Waiver Form July 16 2012 July 15 2013: Fill & Download for Free

Thanks for A2A but I think institute has provided answer in detail ,Pls go through the same!The Institute of Cost Accountants of India(Statutory body under an Act of Parliament)Career ProspectsProfessional Avenues In this globalised world, organizations require professionals such as Cost Accountants (CMAs) who have specialized knowledge on business strategy and value creation. The Cost Accountant being the foundation on which the enterprises are built, the specialized education and training by the Institute make the Cost Accountant a multi-faceted professional. CMAs are driving force in all economic activities, as they are the value creator, value enabler, value preserver and value reporter.Cost Accountants are in great demand in government sector, private sector, banking & finance sector, developmental agencies, education, training & research sector as well as in service and public utility sector. Further, in view of their specialized knowledge and training, CMAs may hold top management position in public and private sectors’ enterprises like Chairman cum Managing Directors, Managing Director, Finance Director, Financial Controller, Chief Financial Officer, Cost Controller, Marketing Manager and Chief Internal Auditor and other important positions.Those CMAs managing their own businesses have found themselves as a Manager and as an Accountant can control and thereby flourish their businesses. There is no doubt that a Cost Accountant can attain the highest ladder of professional career.There is a sustained demand for qualified, trained and experienced cost accountants in India and abroad in different industries and Government Departments. Many members of the Institute are also engaged in providing professional and cost consultancy services and in teaching cost and management accountancy in Universities and Colleges.Cost accountancy edges over financial accounting. Cost accounting promotes study and adoption of scientific methods to secure maximum efficiency in industrial, commercial and other spheres, as compared to financial accounting. Financial accounting mainly draws conclusions on the basis of post facto data long after the operations are put through and expenditure were incurred enabling score keeping or at best statistical analysis. Therefore, role of cost accountants go beyond a financial accountant and they help the management in regulating production operations and processes of production.The members of the Institute are the driving force in the team of management while in employment, and as Cost Auditors, Internal Auditors, Auditors in case of VAT, Excise, SEBI, NSDL and under other statutes/ Regulatory requirements, Advisors and Consultants in practice. There are several areas of practice available for Cost Accountants, a list of which is given below:Independent practiceThere is vast scope for practice by a Cost Accountant for which he has to obtain Practice Certificate from the Institute. Details in this regard are available in the “Membership Section” of the Institute website: http://www.cmaicmai.in/external/Home.aspx. A Cost Accountant may set up the practice at his own as Proprietor or set up a new partnership firm with like-minded Cost Accountants in practice or may be admitted as new partner in the existing firm of Cost Accountants in practice. His clientele include private and public companies, large, medium and small scale undertakings, partnership and proprietary concerns, industrial, commercial and service undertakings etc. For practicing Cost Accountants the Institute issued suggested fees guidelines, which may be seen athttp://icmai.in/upload/pd/Cost_Audit_Fee_of_ICWAI.pdfThere are several areas of practice available for Cost Accountants, which are as follows:Professional Avenues for CMAs in PracticeS. No.Statute/AuthorityDescriptionAAudit Assignments(i)Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017Audit of Accounts & Records under Section 35(5) of Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017.Special Audit under Section 66(1) of Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017.Access to business premises under Section 71.(ii)Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC)Special Audit under Section 14A & 14AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944 of Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC).Special Audit in certain cases under Section 11 of Customs Act, 1962, as authorized by Central Board Excise and Customs.(iii)Companies Act, 2013 Section 148 (2)Vide Companies (Cost Records and Audit) Rules, 2014, G.S.R. No. 425 (E) dated 1st July, 2014 under section 148(2), ibid Cost Accountants are exclusively authorized to appoint as Cost Auditor and conduct Cost Audit as per the provisions of the Companies (Cost Records and Audit) Rules, 2014.(iv)Companies Act, 2013 Section 138 (1)Section 138(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 empowers the Cost Accountants/Firms of Cost Accountant to conduct the Internal Audit of the Class of Companies. Companies (Accounts) Rules, 2014 issued by the Government vide GSR 239 (E) dated 31st March, 2014 defines the class of companies in which the Cost Accountants/Firms of Cost Accountant can be appointed/empanelled as Internal Auditor.(v)Ministry of FinanceSpecial Audit under Customes Act, 1962 vide Circular no. 88/98-Customs., Dated 02/12/1998 issued by Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue for Liberalisation of bonding procedures in respect of 100% EOUs;(vi)Ministry of Health & Family WelfareInternal Audit/Concurrent Audit under National Health Mission (NHM) as empowered by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, New Delhi.(vii)Ministry of Road Transport and HighwaysModel Concession Agreement (MCA) on infrastructure for PPP Projects in Highways empowered by Ministry of Road Transport and Highways.(viii)National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD)Stock audit for Working Capital Finance as prescribed by National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD).(ix)National Securities Depository Limited (NSDL)Internal and Concurrent Audit for depository operations under National Securities Depository Ltd (NSDL).(x)Respective Bank CircularsStock Audit, Concurrent Audit, Forensic Audit and other professional services of various Public Sector and Private Sector Banks in India. Please referAnnexure – I.(xi)State Co-operative Societies ActFinancial Audit of Cooperative Societies in states Maharashtra, Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh and West Bengal.(xii)State Co-operative Societies ActSpecial Audit i.e. Cost Audit and Performance Audit of co-operative societies under the respective Co-operative Societies Act of West Bengal, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Punjab, and Delhi.(xiii)Respective State Govt. CircularsInternal Audit in various State Public Sector Enterprises in Punjab, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh & Odisha.(xiv)Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI)Half-yearly Internal Audit of Stock Brokers and Credit Rating Agencies as prescribed by Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI).(xv)Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI)Stock Brokers and Credit Rating Agencies as prescribed by Securities Exchange Board of India.(xvi)Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI)Internal audit of Registrars to an Issue / Share Transfer Agents (RTAs) .(xvii)Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI)Audit for Metering and Billing Accuracy – authorised to conduct audit for Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI).(xviii)Various State VAT Act/ RulesStatutory Auditors under Value Added Tax Act of States. Please referAnnexure – II.BCertification Areas(i)Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Industrial Policy and PromotionCertificate for verification of Local content in case of procurement for a value in excess of Rs. 10 Crores. ( Order No. P-45021/2/2017-B.E.-II dated 15th June, 2017 on Public Procurement (Preference to Make in India), Order, 2017).(ii)Companies Act, 2013Certifying e-forms which are to be filled by companies under Companies Act and Rules.(iii)Central Excise Act, 1944Certificate of Cost of production of captively consumed goods as per Rule 8 of Central Excise Act, 1944 in accordance with Cost Accounting Standard CAS – 4 issued by the Institute.(iv)Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000Certificate for Average Cost of Transportation as per Rule 5 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000.(v)Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC)Certification of various forms prescribed under the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC).(vi)Customs Act, 1962Certificate towards the amount of duty paid on the materials used for the manufacture of exported goods as indicated in Forms DBK-I,II, IIA,III, IIIA under Customs Act, 1962.(vii)Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity (DAVP)Certificate towards the authenticated figures of circulation, as per the Annexure XII of the DAVP guidelines representing a statement signed by the both publisher and Cost Accountant with their officials seals giving the details of newsprint and ink stored and consumed during the period.(viii)Fertilizer Industry Coordination Committee (FICC)Certificate of product wise position of production dispatches stock etc. for the year (Annexure III–A) under FICC.(ix)Fertilizer Industry Coordination Committee (FICC)Issuance of various certificates as prescribed by Fertilizer Industry Coordination Committee (FICC) in respect of certifying Cost Data for Subsidy Scheme, Transportation Claims, Escalation Claims and Equalize Freight Claims.(x)Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999Valuation Certificate under Notification No. FEMA.298/2014-RB: Foreign Exchange Management (Transfer of Issue of Security by a Person Resident Outside India) (Third Amendment) Regulations, 2014 dated 13th March, 2014.(xi)Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA)Certification of Application for License and renewal thereof to act as Surveyor and Loss Assessor under Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA)(xii)Ministry of Commerce and IndustryIssuance of various certificates under Foreign Trade Policy & Procedures 2015-20 and Aayat Niryat (Import and Export) Forms (ANF). Vide http://F.No.01/94/180/468-Appendices/AM12/PC4 dated 11th October 2012, Cost Accountants are authorized to authenticate various forms and statements, under Foreign Trade Policy & Procedures 2015-20 issued by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. Please referAnnexure – III.(xiii)Ministry of Commerce and IndustryCertifying Performa CI & C2 under Anti–Dumping as prescribed by Ministry of Commerce & Industry.(xiv)Ministry of Commerce and IndustryCertifying Statement of cost of production for Anti-dumping petition to Government of India.(xv)Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public DistributionAnnual utilization certificate under Incentive Scheme for New Sugar Factories and Expansion Projects vide Notification No. F.3 (4)/89-PC/Vol.IV of Ministry of Food Dated 28th February, 1997.(xvii)Ministry of TextileCertificate of fulfillment of Hank Yarn obligation for Textile Industry and Textile Committee Cess – Monthly Return in Form – A.(xviii)National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA)Certification of various Forms as mentioned in SECOND SCHEDULE of Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1995;(xix)Reserve Bank of India (RBI)Compliance Certificate of Reserve Bank of India for Scheduled Banks/ Urban Development Banks/ Urban Co-operative Banks in respect of Consortium Arrangement / Multiple Banking Arrangements.(xx)Reserve Bank of India (RBI)Valuation Certificate as per RBI Circular No.2006-2007/224 DBOD.BP.BC No. 50 / 21.04.018/ 2006-07 dated January 4, 2007 for valuation of different classes of assets (e.g. land and building, plant and machinery, agricultural land, etc.)(xxi)Rubber Board Rubber Rules, 1955Certifying half yearly return in Form ‘N’ for Quantity of Rubber purchased & consumed by manufacturers under rule 33 (f) of the Rubber Rules, 1955.(xxii)Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI)Reporting and Audit for System on Accounting Separation- Certification Work Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI).(xxiii)e-MudhraJoin us as a Partner for issuing e-Mudhra Digital Certificates. http://e-mudhra.com/portal/Partner.aspx(xxiv)Ministry of Finance, Department of ExpenditureCertification regarding average annual financial turnover of bidder :Annexure 9 Sample Prequalification Criteria of Manual for Procurement of Goods 2017CCompanies Act, 2013(i)Companies (Cost Records and Audit) Rules, 2014As per Companies (Cost Records and Audit) Rules, 2014, the class of companies which also include foreign companies, are required to maintain “Cost Records”. Cost accountant in practice may assist the company to maintain the Cost Records as per the Companies (Cost Records and Audit) Rules, 2014.(ii)Section 2(38)An expert who has the power or authority to issue a certificate in pursuance of any law for the time being in force.(iii)Section 7(1)(b)Declaration in the prescribed form no. INC.8. form no.INC 14 that the memorandum and articles have been drawn as per the provisions and in conformity.(iv)Form DIR – 12Sections 7(1)(c), 168 & 170(2) and rule 17 of the Companies (Incorporation) Rules 2014 and 8, 15 & 18 of the Companies (Appointment and Qualification of Directors) Rules, 2014 – Particulars of appointment of Directors and the Key Managerial Personnel and the changes among them in form no. DIR 12.(v)Form INC – 14Declaration that the draft memorandum and articles of association have been drawn up in conformity with the provisions of section 8 in form No. INC.14.(vi)Form INC – 21Section 11(1)(a) read with Rule 24 of the Companies (Incorporation) Rules, 2014- Declaration prior to commencement of business or exercising borrowing powers in form No. INC 21.