ghazi52
PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2007
- Messages
- 102,921
- Reaction score
- 106
- Country
- Location
The country's auto industry on Thursday opposed unrestricted incentives to Electric Vehicles (EVs) as investors can misuse the incentive, well-informed sources in Engineering Development Board (EDB) told Business Recorder. This opposition came at a time when some investors are preparing to invest in EVs as per the policy of federal government. The meeting was convened in the Ministry of Industries and Production to discuss composition of Working Group, Terms of References ToRs) of Working Group and reconstitution of AIDC.
Another purpose of the meeting was to discuss unconfirmed minutes of the 27th meeting of AIDC, held in November 2018. As per the minutes, the policy dictates that the new investor's policy shall be reviewed after every two years by a working group formed by AIDC.
The sources said discussion on Electric Vehicles (EVs) attracted interest of those present. EDB requested all participants to share proposals regarding EVs to formulate policy framework for companies which aspire to bring EVs.
Some participants shared concerns arguing that the EVs have the same parts as the fuel run cars so the incentive should only be given in battery or EV specific parts not the whole vehicle.
They were of the view that this is necessary to protect localization already achieved in the country. Some participants emphasized that the definition of EV, hybrid, semi EV etc should be well defined in the policy beyond any doubt.
According to sources, there was a concern shared in the meeting that this new category may become an avenue to import parts and vehicles at next to no tariff and turn the industry upside down.
The participants appreciated EDB and FBR for their role in removal Regulatory Duty (RD) from parts imported under SRO 655.
It was also pointed out that AIDC should be reconstituted and its ToRs be reviewed because there are many petty procedural issues that are being referred to AIDC.
After a threadbare discussion on the matter it was agreed that a Working Group constituted by the AIDC does not have jurisdiction to reconstitute AIDC. The FBR representative also shared that according to rules of business of Government of Pakistan the TORs of AIDC can not be reviewed.
The sources said that some participants inquired that if such matters, petty or not, cannot be discussed in AIDC then what is the forum to bring up those issues?
A detailed discussion within members of Working Group was generated regarding new entrants. The representatives of new entrant companies, that have invested billions of rupees in Pakistan as a result of favourable Greenfield and Brownfield options, were of the view that as there is no Association of such companies as yet, therefore it should be decided which companies will be members of this forum. It was decided that two big companies on the basis of investment from Chinese companies, Korean companies and European companies will become members of the working group.
The sources further stated that on TORs of Working Group formed on Thursday, participants wanted clarity on whether the Working Group will review the "new investor policy" or the ADP 2016-21.
Acting CEO EDB, who according to the Chairman EDB Board will be replaced soon with permanent and competent CEO, responded that the Working Group will only review the procedural issues that are not given in ADP 2016-21 and have no mandate to change the policy itself.
Earlier, PAMA, in its letter had made it clear that reconstitution of AIDC is neither the jurisdiction nor the competence of the Working Group. PAMA argued that AIDC was constituted on June 2, 2016, adding that only its composition "shall change" after every two years, which may effect by the competent authority.
The incumbent AIDC is legally hit by the mandatory requirement of change of composition every two years which time has lapsed on June 1, 2018. Therefore, it would be lawful to first have the requisite change in the composition of AIDC notified.
After submitting arguments, against the EDB's meeting agenda, PAMA requested EDB to postpone the meeting of February 21, 2019 till the re-composition of the AIDC but EDB did not entertain the request of auto assemblers.
Besides officials of the MoI&P and EDB, representatives of different auto assemblers also participated in the meeting and gave suggestions on the three proposed agenda items.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2019
Another purpose of the meeting was to discuss unconfirmed minutes of the 27th meeting of AIDC, held in November 2018. As per the minutes, the policy dictates that the new investor's policy shall be reviewed after every two years by a working group formed by AIDC.
The sources said discussion on Electric Vehicles (EVs) attracted interest of those present. EDB requested all participants to share proposals regarding EVs to formulate policy framework for companies which aspire to bring EVs.
Some participants shared concerns arguing that the EVs have the same parts as the fuel run cars so the incentive should only be given in battery or EV specific parts not the whole vehicle.
They were of the view that this is necessary to protect localization already achieved in the country. Some participants emphasized that the definition of EV, hybrid, semi EV etc should be well defined in the policy beyond any doubt.
According to sources, there was a concern shared in the meeting that this new category may become an avenue to import parts and vehicles at next to no tariff and turn the industry upside down.
The participants appreciated EDB and FBR for their role in removal Regulatory Duty (RD) from parts imported under SRO 655.
It was also pointed out that AIDC should be reconstituted and its ToRs be reviewed because there are many petty procedural issues that are being referred to AIDC.
After a threadbare discussion on the matter it was agreed that a Working Group constituted by the AIDC does not have jurisdiction to reconstitute AIDC. The FBR representative also shared that according to rules of business of Government of Pakistan the TORs of AIDC can not be reviewed.
The sources said that some participants inquired that if such matters, petty or not, cannot be discussed in AIDC then what is the forum to bring up those issues?
A detailed discussion within members of Working Group was generated regarding new entrants. The representatives of new entrant companies, that have invested billions of rupees in Pakistan as a result of favourable Greenfield and Brownfield options, were of the view that as there is no Association of such companies as yet, therefore it should be decided which companies will be members of this forum. It was decided that two big companies on the basis of investment from Chinese companies, Korean companies and European companies will become members of the working group.
The sources further stated that on TORs of Working Group formed on Thursday, participants wanted clarity on whether the Working Group will review the "new investor policy" or the ADP 2016-21.
Acting CEO EDB, who according to the Chairman EDB Board will be replaced soon with permanent and competent CEO, responded that the Working Group will only review the procedural issues that are not given in ADP 2016-21 and have no mandate to change the policy itself.
Earlier, PAMA, in its letter had made it clear that reconstitution of AIDC is neither the jurisdiction nor the competence of the Working Group. PAMA argued that AIDC was constituted on June 2, 2016, adding that only its composition "shall change" after every two years, which may effect by the competent authority.
The incumbent AIDC is legally hit by the mandatory requirement of change of composition every two years which time has lapsed on June 1, 2018. Therefore, it would be lawful to first have the requisite change in the composition of AIDC notified.
After submitting arguments, against the EDB's meeting agenda, PAMA requested EDB to postpone the meeting of February 21, 2019 till the re-composition of the AIDC but EDB did not entertain the request of auto assemblers.
Besides officials of the MoI&P and EDB, representatives of different auto assemblers also participated in the meeting and gave suggestions on the three proposed agenda items.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2019