Suku Bunga Acuan dan Pertumbuhan

Merespons perlambatan ekonomi, Bank Indonesia kembali melakukan pelonggaran moneter dengan menurunkan suku bunga acuan.

Penurunan bunga acuan (BI Rate) 25 basis poin (bps) menjadi 6,5 persen—dan dua bunga acuan lain—Rabu lalu, merupakan bagian dari upaya BI mendorong pertumbuhan, di tengah ancaman stagnasi ekonomi.

Lewat penurunan bunga acuan, bunga kredit perbankan diharapkan bisa ditekan sehingga bisa mendorong investasi dunia usaha dan daya beli masyarakat. BI dan pemerintah menargetkan bunga kredit sudah di bawah 10 persen (single digit) akhir 2016, dari 12-15 persen saat ini. Dalam enam bulan pertama 2016, BI dua kali menurunkan bunga acuan, tetapi sejauh ini belum berpengaruh pada bunga kredit.

Selain pelonggaran moneter lewat penurunan suku bunga, BI juga melonggarkan sejumlah kebijakan makroprudensial. Langkah BI ini secara tidak langsung menunjukkan perhatian serius BI terhadap perlambatan ekonomi.

Menyusul pertumbuhan 4,79 persen pada 2015, PDB triwulan I-2016 hanya tumbuh 4,9 persen dan triwulan II diperkirakan BI juga di bawah 5 persen. Ancaman perlambatan tecermin dari indikator seperti menurunnya permintaan kendaraan bermotor, semen, kredit, pertumbuhan ritel, dan manufaktur. Perlambatan juga terjadi pada semua komponen pembentuk PDB: belanja pemerintah, investasi, konsumsi rumah tangga, dan ekspor.

Efektifkah penurunan bunga acuan untuk menggerakkan ekonomi? Instrumen moneter tak bisa berdiri sendiri. Penurunan bunga acuan tak otomatis akan direspons perbankan melalui penurunan bunga kredit. Bunga acuan BI hanya salah satu penentu bunga kredit.

Penurunan bunga kredit juga harus didorong melalui peningkatan efisiensi perbankan dan pembenahan faktor di luar moneter. Penurunan bunga kredit juga tak mudah karena rasio kredit terhadap simpanan perbankan, kini, sudah sekitar 92 persen. Di tengah membengkaknya kredit macet, barangkali ekspansi kredit juga bukan prioritas perbankan saat ini.

Perlambatan pertumbuhan yang bisa memicu peningkatan pengangguran terbuka dan kemiskinan berpotensi memicu instabilitas. Untuk memutus lingkaran setan siklus perlambatan ekonomi dituntut kreativitas dan respons bersama pemerintah-BI lewat stimulus fiskal dan moneter.

Mendorong daya beli dan permintaan domestik tak bisa hanya dengan stimulus moneter, tetapi juga stimulus fiskal. Berbeda dengan belanja negara 2015 yang mampu menahan perlambatan ekonomi lebih dalam yang bersumber dari faktor global, kini, fiskal dihadapkan situasi pelik khususnya dengan ketidakpastian penerimaan dari amnesti pajak.

Sementara instrumen moneter juga tak bisa serampangan. Penurunan bunga acuan juga harus memperhatikan faktor, seperti tren bunga AS, dampak pada nilai tukar, dan inflasi. Hal lain, keengganan masyarakat investasi atau membelanjakan dana bukan tak mungkin juga akibat ketidakpastian dan menurunnya kepercayaan. Bagaimana membalikkan situasi ini juga menjadi isu penting di sini.

disadur dari Kompas, Sabtu, 18 Juni 2016

English version

‘Zakat’ and ‘waqf’ play bigger role in poverty alleviation

Poverty has long been a serious problem and a great challenge for Indonesia. According to the World Bank around 59 percent of Indonesian people are considered poor with incomes of less than US$2 a day. Poverty encompasses social, economic and political deprivations. The poor lack basic necessities and are deprived of the life that people value. They have little or no participation in ordinary social and economic life.

Concern about poverty is not new, and has been a focus over the centuries for historians, sociologists and economists. Its causes have been identified, ranging from deficiencies in the administration of income support, to injustices of social and economic systems. Various measures have been put forth to help, including reforms to social security and socioeconomic systems.

Since poverty is a multidimensional problem, solutions to poverty require a comprehensive set of well-coordinated measures. A global war against poverty, in addition to domestic efforts, demands assistance being given from the rich countries to the poor countries. In Indonesia, several policies and strategies have been adopted in the past to reduce poverty, but poverty persists.

Islam provides a novel concept of poverty and the poverty line, as implied in the concept of zakat, which is a charitable poverty alleviation institution in the Islamic system of ethics. There are several kinds of charity; zakat as compulsory charity, shadaqah as optional charity and waqf as perpetual charity.