(vii)Form INC – 22Section 12(2) & (4) and Rule 25 and 27 of The Companies (Incorporation) Rules 2014- Notice of situation or change of situation of registered office in form no. INC 22.(viii)Form – PAS 3Section 39(4) and 42 (9) and Rule 12 and 14 Companies (Prospectus and Allotment of Securities) Rules, 2014- Return of Allotment in form no. PAS 3.(ix)Form – SH7Section 64(1) and pursuant to Rule 15 of the Companies (Share Capital & Debentures) Rules, 2014 - Notice to Registrar of any alteration of share capital in form no. SH 7.(x)Form – CHG 9Sections 71(3), 77, 78 & 79 and pursuant to Section 384 read with 71(3), 77, 78 and 79 and Rule 3 of The Companies (Registration of charges) Rules 2014 Application for registration of creation or modification of charge for debentures or rectification of particulars filed in respect of creation or modification of charge for debentures in form no. CHG 9.(xi)Form – CHG 1Sections 77, 78 and 79 and pursuant to Section 384 read with 77, 78 and 79 andRule 3(1) of the Companies (Registration of Charges) Rules 2014- Registration of creation, modification of charge (other than those related to debentures) including particulars of modification of charge by Asset Reconstruction Company in terms of Securitization and Reconstruction of Finance Assets and Enforcement of Securities Act, 2002 (SARFAESI) in form no. CHG 1.(xii)Form – CHG 4Section 82(1) and Rule 8(1) of the Companies (Registration of charges) Rules 2014- Particulars of satisfaction of charges thereof in form no. CHG 4.(xiii)Form – MGT 14Section 94(1), 117(1) and section 192 – The Companies Act, 1956- Filing of resolutions and agreements to the Registrar in form no. MGT 14.(xiv)Section 137Under form no. AOC – 4 disclosures of related party transactions.(xv)Section 143Report to the Central Government if a fraud is being or has been committed against the company by officers or employees of the company.(xvi)Section 149(4)Section 149 (4) read with Rule 5 of the Companies (Appointment and Qualification of Directors) Rules, 2014: Independent Director Possess skills, experience and knowledge in one or more fields inter alia finance to be an Independent Director.(xvii)Section 153Section 153 and & Rule 9(1) of The Companies (Appointment and Qualification of Directors) Rules, 2014 & Rule 10 of Limited Liability Partnership Rules, 2009: Digital verification of the Form DIR-3: Application for allotment of Director Identification Number(xviii)Section 196Section 196 read with Section 197 and Schedule V of the Companies Act, 2013 and pursuant to Rule 3 of the Companies (Appointment and Remuneration of Managerial Personnel) Rules 2014- Return of appointment of key managerial personnel in form no. MR 1(xix)Section 196, 197, 200, 201(1), 203(1)Section 196, 197, 200, 201(1), 203(1) and Schedule V & Rule 7 of the Companies (Appointment and Remuneration of Managerial Personnel) Rules 2014- Form of application to the Central Government for approval of appointment and remuneration or increase in remuneration or waiver for excess or over payment to Managing Director or Whole Time Director or Manager and commission or remuneration to Directors in form no. MR 2.(xx)Section 232(7)Declaration of compliance alongwith Statement to be filed with Registrar of Companies.(xxi)Section 247(1)Eligible to apply for being registered as a valuer.(xxii)Section 259(1)Appointment as Company Administrator by the tribunal.(xxiii)Section 275(1)Appointment as Company liquidator for winding up of the Company.(xxiv)Section 366Application by a company for registration in Form No. URC–1.(xxv)Section 409(3)Appointment as Technical person of Tribunal (15 years of experience is required)(xxvi)Section 432Appearance in the Tribunal for public examination of promoters/directors.(xxvii)Section 455(1)Section 455(1) read with Rule 3 of The Companies (Miscellaneous) Rules, 2014 – Application to Registrar for obtaining the status of dormant company in form no. MSC 1(xxviii)Section 455(5)Section 455(5) and Rule 7 and 8 of the Companies (Miscellaneous) Rules, 2014- Return of dormant companies in form no. MSC 3.(xxix)Rule 5(2)Nidhi Rules, 2014- Return of statutory compliances in form no. NDH 1.(xxx)Rule 5(3)Nidhi Rules, 2014- Application for extension of time in form no. NDH 2.(xxxi)Rule 21Nidhi Rules, 2014- Half yearly return in form no. NDH 3.(xxxii)Rule 8(8)As per Companies (Registration Offices and Fees) Rules, 2014, documents or form or application filed may contain a power of attorney issued to Cost Accountant.(xxxiii)Form GNL – 1Rule 12(2) of the companies (Registration offices and Fees) Rules, 2014- Form for filing an application with Registrar of Companies in form no. GNL 1.(xxxiv)Form GNL – 3Rule 12(3) of the Companies (Registration offices and Fees) Rules, 2014 – Particulars of person(s) or key managerial personnel charged or specified for the purpose of sub-clause (iii) or (iv) of clause 60 of Section 2 in form no. GNL 3.(xxxv)Rule 20(3)(ix)Rule 20(3)(ix) of the Companies (Management and Administration) Rules, 2014: Scrutinizer for supervising the Voting through electronic means (e-voting) process.(xxxvi)Form INC – 28Rule 31 of Companies (Incorporation) Rules, 2014 – Notice of the order of the Court or any other competent authority in form no. INC – 28.DOther Statutory Work(i)Calcutta High CourtValuer: Members can now apply directly as ‘Valuer’ for empanelment of Calcutta High Court.(ii)Securities and Exchange Board of India Infrastructure Investment Trusts Regulations, 2014Authorized to act as “Valuer” in respect of financial valuation under section 2(zzf) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Infrastructure Investment Trusts Regulations, 2014 as amended on 30.11.2016.(iii)Securities and Exchange Board of India (Real Estate Investment Trusts) Regulations, 2014Authorized to act as “Valuer” in respect of financial valuation under section 2(zz) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Real Estate Investment Trusts) Regulations, 2014 as amended on 30.11.2016.(iv)Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT)Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT): CBDT vide their Notification no. S.O. 2670(E) recognized Cost Accountants as e-return intermediaries;(v)Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC)Accepting of services of the Cost Accountant’s may also be considered by the respective Commissionrates depending upon the extent of complexity of the cases as provided under Circular No.04/2006 dated 12th January, 2006 modified and its inclusion in the assessed value as extended cost of transportation;(vi)Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC)Audit of accounts of SEZ developer as directed by the Commissioner of Customs/Central Excise [refer Circular No. 52/2002-Customs dated 14th August, 2002];(vii)Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC)Certified Facilitation Centers (CFCs) – under ACES-CBEC Scheme: As per MOU with CBEC, Ministry of Finance, Cost Accountants in whole-time practice are authorized to set up Certified Facilitation Centers (CFCs) under Certified Facilitation Centre Scheme in filing various Excise and Service Tax Returns under the provisions of Central Excise Act and Service Tax Act;(viii)Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC)Computation of freight of time chartered/daughter vessel and its inclusion in the assessed value as extended cost of transportation [refer Circular No.04/2006 dated 12th January, 2006].(ix)Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC)Custom Broker: Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) Amended Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 and included the Cost Accountant qualification for Customs Brokers Examination to be held from the year 2017 onwards;(x)Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC)Ministry of Finance amended Circular No.18/2010 Customs dated 08.07.2010 vide Circular No 01/ 2012-Customs dated 5th January 2012 to authorize inter alia Cost Accountants to issue a certificate, certifying that burden of 4% CVD has not been passed on by the importers to any other person;(xi)Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC)The Commissioner of Customs/Central Excise may direct the concerned developer to get his accounts audited by a Cost Accountant nominated by him in this behalf. The expenses of and incidental to such audit shall be borne by the concerned developer, vide Circular No. 52/2002-Customs dated 14th August, 2002;(xii)Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC)Under Rules 6 and 7 of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995, the exporters may be asked to furnish the purchase invoice as to the procurement of the raw hides/wet blue leather. They should also furnish a certificate inter alia from the Cost Accountant as to the consumption and cost of processing chemicals used for its processing and other incidental overhead charges incurred;(xiii)Customs Act, 1962Certification of refund of additional duty of Customs on the goods imported for subsequent sale under Indian Customs Act;(xiv)Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000Valuation Certificate for Cost of goods produced for Captive Consumption, in accordance with Cost Accounting Standard CAS – 4 issued by the Institute, under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000;(xv)Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000Certificate for Average Cost of Transportation, in accordance with Cost Accounting Standard CAS – 5 issued by the Institute, under Rule 5 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000;(xvi)Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Export Goods) Rules, 2007Under Rule 5 of Customs valuation (Determination of Value of Export Goods) Rules, 2007, the proper officer shall give due consideration to the cost-certificate issued by a Cost Accountant;(xvii)Customs Act, 1962Under the Fixation of brand rate of Drawback without pre-verification – Simplified procedure Scheme, unless there are any special reasons, drawback rates are to be fixed without pre-verification of the date filed, (which should be duly verified by the applicant and Cost Accountant or Chartered Accountant or Chartered Engineers) and the exporter would be authorised by provisional brand rate letters issued by the Ministry to claim the drawback rate considered admissible from the concerned Customs House(s);(xviii)Indian Council of ArbitrationAs Arbitrator: The Indian Council of Arbitration authorizes Cost Accountants and Cost Accounting Firms for empanelment in the panel of arbitrators under the category of financial experts;(xix)Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016Regulation 5 and 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Professionals) Regulations, 2016authorized to act as an Insolvency Professional as per the section 206 and 207 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016;(xx)Foreign Exchange Management (Transfer or Issue of Security by a Person Resident Outside India) Regulations, 2017Regulation 11 of the Foreign Exchange Management (Transfer or Issue of Security by a Person Resident Outside India) Regulations, 2017 authorises Cost Accountant in practice for valuation of capital instruments of an Indian company and also under Schedule 2 - Purchase/ Sale of capital instruments of a listed Indian company on a recognised stock exchange in India by Foreign Portfolio Investors and Schedule 6 - Investment in a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) for valuation on an arm’s length basis as per pricing methodology.(xxi)Companies (Registered Valuers and Valuation) Rules, 2017Under Annexure IV of the Companies (Registered Valuers and Valuation) Rules, 2017, the Member of the Institute of Cost Accountants of India are recognised as Registered Valuer for valuation of Securities or Financial Assets.(xxii)Indian Banks Association (IBA)Recognized Firms of Cost Accountants for Empanelment as Forensic Auditor for frauds.Reserve Bank of India mandated that in respect of all borrowing arrangement exceeding Rs. 500 crores, an Independent Evaluation Committee (IEC) would carry out an evaluation of the Techno-Economic Viability (TEV) and the proposed restructuring package. Number of Cost Accountants are members of “Independent Evaluation Committees (IEC) “.Advised all members Banks to engage Cost Accountants/Firms of Cost Accountants for Stock Audit and Risk Based Internal Audit and other Banking operations.(xxiii)Maharashtra unaided Private Professional Educational ( Regulation of Admissions and Fees ) Act,2015Member of Fee Regulating Authority under Maharashtra unaided Private Professional Educational ( Regulation of Admissions and Fees ) Act,2015EAppearance as an Authorized Representative(i)Companies Act, 2013(a) Right to legal representation: Section 432 of the Companies Act 2013;(b) Rights of a party to appear before the Bench: Regulation 19(2) of Company Law Board Regulations, 1991;(ii)Competition Commission of India (CCI)(a) Appearance before Commission:Section 35 of the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2007;(b) Right to legal representation: Appeal to the Appellate Tribunal: Section 53(1) of the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2007;(iii)Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC)(a) Appearance by Authorized Representative: Section 35Q of the Central Excises Act, 1944;(b) Appearance by Authorized Representative: Section 146A of the Customs Act, 1962;(c) Appearance by Authorized Representative: Rule 2(c) of Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982;(iv)Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC)Authority to represent before the Commission: vide Notification No. 8/ (1)/99/CERC dated 27th August, 1999;(v)Depositories Act, 1996Right to Legal Representations: Section 23C, Explanation (c) of Depositories Act, 1996;(vi)Income Tax Act, 1961Appearance by Authorized Representative:Section 288 of the Income Tax Act 1961 read with Rule 50 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962;(vii)Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016Right to legal representation: Section 56 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016;(viii)Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI)Right to Legal Representations: Clause 22C under Conditions for listing: Chapter IV of Listing of Securities;(ix)Service TaxAppearance by Authorized Representative:Section 96D (5) of the Service Tax Act 1994;(x)Special Economic Zone (SEZ)Rights of appellant to appear before the Board: Rule 61 of the Special Economic Zone Rules 2006;(xi)Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI)Right to Legal Representation before Appellate Tribunal as per Section 17 of TRAI Act, 1997;(xii)Value Added Tax Acts/ RulesCost Accountants are authorized to appear before authorities under VAT Acts/ Rules of various State Government(s).