Advice

Nominees Can Sell Shares. Why Not Real Estate?

Hemant learnt the hard way that not all nominated assets pass on with equal ease. His late father’s mutual fund units were transmitted in less than 48 hours. But when it came to the flat in a Mumbai housing society, the brothers were treated only as provisional members. They could not sell, transfer, or fully own it without a court order. That process took almost a year and cost over Rs 2 lakh. The law says a nominee holds assets for the legal heirs in both cases. Yet financial assets move quickly because nominees can redeem or sell them with ease. Property is different because a buyer needs clear title, and nomination alone does not provide that. Financial regulators have made transmission simple and time-bound. Real estate law has not kept pace. Until that changes, many families may find that inherited property brings not comfort, but complication.

Nominees Can Sell Shares. Why Not Real Estate? Read More »

Sometimes, steps to protect investors can hurt them

Devi wanted a lock-in to protect her savings from daily needs—something I had initially dismissed as a drawback.
But she was right: discipline often matters more than flexibility, especially for long-term goals.
Low-income households, as research shows, actively create barriers to prevent premature spending.
Even wealthier investors face the same struggle of staying committed to long-term plans.
Financial products like insurance tried to enforce this discipline, but often at high costs and poor returns.
Solution-oriented mutual funds offered a better balance—goal focus, reasonable lock-ins, and market-linked returns.
Regulatory attempts to remove such options risk pushing investors toward inferior alternatives.
In the end, good financial outcomes depend not on fewer choices, but on clearer products and better guidance.

Sometimes, steps to protect investors can hurt them Read More »

When markets fall: Should investors worry or invest more?

Markets often fall for different reasons — wars, financial crises, or pandemics — but the question investors ask remains the same: Should we worry or see it as a buying opportunity? The recent decline of about 12% from the January 2026 peak has raised similar concerns among investors.

History suggests such declines are normal. Since 1980, markets have risen in 38 of the 46 calendar years, yet they have experienced 10% or more corrections in 41 of those years. In fact, the average intra-year fall has been around 20%, even in years when markets ultimately ended higher. Despite these frequent declines, equities have delivered about 15% annual returns over the long term, roughly doubling investments every five years.

Periods of sharp market falls often create discomfort for investors, causing them to forget the long-term perspective. However, staying invested during such declines is precisely what creates long-term wealth. Historically, markets have delivered their strongest returns after major corrections.

While some investors attempt to exit during crises and re-enter later, this strategy rarely works well. Markets often recover before confidence returns, and missing just a few of the best recovery days can significantly reduce long-term returns.

Truth be told, the sensible approach is simple: decide your equity allocation based on a sound financial plan and stick to it, even when markets feel uncomfortable. Over time, discipline and patience do the heavy lifting

When markets fall: Should investors worry or invest more? Read More »

Being well informed is not enough, seek opposing views

Girish, a seasoned CFO who closely tracks global markets, was convinced that “all pundits were bullish” on silver. He had read extensively before forming his view. Yet my own reading revealed a far more divided expert opinion — some optimistic, many cautious.

The gap wasn’t about silver’s prospects. It was about perception.

Girish had unknowingly fallen into confirmation bias — the tendency to seek information that supports existing beliefs while overlooking contradictory evidence. He wasn’t trying to be selective. Like most investors, he was looking for reassurance, not contradiction.

This bias has deep evolutionary roots. Early humans benefited from acting quickly on established beliefs rather than endlessly questioning them. But in investing, that same instinct can be costly. Markets reward discipline, not conviction driven by selective information.

Today’s algorithms amplify the problem, feeding us content that aligns with what we already agree with, gradually narrowing our perspective.

Confirmation bias cannot be eliminated, but it can be managed. Awareness creates a pause — and that pause allows investors to test their views against opposing arguments before acting.

Sometimes the greatest value an advisor provides is not prediction, but perspective — helping investors slow down, challenge assumptions, and make deliberate decisions rather than instinctive ones.

Being well informed is not enough, seek opposing views Read More »

The SGB Issue: Why Tax Certainty Matters

Imagine a Test match where the host prepares two pitches — a green top for fast bowlers and a dry track for spinners. Before the match, it announces that the green top will be used, and the visiting team selects its players accordingly. After the toss, the host switches to the dry track — the one prepared for itself. In cricket, this would be called unfair play. In taxation, it is called a retrospective change. That is what the Budget 2026 proposal does by removing the capital gains exemption on Sovereign Gold Bonds (SGB) already bought.

The SGB Issue: Why Tax Certainty Matters Read More »

Bolster dispute platform, skip ombudsman creation

Smart ODR has worked well, resolving about 75% of the disputes referred to it within three months. It has enabled disputes to be resolved far faster than courts and without requiring SEBI to decide individual cases. What it lacks, however, is institutional memory. Because arbitration orders are not published, each dispute starts from scratch, and the same questions keep recurring—making arbitration efficient in the moment, but wasteful in the long run.

Bolster dispute platform, skip ombudsman creation Read More »

Cryptos Risks are Structural, its Returns are not

Ganesh’s winning bet in the 1983 World Cup final was worthless because it was unenforceable. Crypto carries a similar risk. Even when prices move in your favour, weak regulation, custody failures, fraud, and legal irreversibility can wipe out gains entirely. As crypto returns compress toward levels seen in traditional assets, its risks remain open-ended. Without enforceability or recourse, a “winning” investment can still end in total loss—making crypto suitable, at best, only for speculative “mad money,” not for serious financial goals.

Cryptos Risks are Structural, its Returns are not Read More »

Your credit is easier to steal than your money

Your credit is easier to steal than your money.
With just a phone number and an OTP, fraudsters can trick lenders into approving loans in your name — without your knowledge. Weak consent systems, no instant alerts, and rushed digital lending have made identity theft alarmingly easy. It’s time India strengthens its safeguards with verified consent, real-time alerts, and stricter ID checks to truly protect borrowers.

Your credit is easier to steal than your money Read More »

Loan rates should mirror unfinished homes higher risk

Rajesh and Seema’s ordeal with a stalled housing project shows how India’s home loan system masks the biggest risk in real estate — that under-construction projects may never be completed. Banks and buyers treat them like ready homes, offering or taking loans at the same rates despite far higher uncertainty. With weak enforcement of RERA safeguards, homebuyers are left exposed. Differential interest rates — lower for completed homes, higher for under-construction ones — would make risks visible, protect buyers, and push the housing finance system toward fairness.

Loan rates should mirror unfinished homes higher risk Read More »

Notify draft rules making dealer liable for sold vehicle

Have you ever sold a car and signed a blank transfer form — did you know it could stay in your name for months and even end up as a terror tool, just like in the Parliament attack of 2001?
RCs often remain in the seller’s name while vehicles pass through multiple hands. If that car is in an accident, you may still be liable. Worse, it can be misused in crime — even terrorism — while the records still show you as the owner.
Other countries have solved this problem with simple processes. India’s draft rules of 2022 offered a clear solution: dealer authorisation, digital delivery intimation, and deemed ownership during possession. Yet three years later, these reforms remain unnotified.

Notify draft rules making dealer liable for sold vehicle Read More »

Scroll to Top
Secret Link

Vigilance Awareness Week 2025 (VAW2025)

Vigilance Awareness Week 2025 is being observed from October 27th to November 2nd, 2025, with the theme:

सतर्कता: हमारी साझा जिम्मेदारी (“Vigilance: Our Shared Responsibility”).

All stakeholders are encouraged to participate in the e-pledge initiative by visiting the CVC portal: https://pledge.cvc.nic.in/.