Faisal Basri’s Blog

Kompas.com, Kamis, 28 Agustus 2008 | 22:49 WIB

JAKARTA, KAMIS - Lemahnya peraturan perundang-undang soal persaingan usaha, dan belum lahirnya undang-undang usaha retail dimanfaatkan PT Carrefour Indonesia untuk melakukan ekspansi bisnis dengan mengakuisisi PT Alfa Retailindo Tbk, dan kemungkinan juga PT Makro Indonesia.

"Karena saat ini baru ada Undang-undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 yang mengatur tentang persaingan usaha. Tapi undang-undang yang khusus mengatur bisnis retail secara detail belum ada," kata Pengamat Ekonomi Faisal Basri, di Jakarta, Kamis (28/8).

Faisal mengatakan seharusnya Pemerintah lebih tanggap, dan secara cepat berinisiatif membuat undang-undang tentang bisnis retail. Karena bisnis retail di Indonesia sekarang sudah berkembang dengan pesat. "Setahu saya sekarang Pemerintah sudah mulai menggodok undang-undang yang khusus membahas tentang bisnis retail, tapi jelasnya akan ditetapkan kapan saya belum tahu," sambungnya.

Menurut Faisal, bila nanti Carrefour jadi melakukan akuisisi saham PT. Makro bisa dipastikan mereka akan melakukan dominasi pasar yang menutup ‘pintu’  bagi pesaing usaha retail yang lain. "Bisa ditebak. Bila Makro jadi diakuisisi, muaranya pasti ingin menguasai pasar retail di seluruh Indonesia," ujar Faisal.

http://www.kompas.com/read/xml/2008/08/28/2249347/carrefour.manfaatkan.lemahnya.uu

Business News - Tuesday, August 19, 2008 Alfian, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta Amid skyrocketing global coal prices, producers have been waging protracted battles with the central and local governments over issues ranging from overlapping land ownerships to royalties and tax refunds. The climax of the fighting came this month when the immigration office banned 14 coal executives of six companies from traveling overseas over allegations their companies had evaded royalty payments between 2001 and 2007. Weak coordination between government agencies and political party factions vying to get a slice of the profits have exacerbated the problems. Indonesian Coal Mining Association president Jeffrey Mulyono told The Jakarta Post coal producers had been under severe pressure since prices began to increase in 2004. "Many have begun to perceive coal as an expensive commodity. The situation has been heating up as many outsiders want to become involved in the coal business," Jeffrey said. Pre-2004, the price of 6.300 calorie coal stood at around US$25 per ton, but the price has since soared to $150, Jeffrey said. The rush to mine coal has ignited a series of disputes between miners and regional authorities over increasing costs of concessions. Jeffrey said newcomers in the sector were lobbying local officials to short cut their way to concessions. "I am not referring to the government in general, but only to some officials," Jeffrey said. Several sources in the industry have indicated that the influx of players into the business is linked to the needs of political parties to secure funds for campaigning ahead of next year’s general and legislative elections. State-controlled mining firm PT Tambang Batubara Bukit Asam had its mining concession illegally confiscated by the Lahat regency administration, which went onto offer the site to five new companies linked to the administration. "It doesn’t make any sense that a local government should give the concessions of a state company to private parties," Jeffrey said. PT Kaltim Prima Coal (KPC), a unit of Asia’s top coal exporter PT Bumi Resources, and PT Perkasa Inakakerta, a unit of PT Bayan Resources, are involved in a dispute with East Kutai authorities. Interim East Kutai Regent Irsan Noor last month ordered KPC and Perkasa to halt operations at some of their concessions, claiming the firms were operating in a forest area without a proper license. Energy and Mineral Resources Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro argued the problems related to local administrations were the result of overlapping regulations on regional autonomy. "There is a different legal frame at play here. Companies with first-generation contracts of work use mining laws to operate, while local authorities use regional autonomy laws to provide mining contracts to companies," he said. Local authorities often insist that mining companies operate according to regional autonomy law, he said. "We have frequently informed them that firms with first-generation contracts are still under the central government’s authority. "The firms cannot cope with the autonomy law because their contracts are drawn up based on different laws," he said. Purnomo said he believed local authorities had begun harassing coal producers in order to benefit from windfall profits amid high global prices. However, coal producers have recently been forced to fend off attacks by the government over revenue payments. The ban on the 14 company executives shows that the six coal companies are reluctant to share their windfall profits with the government. The six coal companies are PT Kideco Jaya Agung, KPC, PT Kendilo Coal Indonesia, PT Arutmin Indonesia and PT Berau Coal and PT Adaro. Director general of mineral resources, geothermal and coal at the Energy and Mineral Resources Ministry Bambang Setiawan on Aug. 6 said the companies owed the state a total of Rp 7 trillion (US$769 million). The mining companies have denied any wrongdoing, saying the royalties were withheld to compensate for tax refunds owed to them by the government. In 2000, the tax office declared that coal products were exempt from value-added tax (VAT), meaning coal firms could no longer claim refunds for VAT from the government for goods and services purchased to produce coal. However, the mining companies have argued for their continued entitlement to VAT refunds, citing that their contracts of work, signed before 2000, protected them from future tax policies. Following negotiations, the government agreed to honor the contracts of work, meaning that producers can continue to claim VAT refunds on the proviso they pay royalties. "We have agreed to respect the contract. The State Finance Comptroller will do the calculation," Purnomo said. He said the coal contracts had been inked well before the new law was enacted. However, University of Indonesia economist Faisal Basri argued the rift over royalty payments stemmed from a weak legal system and poor coordination between state agencies. Faisal said the country should enact a single law on natural resources. "At the moment, every type of natural resource has its own law. As a result, overlapping regulations and disputes with central and local governments over varying interpretations have frequently occurred," Faisal said. The condition is inflamed by the weak coordination between state agencies. "Before issuing a new regulation, the government is supposed to run a simulation on how it will work for different sectors," Faisal said. However, he also criticized coal producers for mixing up royalties and tax payments, which he said were mutually exclusive. Faisal and Jeffrey urged the government and the House of Representatives to immediately pass a three-years-overdue bill on coal and mineral resources to end the legal uncertainties.