(xiii)Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017.Appearance by authorized representative under Section 116 of Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017.FReserve Bank of India(a)For Valuation of Properties - Empanelment of Valuers. (Circular no. RBI No.2006-2007/224 DBOD.BP.BC No. 50/21.04.018/ 2006-07 January 4, 2007).(b)For certification of borrowal companies in respect of Lending under Consortium Arrangement/ Multiple Banking Arrangements. (Circular No. RBI/2008-2009/379 DBOD. No. BP.BC.110/08.12.001/2008-09 dated 10thFebruary, 2009).(c)For certification of borrowal companies in respect of Lending under Consortium Arrangement / Multiple Banking Arrangements. (Circular No. RBI/2008-2009/382 UBD. PCB.No. 49 /13.05.000/2008-09 dated 12thFebruary, 2009)(d)In respect of the Forensic Scrutiny – Guidelines for prevention of frauds (Circular no. RBI/2010-11/555 DBS. CO.FrMC.BC.No.10/ 23.04.001/2010-11 dated 31stMay, 2011 read with Circular no. RBI/2008-09/508 DBS.CO.FrMC.Bc.No.8 /23.04.001/2008-09 dated June 24, 2009 on Frauds in borrowal accounts having multiple banking arrangements and Circular no. RBI/2008-2009/183 DBOD No BP BC 46 / 08.12.001/2008-09 dated September 19, 2008 on Lending under Consortium Arrangement/ Multi Banking Arrangements).(e)For Certificate indicating fair price of capital contribution/profit share of an LLP and a valuation certificate- Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) (Circular no. RBI/201314/566 A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 123 dated April 16, 2014).(f)For Certificate in respect of Foreign Investment in India (Circular no. RBI/2014-15/6 Master Circular No.15/2014-15 July 01, 2014 (Amended upto February 09, 2015).(g)For certification in respect of Loans and Advances – Statutory and Other Restrictions for Lending under Consortium Arrangement/Multiple Banking Arrangement (Circular no. RBI/2014-15/64 DBOD.No.Dir.BC. 16/13.03.00/2014-15 July 1, 2014).(h)For Certification in respect of Guarantees, Co-Acceptances & Letters of Credit – UCBs (Circular no. RBI/2013-14/19 UBD.BPD.(PCB) MC No.4/09.27.000/2013-14 July 1, 2013).(i)For Certification in respect of Management of Advances – UCBs for Exchange of information–Lending under Consortium Arrangement/Multiple Banking Arrangements (Circular No.RBI/2014-15/21 UBD.BPD.(PCB) MC No.5/13.05.000/2014-15 July 1, 2014).(j)Valuation Certificate in respect of Foreign Exchange Management (Transfer of Issue of Security by a Person Resident Outside India) (Third Amendment) Regulations, 2014 (Notification No. FEMA.298/2014-RB: dated 13th March, 2014).(k)Valuation Certificate for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) under Master Circular No. 15/2014-15 dated 1st July, 2014.Cost Accountants in Employment:As mentioned in the beginning, the Cost Accountants are most sought in the business world. There services are deemed vital in investment planning, profit planning, project management and overall managerial decision making process. Many members of the Institute are occupying the top positions in the organizations, as Chairman & Managing Director, Managing Director, Finance Director, Financial Controller, Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Cost Controller, Marketing Manager and Chief Internal Auditor etc.Cost Accountants in Government Department:Realising the importance of the profession of the Cost and Management Accountancy in the economic development of the nation, the Central Government has constituted an all-India cadre known as Indian Cost Accounts Service (ICoAS) at par with other Class-I services such as IAS, IFS etc. to advise the government in cost pricing and in framing the appropriate fiscal and tax policies.Cost Accountants in Education:University Grants Commission (UGC) has notified “UGC Regulations on Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and Other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education, 2010 vide its Circular No. F.3-1/2009 dated 30th June 2010.The Regulations prescribe the minimum qualification for appointment of teaching faculty in universities and colleges in the area of Management/ Business Administration. The qualifications specified for appointment of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor in the above area and Principal/Director/Head of the Institution include First Class Graduate and professionally qualified Cost Accountant among other qualifications and subject to other requirements including qualifying NET/SLET/SET as the minimum eligibility condition for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professors.Further Academic pursuits:A member of the Institute can get enrolled as a member of IMA USA.Recognised by the Academic Councils of many Universities in India for the purpose of admission to the Ph.D. courses in Commerce. Various Universities have recognized CMA qualification for registration as M.Phil. and Ph.D. candidates in commerce and allied disciplines.The MoU between CIMA (The Chartered Institute of Management Accountants), UK and The Institute of Cost Accountants of India introduces a new CIMA Professional Gateway examination (available from May 2009) for the students who have successfully completed the whole of the Institute’s professional examination, enabling a ‘fast track’ route into CIMA’s Strategic level examinations, final tests of professional competence and ultimately CIMA Membership.MOU between Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU): As per MOU dated 11th July, 2008, IGNOU offers specialized http://B.Com and http://M.Com Programs for the students. The Students can simultaneously study the specialized http://B.Com (Financial & Cost Accounting) programme with the Institute’s Intermediate Course and specialized http://M.Com (Management Accounting & Financial Strategies) with the Institute’s final course.

The middle class may have woken up to the crisis in agriculture when thousands of farmers marched to the national capital on 30 November 2018, but it is a crisis that has been with us for quite some time now.The Delhi march had been preceded by many protests across state capitals starting with the ‘Long March’ of 12 March 2018 in Mumbai. In fact, there have been numerous farmer protests – small and large – since 2016. There was the long dharna (agitation) by Tamil Nadu farmers in 2017 in Delhi. Then there was the death of five protesting farmers in police firing in June 2017 at Mandsaur, Madhya Pradesh. These have been only a few of the many agitations that have taken place across the country in recent years.One immediate fallout of the widespread protests has been that it has forced the attention of the media and the political parties on the misery of the farmers. The debate around the plight of agriculture has been reduced unfortunately to only two issues: one, the lack of remunerative prices for which the demand is for higher Minimum Support Prices (MSPs) and, the second, the debt trap that farmers find themselves in. As a result, state and central governments and political parties are promising debt waivers and higher MSPs, and more recently income transfers to farmers. However, none of these responses reveal an understanding of the true extent of the crisis in agriculture. It is unlikely that adversity will go away even if these promises of loan waivers and higher MSPs are implemented, and the income transfers of the state and central governments are handed out.The crisis in agriculture is deep-rooted and is a result of an accumulation of distress over the last decade or so. There are a number of reasons why the predicament agriculture now finds itself in is unprecedented compared to previous instances of distress.First, unlike earlier episodes when acute distress was the result of a disruption in production or weather-induced factors, this time it has intensified at a time when the monsoon has been normal. Sure, the crisis was aggravated by the twin droughts of 2014 and 2015, but its genesis and its subsequent intensification have been a result of factors unrelated to monsoon failure. Apart from the impact of a sharp decline in the prices of agricultural produce since August 2014, the current episode of severe adversity is the result more of a larger neglect of the agricultural sector since 2012-13.Second, this time it is not agriculture alone that is in distress but the entire rural economy has been affected by a severe decline in demand including in activities other than farming (what is called the ‘non-farm sector’).Third, unlike earlier when the response of governments to some extent managed to alleviate the suffering of farmers and revive the agrarian economy, this time the government’s actions have only worsened the crisis.Finally, unlike previous such episodes when the plight of agriculture was localised to parts of the agrarian economy, this time it is both geographically widespread with almost all major states being affected, and different segments of the agricultural sector – food crops, non-food crops, and livestock economy – are in the doldrums.The widespread nature of the crisis also implies that any solution has to address all its dimensions. Unfortunately, the narrow approach given the impending elections has meant that the solutions offered are piecemeal and half-hearted without addressing the root causes. While these may provide temporary relief to the farming community, they are unlikely to prevent another crisis a few years from now.Building up to a crisis: 2014-2016Long-time observers are in some ways not surprised by the state of Indian agriculture today. In many ways, agriculture has always been in crisis, the intensity of which may have gone up or down from year to year. This time it is serious and has taken political dimensions, with almost all political parties waking up to the situation. The entire rural economy has been affected with consequences for overall economic growth.The non-farm sector in rural India, which has lately been an equally important part of the rural economy, has been under stress with most of the rural activities witnessing lower growth than during the period 2004-05 to 2013-14. Along with farmers (cultivators) whose incomes have declined in real terms (that is, after adjusting for inflation), the wages of casual workers have been growing much more slowly than earlier. The real wages of labourers in agriculture as well as the non-farm rural sector have even stagnated in the last five years. Taken together, casual workers and cultivators account for almost two-thirds of all workers in the rural economy. So a decline in their real incomes has contributed in recent years to an extreme episode of demand deflation (that is, a decline in demand, as opposed to an increase in inflation).The current situation in many ways mirrors the predicament faced by the agricultural sector during 1997-2003 when another National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government was in power – led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) with Atal Bihari Vajpayee as Prime Minister. The similarities are a prolonged period of demand deflation led by a collapse of agricultural prices and a sharp slowdown in agricultural wages. The former contributed to the terms of trade shifting away from agriculture and in favour of the non-agricultural sector. (The terms of trade between two sectors broadly measure the purchasing power of the income earned by one sector in order to buy the goods and services of the other sector.)There was also a sharp increase in farmer suicides. It is this backdrop and the anger against the then government that led to the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) being elected to office in 2004. Unfortunately, the NDA-II government again led by the BJP has not learnt from its previous mistakes and has ended up in a similar situation, this time with an agricultural crisis worse than in the early 2000s.Agriculture grew by just 1.76% every year during 1998-2004. However, the rural economy bounced back after 2004 with the growth rate of agriculture accelerating by more than double to 3.84% per annum between 2004-05 and 2012-13 (growth rates are based on the old GDP series). The revival of agriculture was led by an increase in credit availability to agriculture, a rise in farm investment and MSP policies that helped shift the terms of trade in favour of agriculture. The increase in the MSP during the first term of the UPA government (2004-09) may have partially fuelled food inflation during the second term of the UPA (2009-14), but it also led to higher incomes for farmers and a general increase in the wage rate of labour that was unprecedented since the 1980s.At the time, the MSP of paddy was hiked from Rs. 560 per quintal in 2004-05 to Rs. 1,310 per quintal in 2013-14 while that of wheat from Rs. 640 per quintal in 2004-05 to Rs. 1,400 per quintal in 2013-14, both increasing by more than two times. The higher incomes in the hands of farmers certainly helped expand demand in the rural economy, which was reflected in a higher purchase of consumer durable goods like two-wheelers. It was also reflected in a higher demand for labour in employment in the non-farm sector of rural India, the latter being largely led by an increase in private construction.At the same time, the non-farm sector also benefited from an increased transfer of funds from the central and state governments through various rural development and food security programmes such as the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MNREGA) scheme and the expansion in the public distribution system (PDS). The net result was an equally sharp increase in non-farm incomes and the fastest reduction in poverty in the last three decades.Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s NDA government has promised to double farmers’ income by 2022. That is near impossible since farmers’ incomes have declined in real terms not just during this government’s tenure but also since 2011-12.While there are no reliable and robust estimates of farmer incomes, the background paper outlining the strategy and action plan for doubling incomes prepared by the NITI Aayog (National Institution for Transforming India), shows a trend of declining farmer incomes since 2011-12 (Chand 2017). As against a growth rate of farmer incomes at 5.52% per annum between 2004-05 and 2011-12, the incomes of all farmers actually declined at 1.36% per annum between 2011-12 and 2015-16. Extending the calculations to 2017-18 and using the methodology suggested by the NITI Aayog, it is seen that the trend of a deceleration (slowdown) in growth of farmer income has continued.1In fact, the period after 2011-12 has been the longest such episode where farmers have seen the growth in real incomes slow down year after year.Incidentally, this has happened at a time when, based on the new series of national accounts, the agricultural growth rate has been 2.9% per annum between 2013-14 and 2017-18,2which although lower than the 3.5% per annum between 2004-05 and 2013-14 under the UPA government, is not bad considering the back-to-back droughts of 2014 and 2015. However, this picture of a fairly buoyant agricultural sector in terms of total output is only part of the story. A break-up of the various sub-sectors of the agricultural sector shows a story of stagnation in crop production in the last four years.The crop sector has seen a sharp deceleration in the growth of real gross value added (GVA), a comprehensive measure of net income which has been generated in production that is used in the national accounts) during the first four years of this government, with growth in real terms at only 0.5% per annum.3What makes it significant is the size of the crop sector which accounts for as much as two-thirds of agricultural sector GDP and is the source of livelihood for the huge number of farmers dependent on it. Within the crop sector, it was only the horticulture and allied activities, which showed a sharp recovery while there was a decline in the growth rate of all crop production.Rising costs and falling profitsA declining growth rate of GVA in the crop sector is not just a result of weather fluctuations that affected the output in the first two years of the tenure of the Modi government, but also of cumulative neglect over the years that has intensified during the entire term of the NDA-II government.While the agricultural sector rebounded after the crisis of 1998-2003 with a recovery in farmer incomes, this recovery was short-lived and started showing signs of stress from 2012-13. The sharp rise in real casual wages at more than 6% per annum during 2008-13 along with rising fuel and input costs had already begun to squeeze the profit margin of farmers from 2011-12 onwards.The rise in petroleum prices had led to an increase in irrigation costs. Following the introduction of the Nutrient Based Subsidy (NBS) scheme for fertilisers in 2010, fertiliser prices had also risen. Fertiliser consumption that had increased from 16.7 million tonnes in 2000-01 to 28.1 million tonnes in 2010-11 started declining after the introduction of the NBS scheme, falling sharply to 26 million tonnes by 2016-17. It also led to a worsening of the fertiliser mix. All this together contributed to a squeeze on farmer incomes, affecting rural demand for consumer and investment goods. This is visible, for instance, in the trend in tractor and power tiller sales, where tractor sales increased from 247,000 units in 2004-05 to 697,000 in 2013-14, and then declined subsequently to 582,000 in 2016-17. Similarly, sales of power tillers that had risen from 17,481 units in 2004-05 to 56,000 in 2013-14 later declined to 45,200 in 2016-17. The squeeze on farmers’ incomes also resulted in a declining offtake of bank credit and an increase in the total debt burden.The twin droughts of 2014 and 2015 occurred against this background of rising input costs and a squeeze on farm incomes. Adverse weather conditions then led to a decline in agricultural output. But farmers also suffered from two associated factors. The first was the decline in agricultural commodity prices following a sharp collapse of international prices coinciding with the fall in petroleum prices. The decline in crop output prices took place first in cash crops, when they witnessed a sharp collapse in domestic prices following that of international prices, and soon spread to all commodities as well.Both these factors – adverse weather conditions and the fall in international prices – came as a shock to the agricultural sector that had already started showing signs of stress because of rising input prices. These were further aggravated by the response of the government that contributed to a build-up to a full-blown crisis. The first was the sharp cuts in agricultural expenditure with major declines in spending on agriculture-related schemes. The first full budget of the NDA government in 2015-16 saw a decline in the agriculture budget by almost one-fourth in nominal terms compared to the 2013-14 budget. Although it improved in 2016-17, it still remained lower than the allocation in the agriculture budget of 2013-14.Second, the fall in petroleum prices was not passed on to the consumers, leaving them with an unchanged input bill. The government chose to raise taxes and was the beneficiary of a large windfall of tax revenues.While the terms of trade had already started turning against agriculture after 2011-12, it worsened in the next two years. Figure 1 shows the terms of trade between farmers and non-farmers. The last time the index of terms of trade had moved against farmers was during 1997-2003. It had recovered after that with the index moving up from 85 in 2004-05 to 103 by 2010-11, driven by generous MSP increases and a general rise in food inflation. But it declined soon after and has remained at this level ever since (Figure 1).Figure 1. Index of terms of trade between farmers and non-farmersSource: Ministry of Agriculture (2017).The third factor was the decline in real investment in agriculture. At a time when all indicators of the rural economy were suggesting a deterioration of the agricultural situation with a decline in farmers’ income, the response of the government was to reduce the already meagre investment in agriculture. Public investment in the agricultural sector declined sharply with real investment declining at 1% per annum during the four years of the NDA-II government for which data is available. Figure 2 presents the picture.Figure 2. Investment in agriculture (Rs. Crore, 2011-12 prices)Source: National Accounts Statistics.The non-farm sectorWhile distress in the agricultural sector had been building up since 2012-13, one of the reasons why it later worsened was the slowdown in the non-farm sector. The non-farm sector has been gaining importance in the rural economy for some time now. By 2011-12, agriculture was not the dominant employer in the economy, although it remained important in the rural economy. While aggregate data may not fully capture the extent and importance of the non-farm economy in sustaining the larger rural economy, the evidence from village surveys clearly points to its increasing importance.4The rural non-farm economy is now not just a driver of income and employment diversification, it contributed to a significant reduction in poverty between 2004-05 and 2011-12. However, the rural non-farm economy started showing signs of stress when the construction sector too started slowing down. This slowdown was reflected in the national accounts statistics, but is more starkly visible in wage data.Real rural wages rose at more than 6% per annum between 2008 and 2012, but growth started slowing in November 2013. Real wages of agricultural labourers grew at 0.87% per annum between May 2014 and December 2018, whereas for non-agricultural labourers they grew by only 0.23% per annum. For construction workers, who are among the largest group of workers outside agriculture, real wages during the same period declined by 0.02% per annum.The deceleration in real wage growth and stagnation in real wages was reversed in July 2016, which was a normal monsoon year after two years of drought. However, real wages again stagnated after May 2017, most likely as a result of demonetisation in November 2016, which disrupted agricultural activities as well as the rural non-farm sector (see Figures 3 and 4). Both these sectors are largely informal in nature and suffered immensely due to the withdrawal of cash from the system.The decline in real wages was driven by the decline in agricultural production, as also by the slowdown in the non-farm sector, particularly in construction and manufacturing.The construction sector grew at 7.9% per annum between 2004-05 and 2012-13. Growth then decelerated sharply to only 3.5% between 2014-15 and 2017-18, which affected the demand for non-farm labour. The slowing growth in real wages was also partly caused by the cutbacks in public spending, which had helped raise wages between 2007-08 and 2012-13. Not only did the overall expenditure on MNREGA decline after 2011-12, even the person days of work generated started falling. The NDA government’s attitude to MNREGA can be summed up by Prime Minister Modi’s speech in Parliament, where he declared that it should be seen as a symbol of failure of the UPA.Figure 3. Real wages of non-agricultural labour (Rs. per day, 2011 prices)Note: Real wages have been obtained by deflating nominal wages by the consumer price index, rural​.Source: Wage Rates in Rural India, Labour Bureau.Figure 4. General agricultural real wages (Rs. per day)Note: Real wages have been obtained by deflating nominal wages by consumer price index, rural​.Source: Wage Rates in Rural India, Labour Bureau.The slowing growth of real wages contributed to the general decline in demand in rural areas. The cumulative impact was felt not just on agricultural demand but also on non-agricultural goods and services. Unlike the agricultural sector, where unforeseen circumstances such as weather shocks and the collapse of international prices had a role to play, the decline in the rural non-farm sector was entirely a domestic creation. Partly, it was the NDA government's attitude towards rural development interventions such as MNREGA and other such schemes. It saw such policies as a legacy of the previous UPA government and therefore not deserving attention. The wilful neglect of agrarian distress also contributed to the slowdown in the non-farm sector.Finally, the decline in agricultural exports too contributed to the worsening situation in agriculture. The fall in international commodity prices affected the demand for Indian agricultural products in global markets where the collapse in prices along with the relatively negligible decline in domestic prices made Indian agricultural exports uncompetitive. As a result, agricultural exports, which had increased from a low of US$8.8 billion in 2004-05 to US$39.4 billion in 2014-15, declined to US$33.8 billion by 2016-17. At the same time, agricultural imports that amounted to US$3.8 billion in 2004-05 increased to US$15.03 billion in 2014-15 and further to US$16.9 billion in 2016-17.The fall in exports and increase in imports hurt domestic producers. One of the reasons domestic prices remained high making Indian produce uncompetitive, was that unlike international trends the decline in petroleum prices did not materialise in lower energy costs for Indian farmers. The price competitiveness of Indian agricultural exports was also hurt by an ad-hoc export–import policy, which put unnecessary export restrictions, thus preventing farmers from benefiting from international markets. An unfavourable exchange policy and imports by the government also contributed to unfair competition from agricultural commodities, which were imported from the global markets where prices were lower than domestic prices.Intensification of agrarian crisis: 2016-2018Government policy not only neglected agriculture during the crucial period of 2014-2016, but also played an active role in deepening the crisis. Fortunately, the resilient Indian farmer was strong enough to effect a revival in 2016 when the weather turned favourable. Agricultural growth rebounded to more than 6.3% in 2016-17 and followed it up with 5% growth in 2017-18.5Unfortunately, the recovery was short-lived. Farmers who had harvested a bumper crop in Kharif 2016 found themselves unable to sell once demonetisation was announced on 8 November 2016, which thus caused acute misery. Most of the trade in agriculture is cash based, and the absence of cash led to huge losses for most farmers. It also affected the non-farm sector, which was showing signs of revival following the normal monsoon of 2016. The net result was a continuation of the profit-realisation crisis of farmers alongside job losses. Real wages, which had started showing signs of faster growth, also started showing a slower growth from May 2017. By October 2018, the last month for which the Labour Bureau has released data, real wage rates were lower than February 2017 for agricultural as well as non-agricultural labourers.While demonetisation adversely affected the agricultural sector and the non-agricultural sector, the hasty introduction of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) added to the woes of the informal non-farm sector. The combined impact of demonetisation and GST was a further slowdown in the rural non-farm sector.While the crop economy was under severe distress, matters were made worse by the problems in the livestock economy. The cattle economy is an integral part of the agrarian economy, particularly for small and marginal farmers. The