Industry divided on asset repatriation proposal
The government’s proposal to revive a legal protection scheme for repatriated laundered funds, with incentives to channel the money into priority sectors such as productive industries and renewable energy, has prompted mixed reactions from business leaders and policy experts.
Supporters argue the initiative could stimulate investment and job creation at a time when private-sector activity remains sluggish.
Critics, however, contend that the focus should be on preventing capital flight and ensuring accountability for illicit financial flows.
Mir Nasir Hossain, businessman and former president of the Federation of Bangladesh Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FBCCI), described the current economic climate as an “investment drought.”
He noted that private investment has stalled at around 22 percent of GDP, well below the desired level of nearly 28 percent.
He said allowing repatriated funds to be invested in productive sectors could support industrial expansion, investment growth, and employment generation.
In contrast, Dhaka Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DCCI) President Taskeen Ahmed urged the government to prioritise the prevention of money laundering over providing incentives to return overseas assets without adequate scrutiny.
“Once capital is moved abroad illegally, recovering it is extremely difficult, as past experiences have shown,” he said.
He also emphasised the need to create a more business-friendly domestic environment to discourage entrepreneurs from transferring funds overseas.
Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) Executive Director Iftekharuzzaman offered a more measured perspective.
He suggested that the scheme could be beneficial if the government’s objective is genuinely to recover siphoned-off wealth.
He pointed out that similar initiatives in other countries have been introduced because conventional legal channels for recovering illicit assets are often slow and complex.
However, he stressed that any repatriation mechanism must be accompanied by strict conditions, higher-than-normal tax rates, and a transparent process ensuring equal treatment for all applicants.
He also warned that individuals involved in criminal activity or illegal accumulation of wealth should not be allowed to exploit the facility, and any ongoing legal proceedings should continue irrespective of repatriation efforts.
