This refers to the article ‘What is behind the RBI paper on digital payments’ (August 26).
The government’s wary of hindering the robust digital transformation path the country has embarked on.
At the same time, it would be unfair not to reward the Payment Service Providers (PSPs) — who have worked hard to make digital transactions hassle-free.
Per NCPI data, it currently handles more than 500 billion volumes of UPI transactions per month with a value of more than ₹8 trillion.
A nominal charge of ₹1 per UPI transaction exceeding the value of ₹100 would yield the PSPs a substantial amount of revenue.
After gathering feedback, RBI can work out a feasible revenue model without affecting any stakeholder in the UPI system.
Ko-Puvanur & Post (TN)
The entire construction of ‘What’s behind RBI paper on digital payments’ (August 25) stands on an attempted correlation between the unrelated August 10 press release on digital lending and the Aug 17 discussion paper on charges on digital payments. The only thing that both have in common is only the word ‘digital’.
If one takes a close look at the RBI press release, it will be clear that these regulations (not ‘prohibitions’) speak for the protection of the borrowers of “small-ticket loan products in a big way”.
The discussion paper on charges is a quest for the outcome of brainstorming across all stakeholders. Both cannot be linked at all.
This refers to the editorial ‘All property is not theft’. By unequivocally asserting the constitutional principle that no criminal law shall be applied retrospectively, the Supreme Court has effectively struck at the very root of Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act 2016 that sought to criminalise the act of pumping black money in to real estate, which actually amounts to civil liability. While the Apex court has also rightly declared Sections 3 and 5 of the original Prohibition of Benami Transactions Act 1988 as unconstitutional as it mandates three years imprisonment and forfeiture for those entering in to benami transactions, it gave nod for the the state authorities to apply forfeiture prospectively.
Legal measures to prevent black money from being parked in real estate are needed, but the policy makers cannot go against the provisions of our Constitution while framing laws.
That law making is marred by poor legislative rigour is a matter of grave concern.
Apropos ‘Corruption reflects a crisis of ethics, values’ (August 26), bribe givers are often are left with the Hobson’s choice of either paying up, or be deprived of the services they are entitled to.
The Prime Minister’s anguish against corruption is understandable.
In a number of States, we keep witnessing corrupt families being voted back to power. People must wake up and resolve not to vote the corrupt to power.
Until this happens, the PM’s exasperation will only find resonance among the educated citizens, making little dent to the all pervasive corruption.