political mobilisation against cattle trade affected the agrarian economy. Several incidents of lynching of cattle traders and tightening of regulation for cattle trade by state governments led to a sharp reduction in the volume of trade. The downturn in the livestock economy, which used to provide emergency cash and in some cases was also a necessary diversification in the rural economy, now also contributed to the decline in rural incomes. The increase in stray cattle, abandoned by farmers after the cows are no longer lactating, added to the cost of farming as labourers had to be engaged to protect the fields from stray cattle. The net impact of these developments was a sharp reduction in income opportunities that were available to farmers along with an increase in the cost of cultivation. The non-crop economy not only added to income but also acted as insurance against losses in crop cultivation.The cumulative impact of all these factors resulted in one of the sharpest declines in rural demand. Reduced domestic demand and external opportunities led to a collapse of prices in the domestic market. The fact that agricultural markets were fragmented also did not help the farmer realise the price for his produce. The collusion and cartelisation of agricultural markets only led to farmers being squeezed out from the demand that was coming from urban areas. However, it was the demand deflation in the domestic economy that has ended up in a situation where food price inflation has turned negative. Since August 2017, the food price index from the wholesale price index (WPI) has not seen any growth (Figure 5).Figure 5. Wholesale price index food inflation (%)Source: Office of the Economic Adviser.Clearly, the crisis in agriculture this time is not driven by the collapse of agricultural output. Its genesis lies in the broader policies that the Indian economy has followed in the last three decades since the economic reforms of 1991. It is embedded in the larger political economy architecture following structural adjustment policies, which make low inflation the objective of fiscal and monetary policies. Since food and agricultural commodities constitute a significant part of the consumption basket, the objective of low inflation also implies keeping food inflation low.The second component of the structural adjustment policies that seek to keep the fiscal deficit under control also emphasises a reduction in subsidies and revenue expenditure on agriculture and rural development. A failure to adhere to the principle of low inflation invites censure from the rating agencies, which seek to keep the real value of foreign investments intact. Inflation erodes the real value of these investments. While there is no substantial evidence either against undertaking expansionary fiscal policies when there is surplus capacity and demand deflation, or that overall inflation is driven largely by food inflation, successive governments have continued to maintain inflation targeting and fiscal fundamentalism as non-negotiable policy.The implication of the deflationary policies has been felt largely by the farmers and rural population in order to keep the middle classes and the foreign investors happy. Despite the acute crisis in the countryside, governments have avoided using the available fiscal space to increase demand in rural areas.Not only is the aggregate growth rate of crop agriculture lower now than during the UPA years, the increase in agricultural output is nowhere close to the increase in production observed during the period 2004-05 to 2013-14, except in the case of pulses. Figure 6 gives the growth rate of major crops and crop groups for the periods 2004-05 to 2013-14 and 2013-14 to 2017-18.Figure 6. Growth rate of output of different cropsNote:Growth rates are compound annual growth rates. Figures for 2017-18 are based on 4thAdvance Estimates.Source: Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare.Except for pulses, which have seen output grow faster between 2013-14 and 2017-18, all other crops and crop groups have seen a sharp deceleration in output growth.In the case of pulses, untimely imports resulted in a price collapse. But commercial crops such as soybean and cotton that have seen an output decline have also seen a fall in prices. The current spell of low and declining prices is therefore certainly not due to overproduction as has been claimed by the government and some sections of the media, and nor does it follow international prices that have not shown any sharp decline, after falling between 2014 and 2016.The responseOne way to gauge the response of the government and its commitment to agriculture is by examining the budget allocations for agriculture. While the budget of the ministry of agriculture increased almost 10 times from Rs. 21.67 billion in 2003-04 to Rs. 216.09 billion in 2013-14 during the UPA years, the allocation in the first full budget of the NDA government declined by one-fourth to Rs. 166.46 billion in 2015-16. It increased to Rs. 204 billion in 2016-17, which remained lower than the budgeted allocation for 2013-14. In normal course, governments would increase budgeted expenditure on agriculture, particularly in drought years, but the two budgets after the droughts clearly showed the present government’s lack of concern for agriculture.While the budget allocations did show a jump in 2017-18 and 2018-19, much of this was due to smart accounting where the amount spent on interest subsidy, which was earlier reflected in the budget of the finance ministry was brought into the budget of the agriculture ministry. Excluding the interest subsidy component, the overall budget for agriculture increased by 26% per annum during the UPA years but by only 8.7% per annum under the NDA-II government. It is also important to note that except in 2016-17, in none of the years has the actual expenditure been close to the budget allocation. The marginal increase in the agricultural budget in recent years has largely been on subsidy on interest and on insurance premium. But this increase has come at the cost of a decline in investment in agriculture. Real investment in agriculture declined by one percentage point per annum during the first four years of the Modi government.6While the government continued to reduce public investment in agriculture alongside the marginal increases in overall agricultural budgets, the cut in some of the vital schemes such as Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY)7also had adverse effects on the farm sector.In the context of the increased protests by the farmers and resulting politicisation of the farmers’ crisis, the response has largely been of three kinds: loan waivers, MSP increases, and some form of direct income transfers, which have now found favour with political parties and have also been implemented in several states. The total amount of loan waiver announced so far is almost Rs. 1.9 trillion with promises of more after the Lok Sabha8elections.While there is some justification for providing relief to farmers unable to pay their debt due to unforeseen circumstances such as a failure of the monsoon or a collapse in prices, loan waivers have now become the dominant way of addressing the agrarian crisis. The last big loan waiver was in 2008 when the UPA government announced a national loan waiver with loans worth Rs. 700 billion being waived. Given the extent of indebtedness and the crisis in agriculture following the drought and price collapse after 2014, there was some justification for these interventions.The latest data on the extent of indebtedness among farmers is available from the Situation Assessment Survey (SAS) of 2012-13. According to the SAS, 52% of all farmers in the country had on an average unpaid debt of Rs. 47,000. However, there is a large regional variation with a higher incidence in southern states, with 93% of farmers being indebted in Andhra Pradesh and 83% in Tamil Nadu. At the all-India level, 60% of these loans were from institutional sources with the remaining from local moneylenders and other informal sources. The data also shows that the extent of dependence on non-institutional sources was much higher among small and marginal farmers with more than 50% of the loans for these groups coming from non-institutional sources.While loan waivers are desirable in some cases and necessary in the case of extreme indebtedness, they come with their own set of problems. There is the issue of moral hazard,9which penalises the sincere and rule-abiding farmer. It gives rise to a tendency to default on loans, especially if the loan waivers are not a one-time solution but keep recurring every decade, which is the case this time with multiple loan waivers. It also has an impact on the banks, which are already stressed with large non-performing assets. However, the real problem with loan waivers is that they contribute little to providing a solution to the problem of declining farm prices which are seen as the primary reason for worsening of the crisis.Even the attempts to increase the MSPs are unlikely to help raise market prices of crops in rural areas. The idea of providing a fixed mark-up over the cost of cultivation has been quite dominant for some time now. It was also among many recommendations of the National Commission on Farmers chaired by M.S. Swaminathan. An MSP at 50% over costs was also promised by political parties including the BJP which took advantage of the agrarian unrest during the run up to the 2014 election. But the BJP’s actions once it assumed power were contrary to its promises. The government raised MSPs only notionally, and it used administrative measures to reduce procurement. The bonus that was given by the state governments was also discontinued. But the government finally had to respond to the pressure to raise MSPs by announcing increases in the 2018-19 budget. The MSP for paddy was increased by Rs. 200 from Rs. 1,550 to Rs. 1,750 for Kharif 2018, a 13% increase over the previous year. The MSP increase for other crops varied between 3.7% for moong bean to 45% for Niger seed. The MSP makes a significant difference for paddy and wheat for which there is a proper procurement and distribution mechanism in the form of the Public Distribution System (PDS) but not as much for other crops where there is almost negligible procurement. Even for paddy and wheat, the impact has been muted since the market prices were higher than the announced MSP.The third kind of response to the agricultural crisis has been the more recent one of making direct benefit transfers to farmers. Such income transfers have so far been implemented fully only in Telangana. Similar schemes, with some variation, have been proposed in Odisha and Jharkhand which are going for legislative assembly elections this year.The direct income support scheme in Telangana was seen as a political success with the Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS) retaining power in the state with a thumping majority in the assembly elections of December 2018. The Rythu Bandhu scheme of the Telangana government provides Rs. 4,000 per acre for every season to all the farmers of the state, with an annual budget of Rs. 120 billion. The scheme in Jharkhand is similar to the Rythu Bandhu scheme with an enhanced pay out of Rs. 5,000 per acre to 2.28 million farmers at the cost of Rs. 22.5 billion to the state government. The third scheme is the Krushak Assistance for Livelihood and Income Augmentation (KALIA) that has been started by the Odisha government. Unlike in Telangana and Jharkhand, KALIA does not provide any income transfer on the basis of the land holding but for the household as a unit. The pay out at Rs. 10,000 per family per year also extends to sharecroppers and landless agricultural labourers.The central government also announced an income transfer scheme with retrospective effect as part of the interim budget for 2019-20, called the PM-KISAN (Pradhan Mantri Kisan Samman Nidhi). The central government will provide an annual transfer of Rs. 6,000 to be paid in three equal instalments to roughly 125 million small and marginal farmers. The first instalment of the scheme will be delivered before the elections. However, the national scheme does not cover sharecroppers and wage labourers.Concluding remarksThe current crisis in agriculture is a serious one. The precarious situation is basically a result of neglect of the agrarian economy by successive governments. The roots of the crisis, however, are in the broader political economy paradigm that India has followed since the early 1990s. It has resulted in an increased frequency of such extreme episodes, and has also seen the intensity increase over the years. Unfortunately, the solutions being offered are not only inadequate to prevent the recurrence of such crises, but may in the long run actually aggravate the problems.The latest fad of cash transfers is also a part of this broader political economy architecture that sees them as a panacea for all the problems in agriculture. Propagated by a group of influential economists, these are now part of mainstream discourse not just as a resolution of the agrarian crisis but also as solutions for corruption, malnutrition, and jobless growth that the economy has seen in the last two decades.The biggest appeal of the cash transfer scheme is its supposed simplicity. It is certainly popular and politically rewarding, but it is unlikely that it will solve the deep-rooted problems of Indian agriculture.If there is one message from the analysis here, it is that the genesis of the current crisis lies in the faulty and ad-hoc export–import policy, lack of infrastructure, low investment, and cartelisation and collusion in agricultural markets, which have prevented farmers from realising market prices for their produce. It is the combination of these factors along with the twin droughts of 2014 and 2015 which created the current crisis in the first place.It is also true that the situation worsened due to the sudden shocks of demonetisation and the hasty implementation of GST, which affected the rural economy adversely. Cash transfers are not a solution to any