atans1

Posts Tagged ‘GST’

How PAP can win 65% plus of the vote

In Political governance on 15/01/2019 at 2:06 pm

Further to Why PAP aiming for 65% of the popular vote ,if the PAP really really wants to get more 65% or more of the popular vote, it should find an excuse to kick the promised 2 points increase in GST into the long grass. It should say “Thanks to PM’s wife and her team in Temasek, and the team in GIC, we got lots of money. So no need to increase GST until after 2025.

After all over the last 10 years, Singapore’s net investment returns (NIR) contribution (NIRC) to the Budget has more than doubled from S$7 billion in FY2009 to an estimated S$15.9 billion in FY2018.

NIRC consists of 50 per cent of the Net Investment Returns (NIR) on the net assets invested by GIC, the Monetary Authority of Singapore and Temasek Holdings and 50 per cent of the Net Investment Income (NII) derived from past reserves from the remaining assets.

In other words, we spend 50 per cent of the estimated gains from investment, and put the remaining 50 per cent back into the reserves to preserve its growth for future use.

Associate Professor Randolph Tan is Director of the Centre for Applied Research at the Singapore University of Social Services, and a Nominated Member of Parliament.

Under PAP rule will S’pore become like UK or Venezuela?

Making this announcement has the added advantage that after making it, it can close TOC down, persecute prosecute more people for criminal defamation or illegal assembly, and 50-60% ofS’poreans won’t get worked up about these “repressive” acts. They’ll think it’s a fair trade.

Advertisements

HoHoHo: Ho’s rogue bank woes (Cont’d)

In Banks, Emerging markets, Temasek on 14/01/2019 at 10:00 am

GST sure to go up leh. Jialat for PAP govt and us.

Ex-Standard Chartered banker prepares to plead guilty in Iran case
Emerging markets lender under investigation for alleged sanctions breaches

FT headline

Goes on

Although no formal charges have been brought, an internal Standard Chartered investigation found at least one of the bankers under scrutiny was receiving secret kickback payments, one of the people said.

If the ex-employee does plead guilty, it would be one of the few instances of an individual banker being successfully prosecuted in the US over sanctions abuses.

Depending on what the former employee says in any plea deal, an admission of guilt could put Standard Chartered in a weaker position in its negotiations with regulators and enforcement officials, who are seeking to impose fines of as much as $1.5bn on the bank, the people said.

So why GST sure to go up?

The potential fine could complicate the bank’s plan to return capital to investors for the first time in a generation, details of which the bank would like announce alongside its strategy update and full-year results at the end of February, according to people briefed on the proposal.

Ho Ho Ho.

Fyi, over the last 10 years, Singapore’s net investment returns (NIR) contribution (NIRC) to the Budget has more than doubled from S$7 billion in FY2009 to an estimated S$15.9 billion in FY2018.

NIRC consists of 50 per cent of the Net Investment Returns (NIR) on the net assets invested by GIC, the Monetary Authority of Singapore and Temasek Holdings and 50 per cent of the Net Investment Income (NII) derived from past reserves from the remaining assets.

In other words, we spend 50 per cent of the estimated gains from investment, and put the remaining 50 per cent back into the reserves to preserve its growth for future use.

Associate Professor Randolph Tan is Director of the Centre for Applied Research at the Singapore University of Social Services, and a Nominated Member of Parliament.

Under PAP rule will S’pore become like UK or Venezuela?

——————————————————————————-

Cont’d: Why anti-PAP types now really quiet about M’sian switch from GST to SST

In Malaysia on 03/11/2018 at 10:20 am

An update to Why anti-PAP types now really quiet about M’sian switch from GST to SST.

Yesterday,

Malaysia’s new government will cut public spending sharply despite foreseeing the economy growing more slowly than had been expected earlier

No money leh. Those anti-PAP types that want to abolish GST (think rational people like P[olitician] Ravi prepared for reduced govt expenditures? Need I say more?

Yes I can

Malaysia’s deficit target is set to expand this year to 3.7 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) from a 2.8 per cent target under the previous Barisan Nasional government. The median estimate in a Bloomberg survey of nine economists was 3.2 per cent.

The shortfall is set to ease to 3.4 per cent next year.

Sounds like GST is needed in KL especially as

To fund the gap, the government will more than double the amount of dividends it expects to receive next year from state oil company Petroliam Nasional Bhd to RM54 billion.

This assumes oil price will not tank. Remember M’sia introduced GST because oil prices fell to US$30.

 

Why anti-PAP types now really quiet about M’sian switch from GST to SST

In Malaysia on 01/11/2018 at 3:43 pm

When PH won GE and it was annced that GST would be scrapped in favour of Sales Tax, the local anti-PAP types cheered saying that taz the way to beat rises in the cost of living and inflation: bring down prices. I think even P Ravi joined in.

Since then, the silence has been deafening given

Malaysian parliament question time risked breaking out into mayhem on Monday (Oct 15), after finance minister Lim Guan Eng declared he never promised that the Sales and Services Tax (SST) would bring prices down.

https://www.todayonline.com/world/i-never-said-new-sales-tax-would-bring-prices-down-argues-lim-guan-eng

Don’t our anti-PAP types say in TOC, TRE and other alt-media sites KPKB that without GST, prices would be lower?

Tomorrow is Budget day in KL and

Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng’s maiden budget is expected to contain new taxes and spending cuts, and he has warned Malaysians that they should be prepared to make sacrifices.

The new government has to cover a revenue shortfall arising from its decision to scrap the goods and services tax (GST) and reintroduce fuel subsidies —  both done to fulfill election campaign promises.

https://www.todayonline.com/world/malaysia-prepares-austerity-budget-amid-strains-fiscal-deficit-0

Sacrifices? What sacrifices? Anti-PAP types told us that jux abolish GST and everything will be fine.

Any wonder why they so quiet on GST?

 

HoHoHo: Why oil price rises are not gd for PAP

In Economy, Emerging markets, Energy, Political economy, Political governance, Public Administration on 15/10/2018 at 11:19 am

Phew that was a quick sharp retracement after a very sharp spik: Tua kee traders take opposing views on price of oil. The PAP govt must be relieved oil is now trading around US$82 (minutes ago) than above US$86 (middle of last week).

A US$ oil price of closer to US$100 will not only make Tun M (M’sia exports oil) more willingly to cut off our water supply but will pose problems for an early GE in late 2019 esp with the promised rise in GST(See below for GST related posts) after GE: Akan datang: GE in late 2019

According to Citi’s Johanna Chua, Asian countries suffer the most when oil prices rise because, aside from Malaysia, most are net oil importers. Singapore runs a sizable 6.5% oil and gas deficit, followed closely by Pakistan, Thailand, Sri Lanka and Taiwan. Indonesia and Vietnam manage slightly smaller deficits of roughly 1%.

So many of these economies see the largest inflation swings when oil prices rise. Chua’s chart ranking the sensitivity regionally over the past six years. See where we stand.

S'pore oilThe ** explained that the spike in inflation here is caused by some one-off stats adjustment of data base. So not really comparable to other countries. But try telling that to cybernuts like Oxygen or Phillip Ang.

But rational readers should get the message. Voters really get hurt by oil price rises. And the promised GST price increase is not going to impress the 10 points of voters that voted for the PAP in last GE, bring the total votes for the PAP to 70%: a great result for the PM and the PAP after the failure of only 60% in 2011.


GST-related posts

GST rise: Anti-PAP activists should take note

How to ensure no GST rise

Countering PAP’s BS that taxes must go up

 

GST rise: Anti-PAP activists should take note

In Political governance on 09/05/2018 at 4:35 am

“Najib, he’s good,” said Matakahr bin-Ali, a 78-year-old rubber farmer. “Yes he put in the GST, but then he gives back to us.”

Mad Dog, Lim Tean (Got time to register another Oppo party but no time to deliver on promises after raising money from public for video and rally:Where’s yr defamation video and jobs rally Lim Tean?, Meng Seng, Tan Kin Lian, Tan Jee Say, Uncle Leong etc will KPKB at next GE campaign about coming GE rise.

But PAP will say, “Got even more and bigger rebates leh: trust us.”

Who you think majority of voters will trust? PAP, or Mad Dog, “Can’t keep promise” Lim Tean, “Fake data” Leong or the diabolical trio that helped PAP thwart voters who wanted Tan Cheng Bock as president?

