Tata Sons: RBI’s Endgame and a 53-year-old Exemption Whose Time May Be Up

Comments · 128

• RE

  @rebekkaninan5123 · 13 days ago

  As usual Ms Dalal gives a crisp and cogent account of a very knotty corporate problem. 😊 thanks and kudos

  34

• GS

  @gsnmaller875 · 11 days ago

  Your concluding remarks ate very pertinent. Why should Tatas alone be given special treatment.

  6

• DI

  @dineshkumarsnair7964 · 12 days ago

  Accurate observation about other Foundation s.. Tata Sons must come out of their holy pedestal and become just like the other entities..

  3

• CH

  @ChandrasekarRamanathan-se5ek · 11 days ago

  Maximum clarity

  1

• SU

  @Sunil_Deshmukh · 13 days ago

  Sucheta, one aspect of this whole episode troubles me deeply. The Tata Sons board may have decided to reappoint N. Chandrasekaran, but the underlying Tata Trusts governance issue remains unresolved.<br><br>The Charity Commissioner&apos;s concern regarding the 25% limit on perpetual trustees has apparently not been addressed, and SRTT&apos;s ability to function remains constrained. How, then, can the succession process—or decisions requiring the Trusts&apos; participation—move forward satisfactorily?<br><br>More importantly, accepting Chandra&apos;s decision to step down and then asking him to reconsider only after the RBI&apos;s listing decision creates an unfortunate impression of governance being driven by circumstances rather than by a settled succession process.<br><br>Whatever the merits of the listing debate or Chandra&apos;s continuation, the Tatas need to resolve these institutional differences transparently and quickly. The Tata legacy is bigger than any individual, and restoring confidence in the institution should now be the priority.<br><br>And one question still remains unanswered: what happens to the 25% trustee issue? If SRTT remains constrained by the Charity Commissioner&apos;s order, how can the Tata Trusts&apos; position on succession be properly formalised?<br><br>That seems to be the elephant still sitting in the room. The sooner this, along with the other governance differences, falls into place, the better—not just for the Tatas, but for the confidence people have in this great Indian institution.

  13

• AN

  @AnuragSingh-ge4el · 11 days ago

  Thanks a tonne, Ms Dalal! Excellent.

  1

• AV

  @avx4281 · 12 days ago

  Very well summarized. Fully agree with you.

• SA

  @sachint04 · 10 days ago

  Agreed on exemptions. &nbsp; But not on force listing! <br>Listing of a company should be &nbsp;upto board and board alone.

• KR

  @krishnanb107 · 13 days ago

  Why do we need trusts for csr<br>Csr can be done by a listed co

  2

• GE

  @gemindia · 12 days ago

  Thank you for enlightening us

  1

• IN

  @ininjad24 · 13 days ago

  Excellent research, very well written and presented 👍

  4

• AJ

  @AJITHTHOMAS-xp6cm · 11 days ago

  If the SP group has invested in Tata Trusts during their good times <br>It&apos;s only natural justice that they should be allowed to monetize their stake<br>Now that they have fallen into bad times <br>That would only be fair to them

  3