of these developments and are definitely no guarantee of protection against unforeseen events, whether natural or policy-induced. They are certainly not a substitute for the structural reforms needed in agriculture. The current crisis may have worsened due to the sharp fall in agricultural crop prices but it is ultimately a result of multiple failures of policy. Further, it is a crisis which is as much agricultural as it is caused by the failure of the non-farm sector in creating enough jobs as is evident from the deceleration in real wages in rural areas.Some of these income transfer schemes, such as the Telangana model, are also regressive with the amount of transfer proportional to the land owned. In case of the national scheme, which targets the small and marginal farmers, the real problem will be of identifying the beneficiaries. Given that the current problems are a result of demand deflation in the rural areas, the transfers may revive rural demand in the short- and medium run. But they are certainly not free and costless. They come at a cost: a decline in investment as well as a decline in other rural development expenditure. With most state governments already committed to loan waivers, an income transfer scheme does have an impact on the states’ ability to invest in agriculture. The transfer scheme will therefore further erode the fiscal capacity of states.While proponents of a cash transfer scheme may argue that it is non-distortionary and therefore more efficient, it does nothing to correct the imbalance that has arisen due to a movement of terms of trade against agriculture or against price transmissions from international markets. With agriculture becoming more diverse with growth in horticulture and crops with a large trade exposure, increased monetisation and mechanisation of agriculture, a rise in input costs has also been seen.What are needed are larger investments in improving access to better technology, extension programmes to enable farmers to take advantage of new technology, market infrastructure, storage and warehousing infrastructure, and easy and assured supply of credit. Cash transfers absolve the government from all such obligations. Rather, by taking away precious fiscal resources, they makes the farmer more vulnerable to both market- as well as non-market induced risks by reducing investments in basic infrastructure and other support measures necessary to support agriculture. Cash transfers and loan waivers may not be the solution to the agrarian crisis, but will surely create an agriculture which is far more vulnerable and crisis-prone than even what it is currently.

Several common ethanol fuel mixtures are in use around the world. The use of pure hydrous or anhydrous ethanol in internal combustion engines (ICEs) is only possible if the engines are designed or modified for that purpose, and used only in automobiles, light-duty trucks and motorcycles. Anhydrous ethanol can be blended with gasoline (petrol) for use in gasoline engines, but with high ethanol content only after minor engine modifications.Ethanol fuel mixtures have "E" numbers which describe the percentage of ethanol fuel in the mixture by volume, for example, E85 is 85% anhydrous ethanol and 15% gasoline. Low-ethanol blends, from E5 to E25, although internationally the most common use of the term refers to the E10 blend.Blends of E10 or less are used in more than 20 countries around the world, led by the United States, where ethanol represented 10% of the U.S. gasoline fuel supply in 2011.[1]Blends from E20 to E25 have been used in Brazil since the late 1970s. E85 is commonly used in the U.S. and Europe for flexible-fuel vehicles. Hydrous ethanol or E100 is used in Brazilian neat ethanol vehicles and flex-fuel light vehicles and hydrous E15 called hE15 for modern petrol cars in the Netherlands.[2]Contents1E10 or less1.1Availability2E153hE154E20, E255E70, E756E857ED958E1009Use limitations9.1Modifications to engines9.2Other disadvantages10See also11Notes12References13External linksE10 or less[edit]E10, a fuel mixture of 10% anhydrous ethanol and 90% gasoline sometimes called gasohol, can be used in the internal combustion engines of most modern automobiles and light-duty vehicles without need for any modification on the engine or fuel system. E10 blends are typically rated as being 2 to 3 octane numbers higher than regular gasoline and are approved for use in all new U.S. automobiles, and mandated in some areas for emissions and other reasons.[3]The E10 blend and lower ethanol content mixtures have been used in several countries, and its use has been primarily driven by the several world energy shortages that have taken place since the 1973 oil crisis.Typical warning placed in the fuel filler of U.S. vehicles regarding the capability of using up to E10 and warning against the use of blends between E20 and E85.Other common blends include E5 and E7. These concentrations are generally safe for recent engines that should run on pure gasoline. As of 2006, mandates for blending bioethanol into vehicle fuels had been enacted in at least 36 states/provinces and 17 countries at the national level, with most mandates requiring a blend of 10 to 15% ethanol with gasoline.[4]One measure of alternative fuels in the U.S. is the "gasoline-equivalent gallon" (GEG). In 2002, the U.S. used as motor fuel, ethanol equal to 137,000 terajoules (TJ), the energy equivalent of 1.13 billion U.S. gallons (4.3 billion liters) of gasoline. This was less than 1% of the total fuel used that year.[5]E10 and other blends of ethanol are considered to be useful in decreasing U.S. dependence on foreign oil, and can reduce carbon monoxide (CO) emissions by 20 to 30% under the right conditions.[6]Although E10 does decrease emissions of CO and greenhouse gases such as CO2by an estimated 2% over regular gasoline, it can cause increases in evaporative emissions and some pollutants depending on factors such as the age of the vehicle and weather conditions.[7]According to the Philippine Department of Energy, the use of not more than a 10% ethanol-gasoline mixture is not harmful to cars' fuel systems.[8]Generally, automobile gasoline containing alcohol (ethanol or methanol) is not recommended to be used in aircraft.[9]Availability[edit]E10 Logo required on Delaware fuel dispensersE10 was introduced nationwide in Thailand in 2007, and replaced 91 octane pure gasoline in that country in 2013.[10]E10 is commonly available in the Midwestern United States. It was also mandated for use in all standard automobile fuel in the state of Florida by the end of 2010.[11] Due to the phasing out of MTBE as a gasoline additive and mainly due to the mandates established in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, ethanol blends have increased throughout the United States, and by 2009, the ethanol market share in the U.S. gasoline supply reached almost 8% by volume.[12][13]The Tesco chain of supermarkets in the UK have started selling an E5 brand of gasoline marketed as 99 RON super-unleaded.[citation needed] Its selling price is lower than the other two forms of high-octane unleaded on the market, Shell's V-Power (99 RON) and BP's Ultimate (97 RON).Many petrol stations throughout Australia now also sell E10, typically at a few cents cheaper per litre than regular unleaded. It is more commonly found throughout the state of Queensland due to its large sugarcane farming regions. The use of E10 is also subsidised by the Queensland government.[citation needed] Many petrol stations no longer offer a "Regular 91" petrol option, instead only offering Regular E10 (91), Premium (95) and Premium (98), although regular unleaded remains commonly available in Victoria.In Sweden, all 95-octane gasoline is E5, while the status of 98-octane fuel is currently unclear.[citation needed] The product data sheets of the major fuel chains do not clearly state ethanol content of their 98-octane gasoline. In the early-mid-1990s, some fuel chains sold E10. From January 2011, the Fuel Quality Directive (Directive 2009/30/EC) will apply through its transposition into the law of Sweden as a member of the 27 member states of the EU[14].From January 2011, all 95-octane fuel in Finland is E10, and 98E5 octane fuel is also available.Mandatory blending of ethanol was approved in Mozambique, but the percentage in the blend has not been specified.[15]South Africa approved a biofuel strategy in 2007, and mandated an 8% blend of ethanol by 2013.[15]A 2007 Uruguayan law mandates a minimum of 5% of ethanol blended with gasoline starting in January 2015.[16] The monopolic, state-owned fuel producer ANCAP started blending premium gasoline with 10% of bioethanol in December 2009, which will be available in all the country by early January 2010.[17] The other two gasolines will follow later in 2010.The Dominican Republic has a mandate for blending 15% of ethanol by 2015.[4]Chile is considering the introduction of E5, and Panama, Bolivia and Venezuela of E10.[18]Low ethanol blends used around the world (E5 to E25)CountryEthanolblendLegal useCountryEthanolblendLegal useCountryEthanolblendLegal useStateEthanolblendStateEthanolblendCountries with mandatory blends or available for optional useEuropean UnionUnited States(states where mandatory only)[n 1]Argentina[21]E5Mandated[n 2]Malawi[15]E10Mandated[n 3]Austria[22]E10OptionalFloridaE10MinnesotaE10Australia[23]E10OptionalMexico[18]E6Mandated[n 4]Denmark[22]E5OptionalHawaiiE10MissouriE10Brazil[25]E18-E27,5MandatedNew Zealand[26]E10OptionalFinland[27]E5/E10MandatedIowaE10MontanaE10Canada[28]E5Mandated[n 5]Pakistan[29]E10OptionalFrance[30][31]E5/E10OptionalKansasE10OregonE10[n 6]China[33]E10Nine provincesParaguay[34]E18/24MandatedGermany[35]E5/E10Optional[n 7]LouisianaE10WashingtonE10Colombia[36]E10Mandated[n 8]Peru[38]E8Mandated[n 9]Ireland[40]E4MandatedCalifornia[41]E10Costa Rica[42][43]E7Mandated[n 10]Philippines[46]E10MandatedNetherlandsE5/E10/hE15OptionalIndia[47]E5MandatedThailand[48]E10/E20MandatedRomania[49]E4MandatedJamaica[50]E10Mandated[n 11]VietnamE5MandatedSweden[22]E5MandatedSee the country notes at the end of the articleA 2011 study conducted by VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland found practically no difference in fuel consumption in normal driving conditions between commercial gasoline grades 95E10 and 98E5 sold in Finland, despite the public perception that fuel consumption is significantly higher with 95E10. VTT performed the comparison test under controlled laboratory conditions and their measurements showed the cars tested used an average of 10.30 liters (2.27 imp gal; 2.72 U.S. gal) of 95E10 per 100 km (62 mi), as opposed to 10.23 liters (2.25 imp gal; 2.70 U.S. gal) of 98E5 per 100 km (62 mi). The difference was 0.07 in favor of 98E5 on average, meaning that using 95E10 gasoline, which has a higher ethanol content, increases consumption by 0.7%. When the measurements are normalized, the difference becomes 1.0%, a result that is highly consistent with an estimation of calorific values based on approximate fuel composition, which came out at 1.1% in favour of E5.[51]E15[edit]Typical manufacturer's statement in the car owner's manual regarding the vehicle's capability of using up to E10.E15 contains 15% ethanol and 85% gasoline. This is generally the highest ratio of ethanol to gasoline that is possible to use in vehicles recommended by some auto manufacturers to run on E10 in the US.[52][53]This is due to ethanol's hydrophilia and solvent power.As a result of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which mandates an increase in renewable fuels for the transport sector, the U.S. Department of Energy began assessments for the feasibility of using intermediate ethanol blends in the existing vehicle fleet as a way to allow higher consumption of ethanol fuel.[54]The National Renewable Energy Laboratory(NREL) conducted tests to evaluate the potential impacts of intermediate ethanol blends on legacy vehicles and other engines.[54][55]In a preliminary report released in October 2008, the NREL presented the results of the first evaluations of the effects of E10, E15 and E20 gasoline blends on tailpipe and evaporative emissions, catalyst and engine durability, vehicle driveability, engine operability, and vehicle and engine materials.[54][55]This preliminary report found none of the vehicles displayed a malfunction indicator light as a result of the ethanol blend used; no fuel filter plugging symptoms were observed; no cold start problems were observed at 24 °C (75 °F) and 10 °C (50 °F) laboratory conditions; and as expected, computer technology available in newer model vehicles adapts to the higher octane causing lower emissions with greater horsepower and in some cases greater fuel economy.[54]In March 2009, a lobbying group from the ethanol industry, Growth Energy, formally requested the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to allow the ethanol content in gasoline to be increased to 15% from 10%. Organizations doing such studies included the Energy Department, the State of Minnesota, the Renewable Fuels Association, the Rochester Institute of Technology, the Minnesota Center for Automotive Research, and Stockholm University in Sweden.[56]EPA's E15 label required to be displayed in all E15 fuel dispensers in the U.S.In October 2010, the EPA granted a waiver to allow up to 15% of ethanol blended with gasoline to be sold only for cars and light pickup trucks with a model year of 2007 or later, representing about 15% of vehicles on U.S. roads.[57][58][59]In January 2011, the waiver was expanded to authorize use of E15 to include model year 2001 through 2006 passenger vehicles. The EPA also decided not to grant any waiver for E15 use in any motorcycles, heavy-duty vehicles, or nonroad engines because current testing data do not support such a waiver. According to the Renewable Fuels Association, the E15 waivers now cover 62% of vehicles on the road in the US, and the ethanol group estimates if all 2001 and newer cars and pickups were to use E15, the theoretical blend wall for ethanol use would be approximately 17.5 billion gallons (66.2 billion liters) per year. The EPA was still studying if older cars can withstand a 15% ethanol blend.