Dividends are greater than only a share of income—they replicate an organization’s dedication to shareholders and its strategy to governance. But, balancing investor payouts with reinvestment for development has at all times been a problem. This debate has gained recent relevance as India’s monetary markets endure a valuation correction amid sluggish financial development.
Whereas long-term optimism about India’s trajectory persists, dividend-seeking buyers are left questioning: Are firms actually creating long-term worth by retaining earnings, or are they merely masking inefficiencies with self-serving initiatives?
Learn this | Shareholders got record-high dividends in FY24. Will the trend continue?
Not like some world counterparts, India doesn’t mandate a hard and fast dividend payout ratio. Listed firms usually justify withholding dividends by citing development alternatives, however this raises considerations about company governance and the “company downside,” the place managers prioritize pursuits aside from shareholder returns.
In line with SAHA, an Istanbul-based company governance and credit standing company, India’s company governance repute is subpar—similar to international locations like Brazil, Chile, and China. Satirically, whereas these nations implement necessary or semi-mandatory dividend insurance policies, India’s extra versatile strategy has solely fuelled investor frustration.
On the 2024 annual basic assembly of Godfrey Phillips, shareholders questioned why promoter remuneration had doubled whereas dividend payouts shrank, highlighting considerations about firms hoarding money somewhat than distributing income.
To handle this, India’s markets watchdog, the Securities and Exchange Baord of India (Sebi) launched a regulation requiring the highest 500 companies to reveal the situations underneath which they might distribute or withhold dividends. Notably, Sebi didn’t mandate payouts however as an alternative prioritized transparency, aiming to reinforce the data out there to buyers. In concept, this disclosure-based strategy would assist shareholders higher assess an organization’s dividend technique and make knowledgeable selections.
Initially, the regulation was welcomed for bringing much-needed readability to an space the place firms beforehand had vital discretion. A research even discovered that inventory costs rose following the announcement, reflecting investor optimism about improved transparency. Nonetheless, as firms started publishing their insurance policies, enthusiasm waned. Most disclosures have been obscure and non-committal, providing little past authorized compliance. Consequently, inventory costs declined, underscoring a key takeaway: transparency, with out significant motion, is unlikely to satisfy investor expectations.
Learn this | Mint Explainer: Why RBI has proposed new rules on dividend payouts by banks
However that’s not all. Sebi’s try to enhance company governance had an sudden consequence—firms considerably elevated their dividend payouts following the regulation. This was counterintuitive, because the regulation aimed to reinforce transparency, not mandate greater payouts. In observe, as an alternative of offering significant disclosures, many companies merely raised dividends whereas holding buyers at nighttime.
Theorists recommend that company habits is usually formed by “regulatory threats,” which means firms could have perceived Sebi’s transfer as a precursor to stricter guidelines and adjusted accordingly. But, the prevalence of hole disclosures highlights persistent governance considerations.
In international locations the place a hard and fast share of income have to be distributed as dividends, the system is clear-cut—buyers know what to anticipate. This predictability is especially enticing in markets the place firms are inclined to hoard money or prioritize reinvestment over shareholder returns.
India’s dividend payout subject runs deep, and mere disclosure necessities can not resolve it. Firms can simply sidestep such guidelines with superficial compliance. Nonetheless, imposing a compulsory payout ratio isn’t an ideal answer both—it may hinder companies in capital-intensive sectors that must reinvest for development and innovation.
Additionally learn | Mint Explainer: Why Sebi halted trading in LS Industries, Pacheli Industrial Finance
India’s disclosure-based strategy was meant to strike a steadiness between investor expectations and company flexibility. As an alternative, it resulted in little greater than a box-ticking train, reinforcing shareholder considerations about potential fund misallocation.
Pratibha Kumari is assistant professor at TAPMI Bengaluru. Nishat Alam Choudhury is a postdoctoral researcher at Aalto College, Finland.
