Print
How Shastri and Subramaniam sowed the seeds of MSP
Once he accepted the position, Subramaniam drew from his experience in the Steel Ministry and concluded that the core reason for stagnation in Indian agriculture was that 'farmers were not given a fair and remunerative price for their efforts.' He was dismayed to see the government continuing with wartime strategies of imposing controls, rationing, and a procurement system that adversely impacted the primary producer. When two of Shastri's senior colleagues, Jagjivan Ram and Swaran Singh, refused the agriculture portfolio, Shastri rang up C Subramaniam. CS reportedly asked, 'Why me?' To which Shastri replied, 'Because no one else is willing.' Subramaniam asked for time to consider — he was well settled in the Steel Ministry. But Shastri prevailed, assuring him of the fullest political support in the challenging task of tiding over the crisis and making India self-sufficient in food. When Lal Bahadur Shastri took over as Prime Minister in June 1964, the Agriculture Ministry was considered a 'political graveyard', on account of massive food deficits after successive crop failures in different parts of the country. Agricultural production had plummeted to 62 million tonnes per annum, and India was critically dependent on food shipments from the United States under PL-480. Unlike John F Kennedy, who saw US food aid as humanitarian, his successor Lyndon B Johnson was a brusque bully who expected recipients to kowtow to his political preferences. Subramaniam appointed a Foodgrains Prices Committee under LK Jha, Secretary to the Prime Minister, to determine the 'producer price' for paddy and wheat for the 1964–65 crop year. In his first Cabinet note of October 1964, backed fully by Shastri, CS proposed an unprecedented 15 per cent hike in prices for both Rabi and Kharif seasons. This was opposed by Finance Minister TT Krishnamachari, who saw it as inflationary, and Home Minister Gulzari Lal Nanda, who feared unrest among industrial workers. However, even more important than this episodic 15 per cent hike was the establishment of the Agricultural Prices Commission (APC) from 1 January 1965. Its role was to advise on price policy, on a continuing basis, not only for paddy and wheat but also for coarse cereals, pulses, oilseeds, sugarcane, cotton, and jute. Over the years, the mandate expanded, and APC (now CACP) recommendations today cover 23 commodities. Gandhian economist ML Dantwala was appointed the first chairperson of the APC. He had earlier worked on the Indian cotton economy and understood the need to balance the interests of farmers with those of the textile industry. In his new role, he had to recommend Minimum Support Prices (MSPs) to incentivise farmers to adopt new technologies, optimise resource use, and increase productivity. It was clear by then that the community development approach had its limitations. What was needed was higher economic returns and a state guarantee for procurement — either through direct procurement for the PDS or price support for oilseeds and pulses. According to Harsh Damodaran, the idea of the APC had also featured in a Ford Foundation study, but this was underplayed, since anything 'American' was viewed with suspicion in those days. Ironically, the trio behind this transformation — minister C Subramaniam, scientist MS Swaminathan, and agriculture secretary B Sivaraman — were all accused of yielding to American pressure. As an aside: while the Americans were advocating for smallholder agriculture, the USSR promoted collectivisation and professionalisation, both of which had already failed in the USSR and China. Meanwhile, Dantwala's advocacy for a more interventionist approach, including price stabilisation to protect farmers and ensure food security, was challenged by V.M. Dandekar. He argued that such policies would encourage inefficiency and corruption, and hinder natural growth in the agribusiness sector. This intellectual debate played out in the Economic and Political Weekly. Dandekar (and co-author Rath) argued that although poverty and undernourishment were correlated, they were often independent variables and needed distinct policy responses. Also read: The real White Revolution—Shastri's NDDB built a farmers-first economy that still works Jai Jawan, Jai Kisan Yet a quiet transformation took place in India's rural economy within five years of MSP's introduction. If one had to choose the most understated yet transformative five years in the seven decades and eight years of Indian Independence (from 1947 to the present), it would be 1965–66 to 1970–71. During this period, India's foodgrain production rose to 108 million tonnes, laying to rest all doubts about the nation's ability to feed itself. The kisan had delivered. India became more than self-sufficient in food, just in time for the jawan to secure a decisive victory in the 1971 war on both the western and eastern fronts, leading to the creation of Bangladesh. By then, the Agriculture Ministry had become one of the most coveted portfolios. From the 1970s onward, it has been held by stalwarts like Jagjivan Ram, Balram Jakhar, Devi Lal, Nitish Kumar, and Sharad Pawar. Today, it is held by Shivraj Singh Chouhan, one of the longest-serving Chief Ministers of Madhya Pradesh. Also read: Nothing like deviation in democracy. Even Lenin & Stalin adapted: Lal Bahadur Shastri Empirical norms for MSP From a policy perspective, subsequent APC chairpersons — distinguished agricultural economists such as Abhijit Sen, T Haque, and Ashok Gulati — developed empirical norms for determining MSP. By 1980, APC evolved into the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP), as India had achieved a more than adequate food surplus. Three new