[60][61]The EPA waiver authorizes sale of E15 only from Sep 15 to May 31 out of a black hose and a yellow hose to flex fuel vehicles only from June 1 to Sep 14. Retailers have shunned building infrastructure due to the costly regulatory requirements which have created a practical barrier to the commercialization of the higher blend. Most fuel stations do not have enough pumps to offer the new blend, few existing pumps are certified to dispense E15, and no dedicated tanks are readily available to store E15. Also, some state and federal regulations would have to change before E15 can be legally sold.[57][58]The National Association of Convenience Stores, which represents most gasoline retailers, considers the potential for actual E15 demand is small, "because the auto industry is not embracing the fuel and is not adjusting their warranties or recommendations for the fuel type." One possible solution to the infrastructure barriers is the introduction of blender pumps that allow consumers to turn a dial to select the level of ethanol, which would also allow owners of flexible-fuel cars to buy E85 fuel.[61]In June 2011 EPA, in cooperation with the Federal Trade Commission, issued its final ruling regarding the E15 warning label required to be displayed in all E15 fuel dispensers in the U.S. to inform consumers about what vehicles can, and what vehicles and equipment cannot, use the E15 blend. Both the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association complained that relying solely on this warning label is not enough to protect consumers from misfueling.[62][63]In July 2012, a fueling station in Lawrence, Kansas became the first in the U.S. to sell the E15 blend. The fuel is sold through a blender pump that allows customers to choose between E10, E15, E30 or E85, with the latter blends sold only to flexible-fuel vehicles.[64]As of June 2013, there are about 24 fueling stations selling E15 out of 180,000 stations across the U.S.[65]Blender fuel pump in East Lansing, Michigan selling E15 together with the standard gasoline (E10), and the higher blends E30 and E85.In December 2010, several groups, including the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, the American Petroleum Institute, the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers, the National Marine Manufacturers Association, the Outdoor Power Equipment Institute, and the Grocery Manufacturers Association, filed suit against the EPA in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The plaintiffs argued the EPA does not have the authority to issue a “partial waiver” that covers some cars and not others. Among other arguments, the groups argued that the higher ethanol blend is not only a problem for cars, but also for fuel pumps and underground tanks not designed for the E15 mixture. It was also argued that the rise in ethanol has contributed to the big jump in corn prices in recent years.[66][67]In August 2012, the federal appeals court rejected the suit against the EPA. The case was thrown out on a technical reason, as the court ruled the groups did not have legal standing to challenge EPA's decision to issue the waiver for E15.[67][68]In June 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from industry groups opposed to the EPA ruling about E15, and let the 2012 federal appeals court ruling stand.[65]2012 Toyota Camry Hybrid fuel filler cap showing warning regarding the maximum ethanol blend allowed by the carmaker, up to E10 gasoline. The warning label indicates that ethanol blends between E15 to E85 shall not be used in this vehicle.As of November 2012, sales of E15 are not authorized in California, and according to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the blend is still awaiting approval, and in a public statement the agency said that "it would take several years to complete the vehicle testing and rule development necessary to introduce a new transportation fuel into California's market."[69]According to a survey conducted by the American Automobile Association (AAA) in 2012, only about 12 million out of the more than 240 million light-duty vehicles on the U.S. roads in 2012 are approved by manufacturers are fully compliant with E15 gasoline. According with the Association, BMW, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, and Volkswagen warned that their warranties will not cover E15-related damage.[70]Despite the controversy, in order to adjust to EPA regulations, 2012 and 2013 model year vehicles manufactured by General Motors can use fuel containing up to 15 percent ethanol, as indicated in the vehicle owners' manuals. However, the carmaker warned that for model year 2011 or earlier vehicles, they "strongly recommend that GM customers refer to their owners manuals for the proper fuel designation for their vehicles." Ford Motor Company also is manufacturing all of its 2013 vehicles E15 compatible, including hybrid electrics and vehicles with Ecoboost engines.[71]Also Porsches built since 2001 are approved by its manufacturer to use E15.[70]Volkswagen announced that for the 2014 model year, its entire lineup will be E15 capable.[72]Fiat Chrysler Automobiles announced in August 2015 that all 2016 model year Chrysler/Fiat, Jeep, Dodge and Ram vehicles will be E15 compatible.[73]In November 2013, the Environmental Protection Agency opened for public comment its proposal to reduce the amount of ethanol required in the U.S. gasoline supply as mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. The agency cited problems with increasing the blend of ethanol above 10%. This limit, known as the "blend wall," refers to the practical difficulty in incorporating increasing amounts of ethanol into the transportation fuel supply at volumes exceeding those achieved by the sale of nearly all gasoline as E10.[74][75]hE15[edit]Example of public gas station with hE15 next to diesel and regular gasoline in the Netherlands.A 15% hydrous ethanol and 85% gasoline blend, hE15, has been introduced at public gas stations in the Netherlands since 2008. Ethanol fuel specifications worldwide traditionally dictate use of anhydrous ethanol (less than 1% water) for gasoline blending. This results in additional costs, energy usage and environmental impacts associated with the extra processing step required to dehydrate the hydrous ethanol produced via distillation (3.5-4.9 vol.% water) to meet the current anhydrous ethanol specifications. A patented discovery reveals hydrous ethanol can be effectively used in most ethanol/gasoline blending applications.[76][77]According to the Brazilian ANP specification, hydrous ethanol contains up to 4.9 vol.% water. In hE15, this would be up to 0.74 vol.% water in the overall mixture. Japanese and German scientific evidence revealed the water is an inhibitor for corrosion by ethanol.[78]The experiments show that water in fuel ethanol inhibits dry corrosion. At 10,000 ppm water in the E50 experiments by JARI and 3,500 ppm water in the E20 experiments by TU Darmstadt the alcoholate/alkoxide corrosion stopped. In the fuel ethanol this resembles 20,000 ppm or 2 volume% in the case of JARI and 5 x 3500 = 17,500 ppm of 1.75 volume% in the case of TU Darmstadt. The observations are in line with the fact that hydrous ethanol is known for being less corrosive than anhydrous ethanol. The reaction mechanism will be the same at lower-mid blends. When enough water is present in the fuel, the aluminum will react preferably with water to produce aluminum oxide, repairing the protective aluminum oxide layer, which is why the corrosion stops. The aluminum alcoholate/alkoxide does not make a tight oxide layer, which is why the corrosion continues. In other words, water is essential to repair the holes in the oxide layer. Based on the Japanese/German results, a minimum of 2 vol.% or 2.52% m/m water is currently proposed in the revision of the hydrous ethanol specification for blending in petrol at E10+ levels. Water injection has additional positive effects on the engine performance (thermodynamic efficiency) and reduces overall CO2 emissions.[citation needed]hE15 promotion AmsterdamOverall, a transition from anhydrous to hydrous ethanol for gasoline blending is expected to make a significant contribution to ethanol's cost-competitiveness, fuel cycle net energy balance, air quality, and greenhouse gas emissions.[79]The level of blending above 10% (V/V) is chosen both from a technical (safety) perspective and to distinguish the product in Europe from regular unleaded petrol for reasons of taxes and customer clarity. Small-scale tests have shown many vehicles with modern engine types can run smoothly on this hydrous ethanol blend. Mixed tanking scenarios with anhydrous ethanol blends at 5% or 10% level do not induce phase separation. As avoiding mixing with E0, in particular at extremely low temperatures, in logistic systems and engines is not recommended, a separate specification for controlled usage is presented in a Netherlands Technical Agreement NTA 8115. The NTA 8115 is written for a worldwide application in trading and fuel blending.[80]E20, E25[edit]Historical evolutionof ethanol blends used in Brazil1931–2010(Selected years only)YearEthanolblendYearEthanolblend1931E52003E20-251966E252004E201976E112005E221978E18-20-232006E201981E20-12-202007E23-251987-88E222008[81]E251993-98E222009[81]E252000E202010[82]E20-252001E222011[83]E18-E252015E18-E27,5Source: 1937–2007, J.A. Puerto Rico (2007), Table 3.8, pp. 81–82[84]Note: The 2010 reduction from E25 to E20 was temporary and tookplace between February and April.[82]The lower limit was reducedfrom 20% to 18% in April 2011.[83][85]E20 contains 20% ethanol and 80% gasoline, while E25 contains 25% ethanol. These blends have been widely used in Brazil since the late 1970s.[84]As a response to the 1973 oil crisis, the Brazilian government made mandatory the blend of ethanol fuel with gasoline, fluctuating between 10% to 22% from 1976 until 1992.[84]Due to this mandatory minimum gasoline blend, pure gasoline (E0) is no longer sold in Brazil. A federal law was passed in October 1993 establishing a mandatory blend of 22% anhydrous ethanol (E22) in the entire country. This law also authorized the Executive to set different percentages of ethanol within pre-established boundaries, and since 2003, these limits were fixed at a maximum of 25% (E25) and a minimum of 20% (E20) by volume.[25][84]Since then, the government has set the percentage on the ethanol blend according to the results of the sugarcane harvest and ethanol production from sugarcane, resulting in blend variations even within the same year.[84]Since July 1, 2007, the mandatory blend was set at 25% of anhydrous ethanol (E25) by executive decree,[81]and this has been the standard gasoline blend sold throughout Brazil most of the time as of 2011.[86]However, as a result of a supply shortage and the resulting high ethanol fuel prices, in 2010, the government mandated a temporary 90-day blend reduction from E25 to E20 beginning February 1, 2010.[82][87]As prices rose abruptly again due to supply shortages that took place again between the 2010 and 2011 harvest seasons, some ethanol had to be imported from the United States, and in April 2011, the government reduced the minimum mandatory blend to 18%, leaving the mandatory blend range between E18 and E25.[83][85]A blender pump is a multifuel blend dispenser that allows customers to choose between E20, E30, E85, or any other preselected blend.All Brazilian automakers have adapted their gasoline engines to run smoothly with this range of mixtures, thus, all gasoline vehicles are built to run with blends from E20 to E25, defined by local law as "common gasoline type C".[88][89]Some vehicles might work properly with lower concentrations of ethanol, but with a few exceptions, they are unable to run smoothly with pure gasoline, which causes engine knocking, as vehicles traveling to neighboring South American countries have demonstrated.[90]Flex-fuel vehicles, which can run on any type of gasoline E20-E25 up to 100% hydrous ethanol (E100 or hydrated ethanol) ratios,[91]were first available in mid-2003. In July 2008, 86% of all new light vehicles sold in Brazil were flexible-fuel, and only two carmakers build models with a flex-fuel engine optimized to operate with pure gasoline (E0): Renault with the models Clio,[90][92]Symbol, Logan, Sandero and Mégane, and Fiat with the Siena Tetrafuel.[93][94]Thailand introduced E20 in 2008,[95]but shortages in ethanol supplies by mid-2008 caused a delay in the expansion of the E20 fueling station network in the country.[96]By mid-2010, 161 fueling stations were selling E20, and sales have risen 80% since April 2009.[97]The rapid growth in E20 demand is because most vehicle models launched since 2009 were E20-compatible, and sales of E20 are expected to grow faster once more local automakers start producing small, E20-compatible, fuel-efficient cars. The Thai government is promoting ethanol usage through subsidies, as ethanol costs four baht a litre more than gasoline.[97]A state law approved in Minnesota in 2005 mandated that ethanol comprise 20% of all gasoline sold in this American state beginning in 2013. Successful tests have been conducted to determine the performance under E20 by current vehicles and fuel dispensing equipment designed for E10.[98]However, this mandate was later delayed to 2015, and has never taken effect because the federal EPA has yet to authorize the use of E20 as a replacement for gasoline.A study commissioned by BP and published in September 2013, concluded that the use of advanced biofuels in the UK, and particularly E20 cellulosic ethanol, is a more cost-effective way of reducing emissions than using plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) in the timeframe to 2030. The study also found that the use of higher blends of biofuels is complementary to hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) and plug-in hybrids (PHEVs). Battery electric vehicles (BEVs) can deliver strong CO2savings with a decarbonised electric grid, but are expected to have significantly higher costs than internal combustion engine vehicles and hybrid cars to 2030, as the latter are expected to be the most popular models by 2030. According to the study, in 2030 an E20 blend in an HEV can achieve a 10% emission savings compared to an HEV running on E5, for an annual fuel cost premium of GB£13 compared to an annual cost of GB£195 for an all-electric car.