FAISAL BASRI

Senin, 11 Agustus 2008 | Hal. 1 dan 15

 

Pemerintah sedang gencar mendorong investasi agar percepatan pertumbuhan ekonomi lebih berkelanjutan. Modal dasar sudah tersedia, yakni Undang-Undang Nomor 25 Tahun 2007 tentang Penanaman Modal. Keberadaan UU ini diharapkan lebih memberikan kepastian bagi para investor.

Ada yang berpandangan, UU ini sangat liberal sehingga berpotensi memperkokoh cengkeraman pemodal, terutama asing, terhadap perekonomian Indonesia. Bahkan, sementara kalangan telah melayangkan permohonan pengujian materi kepada Mahkamah Konstitusi atas UU ini karena dipandang beberapa pasal bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang Dasar 1945. Sebagian permohonan itu dikabulkan dan sebagian lainnya ditolak.

Persepsi bahwa kaum pemodal telah menguasai roda perekonomian dan berpotensi menggerogoti kedaulatan tampaknya kian menyeruak. Sentimen antiasing (xenofobia) tambah gencar, antara lain karena diilhami oleh kebangkitan sosialisme di Amerika Selatan.

Seberapa besar sebenarnya peranan investasi asing langsung di dalam perekonomian Indonesia? Data menunjukkan, selama ini peranan investasi asing di Indonesia tergolong kecil. Porsi arus penanaman modal asing (PMA) langsung di dalam pembentukan modal tetap kotor rata-rata dalam tiga tahun terakhir hanya 7 persen. Sementara itu, akumulasi (stok) PMA hanya 5,2 persen terhadap produk domestik bruto. Angka ini jauh lebih rendah ketimbang seluruh negara sosialis di Amerika Selatan, seperti Brasil (20,8 persen) atau Venezuela (25 persen).

Untuk menyikapi praktik pengelolaan sumber daya alam, kita memiliki acuan yang pasti, yakni Pasal 33 Undang-Undang Dasar 1945.

Pemerintah tak punya cukup modal untuk mengelola langsung kekayaan negara. Tak berarti, karena itu, negara kehilangan kedaulatan. Pemerintah memiliki kendali penuh.

Dalam kasus minyak, berlaku ketentuan bagi hasil 85 persen pemerintah dan 15 persen kontraktor. Masih ada kewajiban kontraktor menyisihkan 15 persen bagian mereka untuk pasar domestik dengan harga yang jauh lebih rendah daripada harga internasional.