cost concepts entered farmers' political vocabulary: A2, A2+FL, and C2. — A2 includes all paid-out expenses: seeds, fertilisers, chemicals, machinery, irrigation, interest on working capital, depreciation, and rent for leased land. — A2+FL adds the imputed cost of unpaid family labour. — C2, proposed by MS Swaminathan when he chaired the National Commission on Farmers in 2006, includes A2+FL, plus the imputed rent on owned land and other imputed costs. Raising A2+FL by 50 per cent suggested that family labour (time spent by the farmer and their family in the production field) was valued 50 per cent higher than hired wages (money paid to hired labourers). It recognised the sweat equity of farming households. Also read: MSP isn't the real issue. Indian farming has changed, so should protests CACP in a balancing role CACP's job is not easy. Each crop has multiple stakeholders. For example, jute farmers in West Bengal, Assam, and Bihar demand higher MSPs, but grain-producing states like Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, and Madhya Pradesh as well as the Union food ministry oppose this. Their argument is that higher jute prices inflate the cost of gunny bags for wheat procurement. The Ministry of Consumer Affairs worries about inflation. The Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers' Welfare tries to double farmers' income. Balancing these competing demands is a delicate act. Food inflation must be balanced with farmers' incomes. Changes over time As someone who has served as Agriculture Secretary in Uttarakhand and West Bengal, and as Joint Secretary at the Centre and MD of NAFED, I've had candid exchanges with Alagh, Sen, Haque, and Gulati. Like Dantwala, the first three believed in the dominant role of the state in agricultural economics. However, post-liberalisation, Indian agriculture has changed. No longer an economy of shortages, it began to reflect shifts in consumer demand and market orientation. Gulati's tenure reflected this transition. By the early 2000s, farmers near Tier I and Tier II cities were earning more from high-value agriculture — dairy, livestock, fisheries, and horticulture — than from grains. By 2015, horticulture production exceeded cereals in volume, weight, and value. Like the Dantawala-Dandekar debate, Swaminathan was sceptical of liberalised export policies, while Gulati argued that government restrictions on trade in agricultural products prevented farmers from securing better prices and thus better incomes. Freer trade, including external trade, will benefit farmers. Many agricultural commodities, including rice and wheat, remained barred from being exported. This meant Indian farmers could not benefit from global price surges. In Gulati's view, more private procurement and scrapping mandi taxes would narrow the wholesale-retail price gap. He rejected the idea that rising MSPs caused food inflation. He instead pointed to non-MSP items — vegetables, fruit, milk, meat, and fish — that drove food inflation. Also read: Nobody fully understands MSP legal guarantee even now. A panel of experts shows The road ahead The current CACP Chairman, Vijay Paul Sharma, who is now in his second term and a professor at IIM Ahmedabad, brings management expertise in agri-value chains. His tenure has witnessed a successive volley of farmer protests demanding statutory backing for CACP and MSP. Having worked in both central and state governments, I believe the focus should be less on the legal status of MSP or CACP, and more on strengthening infrastructure: warehousing, market linkages, farm machinery hubs, credit access, value addition, and transparent price discovery. Indian agriculture has travelled far since the time of Shastri. The institution he set up must evolve with the times. While principles, such as ensuring the best price for farmers, must be preserved, strategy and practice must adapt to modern realities. This is the second article in a series on Lal Bahadur Shastri and the institutions he helped establish. Sanjeev Chopra is a former IAS officer and Festival Director of Valley of Words. Until recently, he was director, Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration. He tweets @ChopraSanjeev. Views are personal. Disclosure: The columnist is a trustee of the Lal Bahadur Shastri Memorial (LBS Museum). (Edited by Prashant)
Business Upturn
12-06-2025
- Business
- Business Upturn
Indian government likely to hike safeguard duty on steel products beyond 12%: Report
By Aditya Bhagchandani Published on June 12, 2025, 10:13 IST The Indian government is reportedly considering increasing the safeguard duty on steel products beyond the current 12%, according to sources cited by ET NOW. This move is aimed at bolstering the domestic steel industry amid rising import concerns. Sources indicate that the Steel Ministry is strongly backing the proposal, citing the need for enhanced protection to support domestic manufacturers. Currently, the Finance Ministry has already imposed a 12% safeguard duty based on a provisional report submitted by the Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR). The final call on a further hike will be taken once the government receives the conclusive investigation report from DGTR, which is currently awaited. This development could potentially impact steel-consuming sectors and influence steel prices if the duty is hiked further in the coming weeks. Aditya Bhagchandani serves as the Senior Editor and Writer at Business Upturn, where he leads coverage across the Business, Finance, Corporate, and Stock Market segments. With a keen eye for detail and a commitment to journalistic integrity, he not only contributes insightful articles but also oversees editorial direction for the reporting team.
