Posted: 21 Nov 2013 03:51 AM PST
In the absence of clarity,
unscrupulous companies will take advantage of loopholes and honest companies
will get harassed
By Asish K Bhattacharyya
We have discussed a lot on ‘why
CSR’. It’s time to discuss ‘how’, rather than ‘why’. Draft Rules are before
us. The provision (section 135) of the Companies Act 2013 shall be applicable
from the financial year 2014-15 and companies hardly have five months to
formulate the CSR policy. Certain issues are bothering those who are
responsible for formulating the CSR policy and implementing the same.
The Draft Rules state, “CSR
projects/programmes of a company may also focus on integrating business
models with social and environmental priorities and processes in order to
create shared value.” Michel Porter, the Harvard Professor, who introduced
the term ‘shared value’ in a HBR (January-February 2011) article defines
shared value as, “policies and operating practices that enhance the
competitiveness of a company while simultaneously advancing the economic and
social conditions in the communities in which it operates.”
An example of shared value
initiative is the ‘Project Shakti’ of Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL).It
enhances the direct rural reach of the company while empowering women. Can we
classify ‘Project Shakti’ as a CSR project? Whether training expenses on
Shakti entrepreneurs should be classified as CSR expenditure?
The concept of ‘shared value’
blurs the boundary between pure business activities and CSR activities.
‘Shared value’ strategies definitely serve the CSR objectives, but they are
closely intertwined with the business strategy. Clarification on this issue
is essential, as companies and regulators should have a common understanding on
which items should be included in calculating CSR spend. The Act (schedule
VII) stipulates that ‘social business projects’ may be included in the CSR
policy. By definition, surplus from those projects are ploughed back to
improve the product or service or to provide subsidy. For example, the
‘agarbatti’ (incense sticks) business of ITC started to provide livelihood
support to retired employees and then it was extended to other members of the
community located around ITC’s manufacturing facilities.
If ITC designates it as a ‘social
business project’, it shall not include surplus from this business in the net
profit of the company.
A clarification is required on
whether a part of general overheads and the cost of service provided by
employees, who are employed primarily to work for the core business of the
company, but spend some time on those projects, should be considered as CSR
spend.
The Draft Rules state, “Only
activities, which are not exclusively for the benefit of employees of the
company or their family members shall be considered as CSR activity.”
Companies build and operate facilities (e.g. educational institutions and
health care facilities) primarily for employees and their families. Members
of the local community also use those facilities. A clarification is required
on whether only proportionate expenditure that can be assigned to the use of
those facilities by local community members should be considered as CSR
spend. Allocation of expenditure will be an issue that should be addressed by
cost accountants.
Activities related to
‘environmental sustainability’ are also classified as CSR activities.
Companies undertake research projects to improve existing products or
processes to make them environment friendly.
A clarification is required on
whether such research expenses will be considered as CSR spend.The Draft
Rules state, “CSR Policy would specify that the corpus would include the
following: 2% of the average net profits; any income arising therefrom; and
surplus arising out of CSR activities.”
This implies that every year,
companies should transfer two percent of average net profit before tax
(calculated as per section 198) of the previous three years to the CSR corpus
and then spend money for CSR activities from that corpus. A clarification is required
on whether companies should transfer the amount to the corpus at the
beginning of the financial year and invest the corpus fund outside the
business to earn an income that will form a part of the corpus.
The Act mandates that every
company having a net worth of Rs 500 crore or more, or turnover of Rs 1,000
crore or more or a net profit of Rs 500 crore or more during any financial
year shall constitute a CSR Committee of the Board consisting of three or
more directors, out of which at least one director will be an independent
director.
A clarification is required on
whether a company that is not otherwise required to appoint independent
directors is required to appoint an independent director only to comply with
the requirement under section 135 of the Act.
The government should come out
with detailed clarifications as early as possible to enable companies to
formulate the CSR policy. In the absence of clarity, unscrupulous companies
will take advantage of loopholes and honest companies will get harassed.
Affiliation: Professor and
Head, School of Corporate Governance and Public Policy, Indian Institute of
Corporate Affairs; Advisor (Advanced Studies), Institute of Cost Accountants
of India; Chairman, Riverside Management Academy Private Limited
(Article first Published in
Business Standard, 17 November 2013)
|
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
CSR issues continue to remain unresolved by Asish K Bhattacharyya
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment