FDI IN RETAIL SECTOR IN INDIA: LAW AND POLICY

(Term Paper towards partial fulfilment of the assessment in the subject of Investment Law)

Submitted by: Alok Chaturvedi, 578 Shashank Amarnath, 609 Animesh Khandelwal, 630

Submitted to: Mr. Ajay Kumar Sharma Faculty of Law

National Law University, Jodhpur Winter Session (January-May 2012)

1

FDI IN RETAIL SECTOR IN INDIA: LAW AND POLICY In India, there is an opportunity to work all the way up to farmers in the back-end chain. Part of inflation is due to the fact that produces do not reach the end-consumer Abstract The winter session of the parliament of India was marred with controversies. The biggest one was the policy decision of the Central Government to bring in FDI in Multi-brand retail. Almost all the other parties opposed the decision and stalled the session for several days, thereby delaying other important discussions on laws of national importance. Finally, after many days of deadlock, the Government finally rolled back its decision which led to the commencement of the session. This debate has been going on in our country for a number of years and has always created controversy. In this paper we attempt to look at the legal and policy aspects of FDI in Retail Sector and try to reach to a solution to the difficulties in implementing the various policy decisions in this regard (including FDI in Multi-brand Retail). Introduction Article 25 of the ICSID Convention lays down the statutory meaning of the word Investment. Although it does not define it, it says that in order to settle disputes between host nation and home country, there needs to be investment. This means that investment required a foreign country investing into another country2. Foreign Direct Investment or FDI is any investment made by a foreign country in the domestic assets such as companies, organizations, buildings and factories. It provides foreign capital, funds, and expertise and job opportunities to the host nation3. In a Delhi High Court Judgment4, retail has been defined as the sale of goods or commodities to ultimate consumers, as opposed to the sale for further distribution or processing 5. Retailing
1 2

Mike T. Duke, CEO, Wal-Mart1

http://retail-guru.com/allow-100-fdi-in-retail-to-contain-inflation-walmart (Last Visited on 17.02.2012) Julian Davis Mortenson, The Meaning of Investment: ICSIDs Travaux and the Domain of International Investment Law, VOLUME 51, NUMBER 1, WINTER 2010, Harvard Law Journal 3 http://www.moneyguideindia.com/understanding-fdi-what-it-means-for-india (Last Visited on 15.02.2012); The Consolidated FDI Policy, October 1, 2011 defines FDI as investment by non-resident entity/person resident outside India in the capital of an Indian company under Schedule 1 of Foreign Exchange Management (Transfer or Issue of Security by a Person Resident Outside India) Regulations 2000 4 Federation of Associations of Maharashtra and Ors. v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors., 2005 (79) DRJ 426 5 Blacks Law Dictionary, 8th Edition, Thomson West, p.1135

is different from wholesaling. Retailing services consists of the sale of goods/ merchandise for personal or household consumption either from a fixed location (e.g. Store, kiosk, etc.) or away from a fixed location and related subordinated services. It is clear from the definition that the quantity of sale is not the detriment for wholesale trade, but it is the type of customer who determines whether the trade is wholesale or retail. The retail industry is majorly divided into the organised and unorganised sector6. Organised retailing refers to trading activities undertaken by licensed retailers (those registered for sales tax, income tax etc.). These include the big hypermarkets owned by large corporate houses and other retail chains. Unorganised retailing, on the other hand, refers to the traditional low-cost retailing. These include the Mom & Pop Stores, Kirana Stores and other shops (Pan, Bidi etc.). Single Brand Retailing There is no statutory definition for single brand retailing and nor does the central government define it under any of its press notes or circulars. However, Press Note 3 of 2006 7 and Press Note 1 of 20128 throw some light on it. According to the latter, FDI in Single Brand Retailing would mean:1. Products to be sold should be of a 'Single Brand' only. 2. Products should be sold under the same brand internationally i.e. products should be sold under the same brand in one or more countries other than India. 3. Single Brand product-retail trading would cover only products which are branded during manufacturing. 4. The foreign investor should be the owner of the brand. (This condition is a departure from the conditions laid down under the former Press Note- The intention of putting this condition is probably to give more autonomy in the hands of the foreign investor) Further as per the extant FDI policy, there needs to be a 30% local content requirement in order to do FDI beyond 51% in Single Brand Retailing. Multi-Brand Retailing

