ทำไมรัฐบาล ต้องออก พ.ร.ก. กู้เงิน 5 แสนล้าน เพิ่มเพดานหนี้ ‘สมเหตุสมผล’ แค่ไหน | THE STANDARD WEALTH

The discussion revolves around the debate in the country regarding raising the debt ceiling, borrowing money through emergency decrees, or adjusting taxes, such as increasing value-added tax from 7% to 10%. Dr. Nonrit Phisarnbut, a senior academic at the Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI), shared his insights on the matter. Dr. Nonrit noted that while the public debt is already high at 70%, the government is considering raising it further and potentially borrowing an additional 500 billion baht. He explained that from an economic perspective, borrowing can be justified if the economy is growing slower than its potential or if there's a specific crisis, such as the Iran War or natural disasters like droughts, which necessitate government intervention to help vulnerable groups. Academically, the potential growth rate is around 2.7%, but current growth estimates are much lower, ranging from 1.3% to 1.6%. However, Dr. Nonrit expressed reservations about simply injecting large sums of money into the economy as a stimulus. He observed that past government injections, despite being massive, did not lead to the expected GDP growth, suggesting structural problems within the economy. He likened it to "pedaling and the wheel not turning." Therefore, he believes that addressing these structural issues is crucial before money injections can be effective. Regarding borrowing, Dr. Nonrit emphasized that it should ideally be for projects that ensure long-term economic sustainability, rather than just for immediate consumption. He posed the question: "Are we borrowing to eat, or are we borrowing to generate future income?" He suggested that if the government has good projects that will yield benefits in 10, 20, or 30 years, then borrowing is a feasible approach. When asked for examples of such structural investments, Dr. Nonrit highlighted the importance of enhancing people's skills to increase their participation in the economy, rather than just distributing money. He stressed the need for a long supply chain that connects various Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), ensuring that money circulates within the economy and creates jobs, instead of flowing out to large businesses or foreign products. He also pointed out issues like high household debt and lack of funding access for social enterprises as structural problems that need urgent attention. Regarding the effectiveness of loans, Dr. Nonrit mentioned the "multiplier effect" as a key performance indicator (KPI), which measures how much 1 baht invested stimulates the economy. He noted that direct money transfers often have a lower multiplier effect compared to investments in infrastructure or other forms. He also expressed concern about Thailand's high debt levels, which mean that even investments might not be enough to boost the economy significantly. He called for competent public sector individuals to transform organizations and improve the efficiency of the export and tourism sectors. Addressing the prioritization of government spending, Dr. Nonrit warned against over-reliance on short-term stimuli, comparing it to an addiction to steroids. He argued that while helping vulnerable groups is important, it should be targeted rather than a broad approach. He reiterated that the focus should be on restructuring the economy by building human capital and enabling Thais to participate effectively in the global economy, rather than solely on large-scale infrastructure projects like land bridges. On tax structure reforms, Dr. Nonrit acknowledged that the government will need more money in the future, as Thailand's tax revenue, particularly VAT at 7%, is significantly lower compared to other middle and high-income countries. He advocated for a comprehensive tax reform that is not solely reliant on one type of tax and includes drawing more people into the tax system. He suggested a system where everyone pays taxes, but the government provides assistance to prevent individuals from falling into poverty, citing the example of a negative income tax. He also highlighted the need to design tax increases carefully to avoid disproportionately burdening the poor. Finally, Dr. Nonrit emphasized the importance of clear communication from leaders about the country's direction, necessary plans, and how everyone will contribute, including fair tax adjustments and assistance for vulnerable groups. He praised Singapore's leadership for its clarity in this regard. Adding to the discussion, Professor Dr. Athimutita Charoen from Chulalongkorn University and Dr. Pipat Luangnarmitchai, Chief Economist of Kiattiray Kenphat, also shared their perspectives. Professor Athimutita stated that borrowing itself is not inherently bad, especially during a crisis, but the crucial question is how to repay debts without eroding trust or creating long-term problems. He highlighted concerns about fiscal discipline, especially after rating agencies adjusted Thailand's outlook to negative. Professor Athimutita summarized three lessons from past government loans: 1. The problem lies in how money is borrowed, often without specific strategies or clear project markers, leading to scattered spending with little long-term return. 2. The risk is not just high debt but also the rising cost of debt, with interest payments already accounting for 12% of government revenue and projected to increase. This could jeopardize Thailand's investment-grade rating. 3. There's a structural problem within the Thai state, with a lack of fiscal discipline despite existing laws and committees. He suggested using the opportunity to issue a royal decree to raise the debt ceiling as a starting point for strengthening fiscal discipline across the system. Dr. Pipat Luangnarmitchai echoed the sentiment that borrowing is not forbidden but must be used wisely and with a plan for debt reduction. He emphasized building financial resilience to deal with economic shocks. His plan for reducing debt and maintaining market confidence includes three areas: 1. Controlling expenses and using loans wisely for economically beneficial projects that alleviate hardship for specific groups. 2. Increasing government revenue by expanding the tax base and potentially increasing taxes like VAT, which is currently very low. 3. Focusing on investing for the future, attracting quality investments, and developing human resources to achieve long-term GDP growth and naturally reduce debt. In conclusion, the experts agreed that while borrowing may be necessary in the short term to address crises and help vulnerable groups, it must be targeted and accompanied by a clear, long-term plan for structural economic reform, increased revenue generation, and enhanced fiscal discipline. The most critical element is clear communication from leadership to foster a common understanding and shared sacrifice for the country's progress.