Yahoo
04-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
India's finance ministry wants lower energy prices for green steel incentives, sources say
By Neha Arora NEW DELHI (Reuters) -India's finance ministry wants green hydrogen prices to soften before deciding on financial support for production of steel using clean energy, two sources familiar with the matter said, as New Delhi seeks to control inflation and its expenditure. Indian steel producers have been asking for federal incentives as the nation considers mandating the use of a certain percentage of green steel in government projects. India, the world's biggest steel producer after China and a key green house gas emitter, has been working on a green steel policy to decarbonise production of the alloy. A delay in the launch of federal financial support could slow India's energy transition plans to meet 2070 net zero goal. The steel ministry is seeking incentives from the finance ministry for decarbonisation efforts. The finance ministry has argued that high green hydrogen costs would make use of green steel unviable and 'potentially inflationary', the sources told Reuters. The deliberations between the two ministries have been slowed, as the finance ministry has cautioned against a "hasty approach," one of the sources said, declining to be identified as discussions are not public. "Steel is an intermediate product and manufacturing green steel would be costly and there is a need to have a balanced approach between growth and sustainability," the source said, referring to the finance ministry's thinking. India's finance and steel ministries did not respond to Reuters' emails seeking comments. Currently, a majority of Indian steel mills depend on coal for their blast furnace operations. The steel ministry has touted the use of green hydrogen as an alternative but high costs are a deterrent. In December, India said steel produced with carbon dioxide emissions of less than 2.2 tonne per tonne of finished steel would be defined as "green steel". Steel producers in India, the world's fastest-growing major economy, generate 2.55 metric tons of carbon dioxide per ton of crude steel produced, 38% higher than the global average of 1.85 tons, according to Global Energy Monitor. Error al recuperar los datos Inicia sesión para acceder a tu cartera de valores Error al recuperar los datos Error al recuperar los datos Error al recuperar los datos Error al recuperar los datos
Reuters
04-06-2025
- Business
- Reuters
India's finance ministry wants lower energy prices for green steel incentives, sources say
NEW DELHI, June 4 (Reuters) - India's finance ministry wants green hydrogen prices to soften before deciding on financial support for production of steel using clean energy, two sources familiar with the matter said, as New Delhi seeks to control inflation and its expenditure. Indian steel producers have been asking for federal incentives as the nation considers mandating the use of a certain percentage of green steel in government projects. India, the world's biggest steel producer after China and a key green house gas emitter, has been working on a green steel policy to decarbonise production of the alloy. A delay in the launch of federal financial support could slow India's energy transition plans to meet 2070 net zero goal. The steel ministry is seeking incentives from the finance ministry for decarbonisation efforts. The finance ministry has argued that high green hydrogen costs would make use of green steel unviable and 'potentially inflationary', the sources told Reuters. The deliberations between the two ministries have been slowed, as the finance ministry has cautioned against a "hasty approach," one of the sources said, declining to be identified as discussions are not public. "Steel is an intermediate product and manufacturing green steel would be costly and there is a need to have a balanced approach between growth and sustainability," the source said, referring to the finance ministry's thinking. India's finance and steel ministries did not respond to Reuters' emails seeking comments. Currently, a majority of Indian steel mills depend on coal for their blast furnace operations. The steel ministry has touted the use of green hydrogen as an alternative but high costs are a deterrent. In December, India said steel produced with carbon dioxide emissions of less than 2.2 tonne per tonne of finished steel would be defined as "green steel". Steel producers in India, the world's fastest-growing major economy, generate 2.55 metric tons of carbon dioxide per ton of crude steel produced, 38% higher than the global average of 1.85 tons, according to Global Energy Monitor.