6 7

http://www.cci.in/pdf/surveys_reports/indias_retail_sector.pdf (Last Visited on 16.02.2012) Dated 10-02-2006, Issued by the DIPP, Ministry of Commerce and Industry 8 Dated 10-01-2012, Issued by the DIPP, Ministry of Commerce and Industry

When the conditions laid down above will be breached, it will lead to Multi-Branding retail. This means that say if a company like Carrefour sells in India products of more than one brand which are not branded during manufacturing and the foreign investor is not necessarily the owner of the brand. Here it should be noted that one brand can have many products and the restriction is with regard to the number of brands and not the products. Prior to FDI Before the Economy was opened up to FDI in Retail Sector, there were other ways through which a foreign company did business in India. These include9:1. Franchise Agreements: This was considered to be a very easy route. Some of the most successful franchises are Lacoste, McDonalds and Pizza Hut. 2. Cash and Carry Wholesale Trading: The wholesaler deals only with smaller retailers and not Consumers. Metro AG of Germany was the first significant global player to enter India through this route. 3. Strategic Licensing Agreements: Some foreign brands give exclusive licences and distribution rights to Indian companies. Through these rights, Indian companies can either sell it through their own stores, or enter into shop-in-shop arrangements or distribute the brands to franchisees. 4. Manufacturing and Wholly Owned Subsidiary: The foreign brands such as Nike, Reebok, Adidas, etc. that have wholly-owned subsidiaries in manufacturing are treated as Indian companies and are, therefore, allowed to do retail. India and its Commitments on TRIMs at WTO The Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMs) Agreement has been signed by India at the World Trade Organisation (WTO). It states that no Member shall apply a measure that is prohibited by the provisions of General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, GATT [Article III (national treatment) or Article XI (quantitative restrictions)]. Examples of inconsistent measures, as spelled out in the Annex's Illustrative List, include local content or trade balancing requirements10. The question to be seen is, whether the local content requirement

http://www.legalindia.in/foreign-direct-investment-in-indian-retail-sector-%E2%80%93-an-analysis (Last Visited on 18.02.2012) 10 http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/invest_e/invest_e.htm (Last Visited on 17.02.2012)

for single brand retailing under Press Note 1 of 2012 can be infringing upon the international commitment of India. Although on the face of it, the Press Note issued by the Central Government is violative of the TRIMs Agreement, it is still very much required. The local content requirement is very necessary in order to bring in FDI in Multi Brand Retail in a developing country like India. The 'national development' issue also highlights the fact that the ban on local content policies means that developing countries are prevented from adopting industrialization strategies used by the US, Japan, France, Germany the UK, etc, in the past. At present it is tactically important to support the call for revision of the TRIMs Agreement to allow the use of local content policies11. Article 301 of the Constitution allows a State legislature to impose such reasonable restrictions on the freedom of trade, commerce or intercourse with or within that State as may be required in the public interest. In M.R.F. Ltd. v. Kerala Government12, the Supreme Court after referring to important decisions on the subject laid down the following principles for testing the reasonableness of restrictions. Based on the foregoing it appears that together with the State Govt. the aforesaid reasonable restriction may be imposed on multi brand retailers having FDI without being violative of the Article 301. The domestic multi brand retailers should not be made subject to the additional conditions. FDI in Retail- Brazil FDI in multi brand retail is allowed in Brazil. The economy of Brazil is very similar to that of India. The retail sector has been slowly opened up and has flourished since then. The most pertinent example is that of WalMart in Brazil. In order to grow in Brazil, WalMart had to develop a huge back-end infrastructure. The initial years were not very profitable but later there was a boom in its profits. The main reason for the same was the sourcing requirement implemented by the Brazilian Government along with giving a lot of benefits to WalMart as well. WalMart procures 95% of its products locally now and has set up thousands of outlets in Brazil 13. It has also

11 12

Answers to Discussion Paper on FDI in Retail (DIPP), Paras Kumar Jain, Secundrabad (1988) 8 SCC 227 13 http://www.pwc.com/en_GX/gx/retail-consumer/pdf/brazil.pdf (Last Visited on 12.02.2012)

developed a chain of local vendors. But all of this has happened only with constant and vigilant attitude of the Brazilian Government. FDI in Retail- Mexico As the Mexican economy began to open in the mid-1980s, its retail sector began a process of deep transformation. This transformation was accelerated in 1991 by the entry of Wal-Mart and has had profound implications not only for the retail sector but also for the supplying industries. Mexican producers of consumer goods were heavily protected until the mid 1980s. Thus retailers based in the United States whose strength was in dealing with US-based suppliers stayed out. But as tariffs fell over the following half-decade, Mexican retailers began to order more consumer goods imported from the United States. After familiarizing themselves with Mexico, and having brought their own strengths with them, some foreign retailing firms felt that they no longer needed local collaborators. Most importantly, WalMart bought controlling interest in Aurerra in 1997 and became Wal-Mart de Mxico (Walmex)14. The growing dominance of Walmex helped to induce two fundamental changes in the Mexican retail sector. First, the sector modernized its warehousing, distribution, and inventory management. Second, it changed the way it interacted with its suppliers. The profound changes in the retail sector, initiated by Walmex and later introduced by other retailers, have resulted in a significant decline in distribution costs faced by Mexican suppliers. The spectacular expansion of Walmex has also allowed many suppliers to reach a larger segment of Mexican population without incurring additional distribution cost. The benefits of the retail revolution have, however, come at a price of Walmexs hard-nosed style of negotiation with its suppliers. Famously, Wal-Mart keeps negotiations with its suppliers as stark as possible both in terms of the bargaining environment and in terms of the number of negotiable contract features. And because it controls such a large share of the retail market, this often amounts to a take-or-leave-it offer. Thus, the advent of FDI in Multi-brand retail has brought to Mexico both benefits as well as problems. General Trends for FDI in Retail (An Analysis)
14

http://www.uml.edu/centers/cic/Research/Tilly_Research/Mexico/Tilly-Wal-Mart-Lichtensteinbook-rev5.01.05.pdf (Last Visited on 13.02.2012)

After looking at the examples of Brazil and Mexico we can derive the following:-

Positive Backward Externalities: productivity spillovers due to direct transfer of technology to local suppliers and competitive pressure.

Negative Backward Externalities: productivity slowdown due to pressure of imports leading to elimination of local providers and immiserising growth process due to captive relationship

Positive Horizontal Externalities: productivity spillovers through imitation and competitive pressure

FDI IN RETAIL SECTOR

Negative Horizontal Externalities: productivity slowdown due to competitive pressure leading to elimination of local providers

Positive Forward Externalities: lower prices, better services, higher wages and higher fiscal income

Negative Forward Externalities: monopolistic or oligopolistic rent and lower wages possibly

Questions raised in the DIPP Discussion Paper: How far can they be answered? The DIPP Discussion Paper raises a lot of questions with regard to FDI in Multi Brand Retail particularly with mention of Single Brand Retail as well. The question with regard to permitting FDI in Multi-Brand Retail can be addressed in a balanced manner. No doubt, permitting FDI in Multi-Brand Retail will lead to macroeconomic profits through increasing
7

employment, quality, investment etc., it must also be kept in mind that it cannot be done abruptly. A phased manner of introduction has to be followed with around 49% cap initially and further movement only through Approval Route. The incoming foreign investment in Retail will help stabilize the industry and initiate a gradual move from unorganised to organised sector. However, one of the major concerns is that such a move would be detrimental to public interest due to a kind of oligopoly being established. India should take a lesson from China which took a move to FDI in Multi Brand Retail with extensive regulations and initially only permitted it through Joint Ventures. The next question is with regard to building back-end infrastructure. It is not necessary that the back-end infrastructure in every part of the retail sector is equally required. While the food retail would require higher investment in back-end infrastructure, the shoe retail might require higher investment in front-end infrastructure. Thus, a common percentage of the investment to be put into back-end infrastructure is not a sound policy. What can however be done is that, the need of every retail area can be ascertained and a comprehensive policy can be issued. This will tremendously help in developing the retail sector in India. The positive effects of development will trickle down to other smaller Indian retailers. Further, the question with regard to development of SMEs needs to be addressed delicately 15. While the opening up of the FDI in Retail will benefit the SME Sector due to the mandatory sourcing requirement, there is a need to address the policy in a more comprehensive manner. The Central Government must firstly ensure that the sector is properly defined. There is still a lot of confusion due to the Ministrys careless usage of the words SSIU, Small Industries, Small Enterprises interchangeably. The quality is a big concern for all foreign investors, thus making sourcing mandatory can cause a lot of tension since there are some sectors like pharmaceuticals where the SMEs may not be able to provide with the best possible sources. The local content requirement should not be limited to the SMEs and must be enhanced towards the development of industry in general. Moreover, the unorganised sector is still mostly dependent on SMEs; if any more conditions need to be applied the regulations by the Central Government must be strengthened16. Finally, the pertinent question for discussion is that of first procurement right of the Government. Most Indian experts believe that the Government should maintain the right to
15

http://www.smeworld.org/story/features-108/fdi-in-retail-safeguard-indian-mse-trade-enterprises-154.php (Last Visited on 13.02.2012) 16 http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/article2668873.ece (Last Visited on 12.02.2012)

first procurement in order to balance the PDS system. The Back-end infrastructure developed due to the foreign investment will facilitate this. However, if adequate buffer stocks are maintained and storage facilities are made better, then right to first procurement will need to be exercised only in cases of emergency and that to on commodity to commodity basis. Thus, right to first procurement need not be absolute. Is it a perfect policy? : A few questions Unanswered The FDI debate, until now, has mostly centred on the impact of opening of the retail sector to FDI on the farmers and agricultural improvement. However, there are a lot of other issues of substantial significance like the viability of the 30 per cent of local sourcing requirement and the implementation difficulties that are inherent in the new policy which have remained neglected. The Government objective can be stated as, Foreign Investment in Single Brand product retail trading is aimed at attracting investments in production and marketing, improving the availability of such goods for the consumer, encouraging increased sourcing of goods from India, and enhancing competitiveness of Indian enterprises through access to global designs, technologies and management practices. 17 The following section attempts an objective scrutiny of the above statement: I. 30 percent local sourcing requirement: The new policy mandates that in case of FDI beyond 51 percent, sourcing of 30 percent of the value of products sold would have to be done from Indian small industries18/village and cottage industries, artisans and craftsmen. The policy objective, though laudable in spirit suffers from the defects in form. The terms Artisans and craftsmen remain undefined and in the absence of any clarification can be suitably construed by the retailers. The policy coins a new term small industry but does not clarify whether they will be governed by the IDRA Act, or the MSMED Act or any other law.19

17

Press Note No. 1 (2012 Series), issued by Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion The Small Industry for these purposes has been defined as industries which have a total investment in plant & machinery not exceeding US $ 1.00 million. This valuation refers to the value at the time of installation, without providing for depreciation. Further, if at any point in time, this valuation is exceeded, the industry shall not qualify as a 'small industry' for this purpose. 19 While the Press Note 6 of 2009, issued by Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, states that Micro and Small Enterprises (MSE) (earlier small scale industries) were defined solely on the basis of investment in plant & machinery (for micro and small enterprise engaged in manufacturing) and equipment (for micro and small enterprise engaged in providing or rendering of services), in the absence of any amendment to the IDRA, it remains a contentious issue is what is the current position of small scale industries.
18

Further, it seems an incongruous juxtaposition that while village industries remain undefined and can be construed to mean household production in villages with barely an investment of a few thousand rupees,20 the maximum limit of investment in plant and machinery in small industry is US $ 1.00 million which is almost same as that of a medium enterprise.21 The most important aspect in this debate which has not received attention is that the 30 percent sourcing requirement is for single brand retail. The policy stipulates 30 percent sourcing of the products sold; it remains unclear how the government believes that products sourced from Indian small industry are preferred by the customers in the presence of imported products and does not lead to unsold inventories. 22 Alternatively, if the Indian products succeed and earn profit for the local supplier, any increase in valuation beyond US $ 1 million will result in the status of small industry being taken away from the industry. The compliance to these conditions is to be ensured through self-certification to be subsequently checked by statutory auditors.23 In light of the scams and swindles that have rocked the country in past despite a strict regulatory regime, it remains to be seen that without any provision of any penal provision for the breach of these conditions, how efficacious these provisions will prove to be. II. Fair Price to Farmers: It is not disputable that the farmers in India receive a meagre 1020 percent of the price that the consumer pays for the products in the market. 24 This is due to margin sharing by middlemen. It is being argued that FDI in retail will result in a direct contact between the farmers and the retailers. However, this argument is falliable in light of the fact that in the absence of a minimum price being fixed to be paid to the producer, how the Multinational Retailers having higher bargaining power will be compelled to pay fair price to the farmers. Further, keeping in view the indispensable role of the distributors and