Terakhir, muncul persoalan dengan usaha pertambangan batu bara. Sampai-sampai para anggota direksi dan komisaris beberapa perusahaan batu bara dicekal.

Sumber kekisruhan adalah penerbitan Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 144 Tahun 2000, yang memasukkan komoditas batu bara sebagai barang bukan kena pajak sehingga beberapa perusahaan pertambangan batu bara tak bisa memperoleh restitusi PPN. Perusahaan yang dirugikan hanyalah yang terikat dengan Perjanjian Karya Pengusahaan Pertambangan Batu Bara (PKP2B) generasi pertama.

Tentu saja perusahaan-perusahaan PKP2B sewot karena sesuai perjanjian kontrak karya generasi pertama, mereka dikenai tarif pajak perseroan jauh lebih tinggi, yakni 45 persen. Padahal, tarif pajak tertinggi sesuai dengan ketentuan perpajakan yang berlaku hanya 30 persen, bahkan akan segera diturunkan menjadi 25 persen sesuai dengan UU terbaru. Sebagai kompensasi pembayaran pajak perseroan yang lebih tinggi, isi kontrak karya menjamin sistem perpajakan yang tetap. Maka, sesuai dengan kaidah lex specialis, PP No 144/2000 seharusnya tak berlaku bagi mereka.

Dua tahun lalu kisruh di usaha batu bara terjadi karena pemerintah mengenakan pajak ekspor batu bara. Dengan alasan serupa, akhirnya pemerintah mencabut ketentuan ini.

Dengan telah keluarnya rekomendasi dari Mahkamah Agung bahwa substansi PP No 144/ 2000 bertentangan dengan peraturan di atasnya, kita berharap pemerintah segera menyelesaikan kekisruhan ini.

Namun, tanpa harus menunggu penyelesaian tuntas, perusahaan kontrak karya wajib melunasi pembayaran dana hasil produksi batu bara yang mereka sandera. Jika kebijakan pemerintah salah, tak sepatutnya perusahaan yang merasa dirugikan menempuh cara yang melanggar hukum pula.

Saatnya semua pihak patuh kepada hukum. Pemerintah juga harus sangat tegas dan lebih tegas, dengan tidak lagi memberikan kelonggaran waktu pembayaran tunggakan pajak hingga akhir tahun ini kepada perusahaan-perusahaan yang nyata-nyata sedang menikmati rezeki melimpah dari meroketnya harga komoditas tambang.

Penataan institusi

Pelajaran berharga dari kisruh usaha migas dan pertambangan ialah sangat dirasakan mendesaknya penataan institusi. Tugas pemerintah dan DPR jelas, menuntaskan segera rancangan UU minerba (mineral dan batu bara) yang sudah lama terbengkalai. Sangat mendesak pula menyusun undang-undang pengelolaan kekayaan alam sebagai payung agar terpelihara konsistensi di antara undang-undang yang mengatur kekayaan alam yang lebih spesifik.

Tanpa kepastian hukum, jangan berharap banyak kita akan kembali berada di dalam radar screen sebagaimana diutarakan Chatib Basri dalam analisis ekonomi minggu lalu. Saya khawatir investasi yang sudah ada di Indonesia pun satu demi satu hengkang. Indikasi ke arah sana sudah terlihat. Data Bank Indonesia menunjukkan, investasi langsung Indonesia ke luar negeri naik tajam dari 2,7 miliar dollar AS tahun 2006 menjadi 4,8 miliar dollar AS. Untuk tahun ini, selama triwulan pertama saja sudah mencapai 1,6 miliar dollar AS.

http://cetak.kompas.com/read/xml/2008/08/11/00570150/batu.bara.membara

The Third Round Discussion of the Social Pact Discussion Group (Resume)

Acacia Hotel, 4 September 2007

Pengantar:

Seingat saya, acara diskusi ini diselenggarakan oleh Demos sebagai rangkaian untuk menyusun semacam Pakta Sosial. Diskusi dipimpin oleh Mas Stanley, anggota Komnas HAM. Ringkasan hasil diskusi di bawah ini saya temukan—tak sengaja—sewaktu melakukan pencarian dengan “Starware Search”. Karena praktis seluruh isinya merupakan paparan saya, mungkin ada baiknya untuk ditampilkan. Maklum, sangat sulit rasanya untuk menuliskan kembali pemikiran yang telah saya sampaikan itu.