[99][100]E70, E75[edit]When the vapor pressure in the ethanol blend drops below 45 kPa, fuel ignition cannot be guaranteed on cold winter days, limiting the maximum ethanol blend percentage during the winter months to E75.[101]E70 contains 70% ethanol and 30% gasoline, while E75 contains 75% ethanol. These winter blends are used in the United States and Sweden for E85 flexible-fuel vehicles during the cold weather, but still sold at the pump labeled as E85.[102]The seasonal reduction of the ethanol content to an E85 winter blend is mandated to avoid cold starting problems at low temperatures.[102][103]In the US, this seasonal reduction of the ethanol content to E70 applies only in cold regions, where temperatures fall below 32 °F (0 °C) during the winter.[104][105]In Wyoming for example, E70 is sold as E85 from October to May.[102][106]In Sweden, all E85 flexible-fuel vehicles use an E75 winter blend.[103]This blend was introduced since the winter 2006-07 and E75 is used from November until March.[107]For temperatures below −15 °C (5 °F), all E85 flex vehicles require an engine block heater to avoid cold starting problems.[107]The use of this device is also recommended for gasoline vehicles when temperatures drop below −23 °C (−9 °F).[108]Another option when extreme cold weather is expected is to add more pure gasoline in the tank, thus reducing the ethanol content below the E70 winter blend, or simply not to use E85 during extreme low temperature spells.[107][108]E85[edit]Typical yellow cap used for the fuel filler cap of U.S. vehicles built to use the E85 blendFurther information: E85See also: Flexible-fuel vehicles in the United StatesE85, a mixture of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline, is generally the highest ethanol fuel mixture found in the United States and several European countries, particularly in Sweden, as this blend is the standard fuel for flexible-fuel vehicles. This mixture has an octane rating of 94-97, which is significantly lower than pure ethanol, but still higher than normal gasoline (87-93 octane, depending on country).Logo used in the United States for E85 fuelThe 85% limit in the ethanol content was set to reduce ethanol emissions at low temperatures and to avoid cold starting problems during cold weather, at temperatures lower than 11 °C (52 °F).[104]A further reduction in the ethanol content is used during the winter in regions where temperatures fall below 0 °C (32 °F)[105]and this blend is called Winter E85, as the fuel is still sold under the E85 label. A winter blend of E70 is mandated in some regions in the US,[102][106]while Sweden mandates E75.[103][107]Some regions in the United States now allow E51 (51% ethanol, 49% gasoline) to be sold as E85 in the winter months.As of October 2010, nearly 3,000 E85 fuel pumps were in Europe, led by Sweden with 1,699 filling stations.[109][110]The United States had 3,354 public E85 fuel pumps located in 2,154 cities by August 2014, mostly concentrated in the Midwest.[111]Thailand introduced E85 fuel by the end of 2008, and by mid-2010, only four E85 filling stations were available, with plans to expand to 15 stations by 2012.[97]A major restriction hampering sales of E85 flex vehicles or fuelling with E85, is the limited infrastructure available to sell E85 to the public, as by 2014 only 2 percent of motor fuel stations offered E85,[112]up from about 1 percent in 2011.[113]As of November 2015, there were only 3,218 gasoline fueling stations selling E85 to the public in the entire U.S.,[114]while about 156,000 retail motor fuel outlets do not offer the E85 blend.[112]The number of E85 grew from 1,229 in 2007 to 2,442 in 2011, but only increased by 7% from 2011 to 2013, when the total reached 2,625.[112]There is a great concentration of E85 stations in the Corn Belt states, and as of November 2015, the leading state is Minnesota with 274 stations, followed by Michigan with 231, Illinois with 225, Iowa with 204, Indiana with 188, Texas with 181, Wisconsin with 152, and Ohio with 126. Only eight states do not have E85 available to the public, Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Montana, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont.[115]The main constraint for a more rapid expansion of E85 availability is that it requires dedicated storage tanks at filling stations,[108]at an estimated cost of US$60,000 for each dedicated ethanol tank.[116]A study conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy concluded that every service station in America could be converted to handle E85 at a cost of $3.4 billion to $10.1 billion.ED95[edit]See also: BEST: Ethanol-powered bus trialED95 designates a blend of 95% ethanol and 5% ignition improver; it is used in modified diesel engines where high compression is used to ignite the fuel,[117]as opposed to the operation of gasoline engines, where spark plugs are used. This fuel was developed by Swedish ethanol producer SEKAB.[117]Because of the high ignition temperatures of pure ethanol, the addition of ignition improver is necessary for successful diesel engine operation. A diesel engine running on ethanol also has a higher compression ratio and an adapted fuel system.ED95 bus in Sweden running on a modified diesel engineThis fuel has been used with success in many Swedish Scania buses since 1985, which has produced around 700 ethanol buses, more than 600 of them to Swedish cities, and more recently has also delivered ethanol buses for commercial service in Great Britain, Spain, Italy, Belgium, and Norway.[118]As of June 2010 Stockholm has the largest ethanol ED95 bus fleet in the world.[118][119]As of 2010, the Swedish ED95 engine is in its third generation and already has complied with Euro 5 emission standards, without any kind of post-treatment of the exhaust gases. The ethanol-powered engine is also being certified as environmentally enhanced vehicle (EEV) in the Stockholm municipality. The EEV rule still has no date to enter into force in Europe and is stricter than the Euro 5 standard.[120]Nottingham became the first city in England to operate a regular bus service with ethanol-fueled vehicles. Three ED95 single-deck buses entered regular service in the city in March 2008. Soon after, Reading also introduced ED95 double-deck buses.[121]Under the auspices of the BioEthanol for Sustainable Transport project, more than 138 bioethanol ED95 buses were part of demonstration trial at four cities, three in Europe, and one in Brazil, between 2006 and 2009.[2][122][123]A total of 127 ED95 buses operated in Stockholm, five buses operated in Madrid, three in La Spezia, and one in Brazil.[2]In Brazil, the first Scania ED95 bus with a modified diesel engine was introduced as a trial in São Paulo city in December 2007, and since November 2009, two ED95 buses were in regular service.[123][124][125][126]The Brazilian trial project ran for three years and performance and emissions were monitored by the National Reference Center on Biomass (CENBIO- Portuguese: Centro Nacional de Referência em Biomassa) at the Universidade de São Paulo.[127]In November 2010, the municipal government of São Paulo city signed an agreement with UNICA, Cosan, Scania and Viação Metropolitana, a local bus operator, to introduced a fleet of 50 ethanol-powered ED95 buses by May 2011. Scania manufactures the bus engine and chassis in its plant located in São Bernardo do Campo, São Paulo, using the same technology and fuel as the ED95 buses already operating in Stockholm. The bus body is a Brazilian CAIO.[128][129]The first ethanol-powered buses were delivered in May 2011, and the 50 buses will start regular service in June 2011 in the southern region of São Paulo.[127]The 50 ED95 buses had a cost of R$ 20 million (US$12.3 million) and due to the higher cost of the ED95 fuel and the lower energy content of ethanol as compared to diesel, one of the firms participating in the cooperation agreement, Raísen (a joint venture between Royal Dutch Shell and Cosan), supplies the fuel to the municipality at 70% of the market price of regular diesel.[127][130]E100[edit]See also: Flexible-fuel vehicles in BrazilTypical Brazilian flexible-fuel engine with secondary gasoline reservoir for cold starting the engine at temperatures below 15 °C (59 °F)The Brazilian 2008 Honda Civicflex-fuel has outside access to the secondary reservoir gasoline tank in the front right side shown by the arrow.E100 is pure ethanol fuel. Straight hydrous ethanol as an automotive fuel has been widely used in Brazil since the late 1970s for neat ethanol vehicles[84][131]and more recently for flexible-fuel vehicles.[132][133]The ethanol fuel used in Brazil is distilled close to the azeotrope mixture of 95.63% ethanol and 4.37% water (by weight) which is approximately 3.5% water by volume.[134]The azeotrope is the highest concentration of ethanol that can be achieved by simple fractional distillation. The maximum water concentration according to the ANP specification is 4.9 vol.% (approximately 6.1 weight%)[135]The E nomenclature is not adopted in Brazil, but hydrated ethanol can be tagged as E100, meaning it does not have any gasoline, because the water content is not an additive, but rather a residue from the distillation process. However, straight hydrous ethanol is also called E95 by some authors.[136][137]The first commercial vehicle capable of running on pure ethanol was the Ford Model T, produced from 1908 through 1927. It was fitted with a carburetor with adjustable jetting, allowing use of gasoline or ethanol, or a combination of both.[108][138][139][140]At that time, other car manufacturers also provided engines for ethanol fuel use.[108]Thereafter, and as a response to the 1973 and 1979 energy crises, the first modern vehicle capable of running with pure hydrous ethanol (E100) was launched in the Brazilian market, the Fiat 147,[141]after testing with several prototypes developed by the Brazilian subsidiaries of Fiat, Volkswagen, General Motors and Ford.[131]As of September 2012, there were 1.1 million neat ethanol vehicles still in use in Brazil.[142]Since 2003, Brazilian newer flex-fuel vehicles are capable of running on pure hydrous ethanol (E100) or blended with any combination of E20 to E27,5 gasoline[132][133](a mixture made with anhydrous ethanol), the national mandatory blend.[25][81]As of September 2012, there were 17.1 million flexible-fuel vehicles running on Brazilian roads.[142]E100 imposes a limitation on normal vehicle operation, as ethanol's lower evaporative pressure (as compared to gasoline) causes problems when cold starting the engine at temperatures below 15 °C (59 °F).[143]For this reason, both pure ethanol and E100 flex-fuel vehicles are built with an additional small gasoline reservoir inside the engine compartment to help in starting the engine when cold by initially injecting gasoline. Once started, the engine is then switched back to ethanol.[143]An improved flex-fuel engine generation was developed to eliminate the need for the secondary gas tank by warming the ethanol fuel during starting,[144][145]and allowing them to start at temperatures as low as −5 °C (23 °F),[146]the lowest temperature expected anywhere in the Brazilian territory.[147]The Polo E-Flex, launched in March 2009, was the first flex-fuel model without an auxiliary tank for cold start. The warming system, called Flex Start, was developed by Robert Bosch GmbH.[148][149]Swedish carmakers have developed ethanol-only capable engines for the new Saab Aero X BioPower 100 Concept E100, with a V6 engine which is fuelled entirely by E100 bioethanol,[150][151]and the limited edition of the Koenigsegg CCXR, a version of the CCX converted to use E85 or E100, as well as standard 98-octane gasoline, and currently the fastest and most powerful flex-fuel vehicle with its twin-supercharged V8 producing 1018 hp when running on biofuel, as compared to 806 hp on 91-octane unleaded gasoline.[152][153]The higher fuel efficiency of E100 (compared to methanol) in high performance race cars resulted in Indianapolis 500 races in 2007 and 2008 being run on 100% fuel-grade ethanol.[154]Use limitations[edit]Modifications to engines[edit]The use of ethanol blends in conventional gasoline vehicles is restricted to low mixtures, as ethanol is corrosive and can degrade some of the materials in the engine and fuel system. Also, the engine has to be adjusted for a higher compression ratio as compared to a pure gasoline engine to take advantage of ethanol's higher oxygen content, thus allowing an improvement in fuel efficiency and a reduction of tailpipe emissions.[101]The following table shows the required modifications to gasoline engines to run smoothly and without degrading any materials. This information is based on the modifications made by the Brazilian automotive industry at the beginning of the ethanol program in that country in the late 1970s, and reflects the experience of Volkswagen do Brasil.[155]Disadvantages to ethanol fuel blends when used in engines designed exclusively for gasoline include lowered fuel mileage, metal corrosion, deterioration of plastic and rubber fuel system components, clogged fuel systems, fuel injectors, and carburetors, delamination of composite fuel tanks, varnish buildup on engine parts, damaged or destroyed internal engine components, water absorption, fuel phase separation, and shortened fuel storage life.[156][157][158]Many major auto, marine, motorcycle, lawn equipment, generator, and other internal combustion engine manufacturers have issued warnings and precautions about the use of ethanol-blended gasolines of any type in their engines,[159]and the Federal Aviation Administration and major aviation engine manufacturers have prohibited the use of automotive gasolines blended with ethanol in light aircraft due to safety issues from fuel system and engine damage.[156][157][158][160]