20

The definition for artisans, village and cottage industries is: "Artisans (irrespective of location) or small industrial activities (viz. manufacturing, processing, preservation and servicing) in villages and small towns with a population not exceeding 50,000, involving utilisation of locally available natural resources and/or human skills (where industrial credit requirements do not exceed Rs.50,000/-)" vide RPCD.No.PLNFS.BC.126/PS.72-91/92 dated May 6, 1992, http://dcmsme.gov.in/publications/circulars/rbicirculars9.html#rbi48 , (Last visited on 20.02.2012). 21 Further, the mention of village and cottage industries after an oblique (/) raises a doubt whether the small industries situated in villages would only qualify for the benefits. 22 D. Raghunandan, FDI in Organized Retail: A Lose-Lose Game , Newsclick, December 12, 2011, http://newsclick.in/india/fdi-organized-retail-lose-lose-game, (Last visited on 20.02.2012). 23 Satvik Verma, Step by Hesitant Step for Retail, 14th January 2012, The Economic Times. 24 Amit Shanbaug, Multi-brand Retail to attract $ 20 bn by 2015, http://dipp.nic.in/English/Discuss_paper/Reponses35_RetailTrading_31August2010.pdf, (Last visited on 20.02.2012).

10

transporters,25 the hegemony over the propagated common platform for the retailer and the farmer persists. It can be reasonably assumed that these chains will buy only the best quality agricultural products. While Indian agriculture can be termed primitive as compared to developed nations, in the absence of any measure to improve the overall quality of the agricultural products, it remains to be seen that how the concerns of the opponents of FDI in retail policy are allayed. III. Control on Inflation: The advocates of this policy state that this measure will result in improved supply-chain efficiencies and better storage capabilities thereby resulting in reduction in loss and food prices.26 Despite the FDI in cold storage been allowed upto 100%,27 India has a very limited integrated cold-chain infrastructure, with only 5386 standalone cold storages, having a total capacity of 23.6 million MT. ,80% of this is used only for potatoes.28 Though an optimist may argue that fdi in front-end retail will boost investment in cold-chain storage, it remains to be seen whether the requirement of investment in back-end infrastructure will not deter the retail investors from investing in India. Another lacuna in the policy is that the position on back-infrastructure in cases of non-perishable goods like FMCG products, etc. is not clear. IV. Employment Generation: The major argument in favour of FDI is that it will generate around 10 million jobs.29 The major contentions have revolved that the retail stores will generate employment and the quality of employment will be far better than the present employability conditions. On a deeper analysis, it becomes clear that a major reason for lesser FDI in India, as compared to countries like China, etc. is that Indian Labour Laws are stringent and bound the foreign investors to employ as much as 17 percent excess employees than the required workforce.30 Therefore, adding the requirement of reservation for rural youth in employment opportunities for such stores will be a nail in the coffin. Further, stores
25

Mohan Guruswamy, Kamal Sharma, J.P. Mohanty and T.J. Kirah, FDI in Indias Retail Sector: More bad than Good?, http://www.indiafdiwatch.org/fileadmin/India_site/10-FDI-Retail-more-bad.pdf, (Last visited on 20.02.2012). 26 Discussion Paper on FDI in Multi-Brand Retail Trading, http://dipp.nic.in/English/Discuss_paper/DP_FDI_Multi-BrandRetailTrading_06July2010.pdf, (Last visited on 20.02.2012). 27 Ninetieth Report on Foreign and Domestic Investment in Retail Sector, 8th June 2009, pg. 2 28 supra note 26 29 The Honrable Minister for Commerce mentioned that FDI in India will create 10 million nobs over 3 years, http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-11-25/news/30440861_1_retail-sector-single-branddomestic-retailers, (Last visited on 20.02.2012). 30 James Kynge & Edward Luce, India Starts to See China as a Land of Business Opportunity, Financial Times, Sept. 23, 2003, as referred in Mark B. Baker, Awakening the Sleeping Giant: India and FDI in 21 st Century, 15 Ind. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 389