***

The Social Pact Discussion Group, in the third round FGD, attempted to explore the fundamental condition of national economy both from business perspective and labour interest. The orientation of this discussion is the same with other previous discussions, e.g. creating understanding between the economy actors and decision makers, particularly The Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration and IX Commission of DPR to search for proportional joint solution for industrial relationship matters.

An economy expert, Faisal Basri acted as the key resource person during the discussion. Representing businessmen group, Gilbert Wiryadinata, Yusuf Santo (The General Secretary of Plastic Association) and Hasanuddin Rahman (Indonesia Businessmen Association) also attended the discussion. Felikson Silitonga (KOPBUMI), Lilis Mahmudah (SPN) and Timboel Siregar (OPSI) represented labour group, while some activists of non-political organizations such as Demos, LIPS and TURC also participated in the discussion. Unfortunately, there was no representatives of decision maker groups (such as The Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration and IX Commission of DPR) attending the discussion. Even since the first round discussion, this group has not yet sent their representatives. “It should be them who actively make efforts to create such a forum like this, and it is very unfortunate for them not to use this forum well,” said Faisal Basri before initiating the discussion.

According to Faisal, an intense debate has been occurring between free-market oriented economy with people oriented economy perspective. As the former was supported by big, systematic campaigns, it leads the score with, for example, its flexibility market concept. According to Faisal, if accepted, the concept will be the opposite of labours’ interests. The government seems to lose perspective; which is reflected through the poor socialization of 2025 vision. In addition, the state has failed to run its serving function.

Referring to the purpose of state as implied to the country’s basic constitution, the perspective has actually been clearly stated. In political matters we have to set our orientation to social democracy and in economical matters to social market economy. The most ultimate principles are no subordination by capitalists, social welfare not for individual interests, and means of productions must be handled to the people. Instead of production, social market economy suggests the existence of regulations, stabilization and social security in many aspects, including in the matter of manpower. The basic philosophy of the concept is that there will be no suffering people. The concept also gives birth to national social security system. Unfortunately, a lot of problems occurred, hampering its implementation. Therefore, the concept stays as a concept. The model has been applied in several Scandinavian countries, particularly in Norway, where a collective bargaining between businessmen and labours has occurred.

The experiences of various different countries cannot be easily adapted in Indonesia, because the country has different basic economy and manpower structure. In industrial countries such as Norway and Korea, manufacture labours have strong position, while in Indonesia, they only number 12% of the whole manpower. Around 42% of Indonesia’s labours work in agrarian sector, reflecting the fact that our economy structure has moved to industry while our manpower still work in agrarian and informal structures. Of the 12% manufacturer labours, 70 % work in informal sector, where no labour organizations are established. Among the whole number of labours who work in formal sector, only 2% being the members of labour organization. Therefore, in the context of establishing social pact in Indonesia, it will be better if labour groups attempt on multi-sector linkage and synergy with, for example, peasants to create inter-sector solidarity.

The businessmen also suffer from acute New Order disease. Most of Indonesian businessmen have broker characteristics rather than true businessman. They exist because of their collusion with those in power. The economical foundation thus becomes fragile, unhealthy and full of artificial protection so that our businessmen become uncompetitive, trapped in interest oriented economy. With cheap labours, great numbers of materials and government’s full protection, investors easily infiltrate Indonesia’s economy during the New Order era. The investors’ paradigm, however, now changes. They do not only consider variable costs (cheap material and labours), but also fixed cost.

Hence, it is difficult for Indonesia to compete with, for example, China. Why? Because most companies are not efficient in Indonesia as the fix cost is considerably high. In China, there is no toll fee; all high ways are free to pass, while harbours, airport and electricity generations are provided by the state. Indonesia shows almost different fact: poor infrastructure provision by the state. Even to request for electricity generator, businessmen who come to State Electricity Company (PLN) are charged three times of the normal price. Such situation triggers some companies, such as Sudamek Group, an enting-enting (a kind of traditional snack) producer, to move its company to China, because of the cheap fix cost in the country. The future competition will probably not be between companies with other companies but between one country with other to create lower fix cost. Then, what are the state’s functions today? Therefore, we have to define the role of the state first.

