Hystory of Nepalese Economy

History of Nepalese Economy

Basic Features of Land Tenure System in Post Unification of Nepal

1. Birta - The Birta System was more widespread and had a very long history in the Nepalese Economy. Under the system income-yielding assets such as agricultural lands, forest and villages were granted to individuals on a tax free basis as a mark of favour or appreciation of service. In a society cohere land constituted and predominant source of income, and landownership was synonymous with social status, the power to bestow or withhold favour in the form of birta grants was of considerable significance in organizing the foundations of political authority and administration and so was exercised on an extensive scale. However, birta grants had a negative impact on the fiscal jurisdiction of the state, because income from specified sources in the area covered by a birta giant was appropriated by the birtaowner, rather than by the state.

Types of birta land are of following:

(a) Related exchanged birta, (b) Re birta, (c) Gift birta, and (d) Kub birta

2. Guthi - The guthi system emerged when similar tax-free grants of agricultural lands, forests and villages were made to temples and monasteries or for financing specified religious ceremonies at those institutions, or else other functions of a religious, charitable or philanthropic character. Guthi grans, once made were seldom revoked, because the dislocation of the concerned religious, charitable or philanthropic function that revocation would entail was traditionally considered a sacrilege. Guthi land are of mainly two types (a) Royal Guthi, (b) Private Guthi. At present guthi land under guthi corporation are registered Guthi tenants, registered Guthi, subordinated Guthi and appointed Guthi.

3. Kipat - The kipat system was traditionally limited fiscal jurisdiction of the nineteenth century Nepali state. The system was practically confined to tribal communities of kirat ethnic stock, such as the Limbu of the hill region east of the Dudhkoshi river. Under the kipat system income - yielding sresources belonged to the community under customary law, not to the state under statutory law. The state, consequently, had no power to tax lands under kipat tenure, or raise revenues through the exploitation of kipat forests. Its fiscal jurisdiction over kipat areas was, therefore, limited to the sovereign power of taxation over individual households.

4. Raikar - The land under the state ownership and which can be cultivated by the people paying certain amount of tax. At present raikar land can be buy and sold by an individual according to his coil. The landowner must pay tax to state.

5. Jagir Land - Jagir land is another land system in Nepal, it was extensively developed by King Prithvi Narayan Shah and was existence within the Rana Regime, now it is not in existence. Jagir land was provided to the people who were in civil service and military. In spite of case salary land used to be provided. Rana family were mostly benefited from Jagir system.

6. Rakam Land System - Land provided to villagers in spite of cash from the transportation of government goods. Jagir land was temporary and there was no right of other family member after the death of jagire but rakam was permanent and there was right of consumption to other family members.

7. Rajbandaki Land System - Land provided by King taking certain amount of cash by tenants. In other word land is mortgaged by King. During the rule of Juddha Shamsher this land was converted into Raikar.

Sources of State Revenues in Post Unification of Nepal

1. Taxes

(a) Agrain taxes

(b) Commercial taxes

2. Production and trade in the state sector

(a) Agricultural plantations

(b) Mines

(c) Forests

3. State - intervention in put trade

(a) Fiscal monopolies

(b) State trading

1(a) Agrain taxes - Agrain taxes means the levy imposed on lands used for agricultural purposes as well as taxes on homesteads in rural areas.

(b) Commercial taxes - Commercial taxes means taxes on the transit, export, import and sale of commodities.

2. Receipts from the state sector - The receipts that received from state sector were the ownership of state to the natural resources, mainly agricult - 2 -ural lands, mines and forests, Not withstanding state ownership, the actual made of production and resource - mobilization by the state from such production, were different for each of these there categories of natural resources.

3. State intervention in trade - Production in the state sector comprised an infinitesimal part of the total national product, the bulk of which was produced and traded in the private sector. A part of the income earned by private merchants was absorbed by the state through commercial taxation. Such taxation, however, was limited to the movement, sale, import and export of commodities and so left untouched a significant part of the merchant's profits. The state lacked both the tradition and the capability to assess and tax such profits, hence it resorted to a more direct method of raising revenue from that source, which we may designate as state intervention. Such intervention meant that the state controlled sources of supply of goods with distribution being confined to traditional customers according to traditional practices state intervention made it possible for the government to manipulate the terms of trade to the detriment of the producer and trader. The difference between the price actually paid by the state and the price that the producer