11

like Walmart tend to focus more on mechanisation of stores. At present, retail sector provides employment to two-third of the total employment in the broad category of trade, hotels and restaurants.31 It is a question for the FDI supporters that on what grounds assumptions are made that excess employment will be generated to such great extents when even middlemen will be losing jobs to livelihood.32 Further, even if it is conceded that the employment generation will indeed occur, there are no measures in the policy to ensure that such shift in the nature of employment and employability will be settled suitably. Another question that arises regarding permitting FDI in cities having a population of less than is not about the impact of FDI on the masses in these cities but rather the success of multi retail chains in these locations considering the typical preferences of Indian households in smaller cities. V. Tax Benefits: The authors concede to the point that though FDI in retail will lead to a compulsory billing and thus a check on theft of tax on sales, it is suggested that this problem exists primarily because of the implementation flaws in the present legal system. Therefore, in the opinion of the authors, a shift from the present system instead of addressing the problems of the system is not a sound policy. VI. Unaddressed Issues: The decision of opening retail sector to foreign investment was advocated on the basis that it will result in technology transfer. However, this aspect remains unconsidered even in the DIPP Discussion paper. In fact, most of the single brand retail outlets are in the nature of small shops catering to high end customer segment without any visible benefits of technology transfer trickling down to the Indian manufacturing sector.33 In addition, while benefits to the agriculture segment seem to be the sole criteria of allowing FDI in retail, in most of the existing retail outlets devote only a minimal space to fruits and vegetables. Moreover, a significant point that has escaped attention is the requirement of these stores in terms of space and energy consumption. It is submitted that while countries like USA have a high land to population ratio and therefore, the supermarkets which tend to occupy humungous space and have whopping energy consumption are feasible; it remains to be seen
31

NSSO, Report No 531, Employment and Unemployment Situation in India, 2007-08, as referred in DIPP Discussion Paper, supra note 26 32 Supra note 27 33 Asit Ranjan Mishra & Sapna Agarwal, Green Light for Single-brand Retail Reform, http://www.livemint.com/2012/01/11002052/Green-light-for-singlebrand-r.html, (Last visited on 20.02.2012).

12

how far India with unfavourable resource availability in terms of land and energy will be a lucrative destination for the investors. Conclusion There has not been much change in the policy on FDI in Retail Sector after Press Notes 2, 3, 4 and 6 of 2009 except the Press Note 1 of 2012. This shows that the Government is still not fully ready to bring in FDI in Multi-Brand Retailing. Even the single brand retailing has not seen many investors34 since its inclusion in the automatic route (till 51%) in 2006. The focus area as pointed out throughout the discussion on FDI in Retail Sector is building up better infrastructure, moving in a calibrated manner and making more clear and transparent regulations for the same. But the idea of FDI till now in India seems to have a number of blockades in its path because of inherent lacunae in the policy. It is submitted that even if the policy is implemented in toto, there will issues concerning regulatory and the legal framework for a fair and transparent implementation of the policy. Therefore, to conclude with it can be said that while the FDI in retail may be a lucrative option for an emerging economy like India; its success, which is dependent on proper implementation, is a question to be answered by future. Bibliography (I) Articles

Discussion Paper on Foreign Direct Investment, Issued by the DIPP, Ministry of Commerce and Industry Priyanka Das, Multi-Brand Retailing in India: Curse or Boon?, E-News Line, PSA Legal, 2011 Dr.S.V.Devanathan, The Negative effects of permitting Hypermarkets and FDI in the Retail Industry in India, Saranthan College of Engineering, Trichi 90th Parliamentary Standing Committee Report on Foreign and Domestic Investment in Retail Sector, Rajya Sabha Secretariat, June 2009
Julian Davis Mortenson, The Meaning of Investment: ICSIDs Travaux and the Domain of International Investment Law, VOLUME 51, NUMBER 1, WINTER 2010, Harvard Law Journal