The state often creates troubles, as in the case of the increase of toll fee. Here, the New Order interest oriented economy is still applied by some interest groups. The system persists, the actors change (during the new Order were Soeharto’s cronies, now what we call as B-3 (Bosowa, Bukaka, Bakrie)). Worse, their economic interests are often camouflaged with politicizing dangerous ethnic sentiments (between native and non-native groups).

Labour movements are often taken by the political intrigues and fragmented by their political affinities. Some organizations are busy to rally in front of the President’s Palace, some in Senayan. Unfortunately, such division is not based on systematic role division, but because of friction that makes labour organization more fragmented and elitist. Therefore, labour movements must be more thoughtful, to avoid them being divided by politicians’, businessmen’s, and even labour elites’ political-economy interests. Critical attitudes, solid organizations and solid cooperation with other organizations from other sectors, are, thus very important. In addition, labour organizations also need to increase their ability to conduct productive negotiations, so that the organizations are not trapped in ceremonial agendas anymore.

Kompas, Sabtu, 2 Agustus 2008 | 01:05 WIB

Jakarta, Kompas - Pengelolaan dana bergulir harus diawasi secara ketat agar tidak diselewengkan untuk kegiatan kampanye politik. Oleh karena itu, Peraturan Menteri Keuangan Nomor 99/PMK.05/2008 tentang Pedoman Pengelolaan Dana Bergulir pada Kementerian Negara atau Lembaga harus benar-benar dilaksanakan.

Sesuai ketentuan Peraturan Menteri Keuangan (PMK) tersebut, kementerian dan lembaga nondepartemen yang mengelola dana bergulir wajib melaporkan realisasi penyalurannya kepada Menteri Keuangan paling lambat 31 Desember 2009. Jika tidak dilaporkan, dana itu harus dikembalikan ke kas negara.

Ekonom Faisal Basri, Jumat (1/8) di Jakarta, menegaskan, nomenklatur keuangan tersebut harus dipatuhi. ”Jangan sampai dana bergulir itu dipakai untuk kampanye politik,” ujarnya.

Menurut Faisal, sikap Menteri Negara Urusan Koperasi dan Usaha Kecil Menengah Suryadharma Ali yang mengirim surat kepada Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono—yang menyatakan beberapa program pemberdayaan UKM akan macet terkait ketentuan PMK—sangat mengecewakan.

Surat tersebut, kata Faisal, seolah-olah memaksakan agar dana bergulir senilai Rp 428 miliar tetap dicairkan. ”Presiden jangan takut dengan gertak-gertakan menteri,” ujarnya.

Faisal juga mengingatkan agar Menteri Keuangan bersikap tegas. ”Menteri Keuangan harus tegas untuk tidak ikut-ikutan permainan politik, kecuali Presiden nekat membuat keputusan presiden,” katanya.

Menteri Keuangan Sri Mulyani menegaskan, dana bergulir harus ditagih dan dikembalikan ke APBN. Berbeda dengan dana sosial, seperti hibah atau bantuan langsung tunai, yang tidak perlu ditagih.

Selain itu, dana bergulir harus dikelola badan layanan umum (BLU), bukan oleh deputi atau pembantu menteri lainnya. Namun, menurut Menkeu, ada deputi di kementerian negara yang ingin mengelola dana bergulir itu, padahal ada BLU.

”Saya menyarankan deputi itu ditempatkan sebagai ketua pengarah dalam BLU. Keputusannya cukup dengan surat Mennegkop. Kalau tidak diikuti, penyaluran dana bergulir akan menjadi bahan temuan BPK,” ujar Menkeu.

Menanggapi hal itu, seusai pembukaan semiloka Program Perempuan Keluarga Sehat Sejahtera (Perkassa), Suryadharma menyatakan, ”Kalau merujuk tahun sebelumnya, dana itu bisa digulirkan ke masyarakat, tidak perlu dikembalikan ke pemerintah. Namun, ada komitmen masyarakat untuk menggulirkan ke yang lain, tanpa campur tangan pemerintah.” (OSA/OIN)

http://cetak.kompas.com/read/xml/2008/08/02/0105337/waspadai.dana.bergulir.untuk.kampanye.politik