The compulsory and optional charity deals with poverty though basically adopting a re-distributive approach, while waqf can be used to enhance the poor’s capacity to take care of themselves, through providing better access to education, health and so on.

Potential zakat is based on three definitions of what wealth it can be drawn from.

The first is based on traditional views, according to which zakat is levied on agriculture, livestock, stock in trade, gold, silver and money.

The second definition is based on the views of contemporary Muslim scholars where zakat can also be deducted from net returns from manufacturing and building rent and from net savings made from a salary.

A third basis for zakat calculation is based on Maliki views, where the zakat base includes buildings and other fixed assets, except those assigned for personal and family use. Estimates of potential zakat based on the first definition are equal to around 1 percent of Indonesia’s GDP; the second definition could bring in 1.7 percent of GDP; and the third could amass 2 percent of national GDP.

Thus, potential zakat collection in Indonesia ranges from Rp 100 trillion ($7.5 billion) to Rp 240 trillion per year – however, collected zakat amounts to just 0.2 to 0.5 percent of these amounts, or around Rp 460 billion. Of that, Rp 60 billion is distributed via the government-funded Zakat National Board (Baznaz) and around Rp 400 billion through other private zakat institutions.

Waqf is a locked-in dedication of the benefits of an asset for specific, charitable purposes. A waqf asset cannot be disposed of; its ownership cannot be transferred.

There are an estimated 358,710 waqf properties in Indonesia, which total 1.5 million square meters. These waqf assets can be part of a potential solution for helping the poor.

In addition, cash waqf has recently grown quickly in Indonesia mainly because of its flexibility and potential to benefit poor people anywhere. Based on a report, the national potential of fixed-asset waqf is Rp 377 trillion a year, and of cash waqf, Rp 120 trillion a year.

However, collected cash waqf totals only around Rp 43 billion, or 0.03 percent only of total cash waqf potential. Indonesia has safety net programs for the very poor and vulnerable but has not made the institutions of zakat and waqf a part of its poverty reduction strategy.

Muslims are paying their zakat on their own to the poor and to different charitable institutions. However, all these transaction are not passing through proper channels and are not recorded, flowing without planning and not as part of any strategy.

Therefore, one cannot asses the effectiveness of zakat in poverty alleviation. The same with waqf. These institutions need to be revived and organized with proper planning, which will provide an additional source of income to the government to provide for social welfare. These institutions need to be integrated into the overall poverty reduction strategy so we can see tangible results.

by Muhammad Shodiq

source The Jakarta Post, Friday, June 17, 2016

Benchmark Rate and Growth

Responding to the economic slowdown, Bank Indonesia has yet again taken monetary easing measures, by lowering the benchmark rate.

The lowering of interest rates by 25 basis points (bps) to 6.5 percent - and two other benchmark rates - on Wednesday, is part of BI's efforts to encourage growth amid danger of economic stagnation.

Through lower benchmark rates, it is hoped that lending rates in banks could be pressed, which would hopefully spur investment in businesses and enhance people's purchasing power. BI and the government have targeted that lending rates be below 10 percent (single digit) by the end of 2016, down from the current rate of 12-15 percent. In the first six months of 2016, BI has twice lowered the benchmark rate, but it has yet to have an impact on lending rates.

Other than monetary easing through a lower benchmark rate, BI has also eased a number of macroprudential policies. This move indirectly shows BI's serious concern toward the economic slowdown.

After recording a growth of 4.79 percent in 2015, the GDP in Q1-2016 has only grown by 4.9 percent and the second quarter is predicted to also be under 5 percent.

Is lowering the benchmark rate an effective way to get the economy moving? Monetary instruments cannot stand alone. The lowering of benchmark rates will not automatically be responded to by banks by lowering lending rates. BI's benchmark rate is only one of the things that determine the lending rate.

The lowering of lending rates must be supported through banking efficiency and revamping factors outside of the monetary system. The lowering of lending rates is also not easy given the ratio of loans on savings in banks, which has now reached 92 percent. Amid the increase in bad credit, perhaps credit expansion is not a priority for banks at this moment in time.

The slow growth, which has led to an increase in open unemployment and poverty, has the potential to trigger instability. To cut the cycle of slowed economic growth, creativity and a joint response by the government and BI is needed through the fiscal and monetary stimulus.

Pushing purchasing power and domestic demand is not only done through monetary stimulus but also fiscal stimulus. Different from state spending in 2015, which was able to withstand the economic slowdown stemming from global factors, the fiscal situation is complicated, especially with the uncertain state revenue from the tax amnesty.

Monetary instruments, meanwhile, also cannot operate carelessly. The lowering of the benchmark rate must also take into consideration factors such as the trend of US interest rates, as an effect on the exchange rate and inflation. In addition, the reluctance of the public to invest or spend could also be caused by uncertainty and a decline in trust.

source Kompas, Saturday, June 18, 2016