- Statewise export data quality weak-Though states like Gujarat, Maharastra and Tamil Nadu proudly flaunt their lion's share of domestic exports(55% in all, about 25%,21%,9%), my Gujju friends would be disappointed about the data quality issues. Similarly, all these states are trading hubs with export ports/traders, and thus misreporting is more. As the disclaimer states, The state-wise exports given in Table 7.16 are only indicative as there are many weaknesses in the data. -its like the ubiquitous Facebook forward that Mumbai pays %..of income tax-just because companies with registered/corporate office in Mumbai are recorded as being from Mumbai, its not necessarily the credit of Mumbai
- Only one state of origin code can be given by the exporter in a single shipping Bill. In case of shipping bills with multiple invoices containing items originating from more than one state, there is no provision for making different entries
- In the customs daily trade returns (DTRs) the non-reporting of state of origin (STON) is considerable and exporters have a tendency to report the state to which they belong/ the state to which the port (through which the export has taken place) belongs/ the state from where they ‘procured’ the goods as the state of origin for those particular goods instead of the actual state of origin of goods
- The problem is acute in the case of non-manufacturing exporters, who only know the place of procurement and not production of the goods. These weaknesses need to be rectified to improve the quality of data.
the UAE, USA, Singapore, the UK, and Hong Kong in 2008-9, 2009-10, and 2010-11. An interesting point to be noted is that India has trade surplus with the UAE from which it imports large quantities of oil, while it has a high trade deficit with similar oil exporters like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Nigeria.The reasons for deficits are also the rising imports of machinery from China and gold from Switzerland.