34

Ibid

13

 Pradeep Agarwal, Economic Impact of FDI in South Asia, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, 2000 Cedric Durand, Externalities from FDI in Mexican Retail Sector, UNAM Working Paper, Mexico, 2005 Arpita Mukherjee, Socio-Economic Impact of Direct Selling, ICRIER, 2009 Retail Sector in India: Changing with changing times, Deloitte, 2011

(II)

Books

Rajiv Jain, Guide on Foreign Collaboration, Policy and Procedure, 9th Edition, Indian Investment Publication, 2003 Taxmanns, Foreign Exchange Management Manual, Taxmann Publications, 2012 Ajay Dua, Investing in India, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, November 2005

(III)

Links

http://www.legallyindia.com/20091120296/Legal-opinions/press-note-maze-in-retailtrading-not-getting-better http://www.halsburys.in/retail-sector-bargaining.html http://www.cci.in/pdf/surveys_reports/indias_retail_sector.pdf http://rupe-india.org/43/retail.html http://www.pragoti.in/node/1239 http://retail-guru.com/allow-100-fdi-in-retail-to-contain-inflation-walmart/ http://amchamindia.com/Amcham_Response_on_Discussion_Paper_on_FDI_in_Mult ibrand_Retail_Trading_2010.pdf http://www.moneyguideindia.com/understanding-fdi-what-it-means-for-india/ http://www.thefreelibrary.com/FDI+in+India's+retail+sector %3A+problems+and+prospects.-a0258052489 (comparison with other developing countries) http://www.businessworld.in/businessworld/businessworld/content/Retail-FDI-HoldStep-Regressive-Says-India-Inc.html (Comparison)
14

 http://www.pluggd.in/multi-brand-retail-fdi-in-india-297/ (Economic Analysis) http://www.domain-b.com/industry/Retail/20111207_fdi_disappoints.html http://m.economictimes.com/PDAET/articleshow/11021742.cms (response on rolling back) http://www.ey.com/IN/en/Industries/India-sectors/Retail--Wholesale/Retail_Expected-impact-of-FDI-in-Retail (Economic Analysis) http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Lebanon/Local %20Assets/Documents/Consumer%20Business/Retail_POV.pdf (Economic Analysis) http://dipp.gov.in/English/Discuss_paper/RetailTrading_VNPrasad.pdf http://www.psalegal.com/upload/publication/assocFile/ENewslineMarch2011.pdf http://www.smeworld.org/story/features-108/fdi-in-retail-safeguard-indian-mse-tradeenterprises-154.php http://www.nabard.org/fileupload/DataBank/Publications/Nabard%20E%20Book.pdf http://www.icrier.org/pdf/Final_Executive_Summary.pdf http://rru.worldbank.org/Documents/PapersLinks/1111.pdf http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/article2668873.ece http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/item/50586-ifs-and-buts-of-fdi-in-retail.html http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2011/12/12/economics-journal-why-did-indianretailers-u-turn-on-fdi/ http://nkravi.sulekha.com/blog/post/2011/12/fdi-in-retail-macro-economics-andindian-democracy.htm http://blogs.economictimes.indiatimes.com/policypuzzles/entry/fdi-in-retail-for-semiurban-india http://blogs.economictimes.indiatimes.com/policypuzzles/entry/the-30-sme-clause http://www.firstpost.com/tag/retail-fdi http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/SME-sourcing-normsviolate-WTO-norms/articleshow/10913158.cms http://treadthemiddlepath.blogspot.in/2011/11/fdi-in-retail-in-india-all-this-talk.html http://intl.econ.cuhk.edu.hk/topic/index.php?did=23
15

 http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/30-sourcing-promise-clasheswith-WTO-norm/Article1-778787.aspx http://indiacurrentaffairs.org/fdi-in-retail-trade-hurts-where-it-hurts-most-kamalnayan-kabra/ http://www.downtoearth.org.in/content/fdi-retail-some-unanswered-questions http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-01-14/news/30627664_1_singlebrand-product-retail-trading-single-brand-fdi http://www.asianage.com/editorial/some-questions-fdi-retail-907 http://www.livemint.com/2011/11/24205234/Reforms-restart-with-FDI-in-re.html http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=874707&download=yes

16