Even I who have never voted PAP in my life, think I’d trust PAP more than I trust Mad Dog, “Can’t keep promise” Lim Tean, “Fake data” Leong or the diabolical trio.

With enemies like these, does the PAP need friends? What do you think?

My serious point is that these guys should sit down and shut up. They should allow people like Dr Paul, Pritam, Auntie, Show Mao (If he can remove his balls from his mouth), Chris K, and the young professionals in the SDP and WP to lead the battle in denouncing and rebutting the need for the GST rises.

Let others succeed where they failed.

A new generation should fight the PAP’s mixture of young and old leaders. They can at least seriously dent the PAP’s hegemony: but only if the Old Guard step aside.

 

TRE poster asks “Why save when struggling?”/ Corporate raiders and change

In Corporate governance, Economy, Financial competency on 21/04/2018 at 10:57 am

When TRE used PAP is losing the war to keep S’poreans in ignorance there was this comment

SUNNY:

in fact every generation can barely only support it self.
actually we are now the future generation ,what benefits are we enjoying??
may be the leaders should have their 90% salary/bonus cut for future 20 years generation,so we can witness before we die.
why save when it is raining heavily today.we won’t be around tomorrow.
who knows if the world will end tomorrow.

Here’s another thing to think about

What is the point of having a very good balance-sheet if the S’pore economy is underperforming its full potential?

In the 50s, 60s and 70s, US CEOs boasted of their companies strong balance sheets while spentdingcorporate funds on private jets, hunting lodges for themselves, co directors and senior executives, and their cronies. Shareholders got “peanuts” but wewre grateful. Then came the corporate raiders with the doctrine of “shareholder value”. CEOs  etc are still well renumerated but they have to keep the shareholders happy.

Recognise what should happen here next?

Too bad we got the likes of the Wankers’ Party, Mad Dog, Uncle Leong, Phillip Ang, Goh Meng Seng, s/o JBJ, TKL, Martyn See, Seelan Palay,Kirsten Han, M Ravi and TJS. They are the faces that the swing voters (those who voted for Dr Tan Cheng Bock) usually associate with change.

We need more people like Dr Paul, Terry Xu, Sonny Liew, Chris K, Tay Kheng Soon, Yeoh Lam Keong, Cherian George, Donald Low, Alex Au, Mohamed Imran Mohamed Taib, Tan Tarn How and Remy Choo.

 

How to ensure no GST rise

In Political governance on 16/03/2018 at 11:20 am
This suggested tight slap to PAP sure to work. Sad that it wouldn’t be administered.
A TRE reader who is no cybernut wrote that losing five GRCs will make a GST rise unlikely. But that it wouldn’t happen because S’poreans don’t want Oppo running their wards. He’s right on both counts. And based on WP’s leaders behaviour in Aljunied (Now the subject of a legal suit by the town council against Low, Auntie and her bayee for breach of fiduciary duties) who can blame the voters?
Btw, based on sentiment in Aljunied, the WP is likely to lose big time in next GE. If Indian PAPpy can beat Chinese speaking scholar Show Mao in his ward in last GE, anything is possible in next GE.
opposition dude:

Always remember, this is a numbers game. He who has the most seats in parliament will govern Singapore it’s as simple as that. Right now PAP has over 80 seats and 1 to 3 more will be created in the next GE for sure. You want to make PAP lose more than 40 seats in the next GE is unthinkable for both the 70%/30%. All we can do is to make PAP lose more than what they have planned for, only then will a crystal clear signal be sent to the party that we are all frustrated with them over the immigration policy and the high cost of living in SIngapore.

If they lose 5 GRCs in the next GE then we will have sent in 25 or so opposition MPs into parliament. But the same stupid problem of voters not wanting an opposition party to run their ward lingers on. Together with the annual 20k new citizens being granted citizenship this will be quite the challenge.

GST: Even economists tot GST could go up

In Economy, Political governance, Public Administration on 11/03/2018 at 10:44 am

I quoted a senior lawyer

If the G thinks the earlier remarks were clear and categorical, so that citizens could have no doubts, how does it explain why so many reputable economists were willing to entertain thoughts of an increase this decade?

PAP voter cheers on Auntie, says Fu talking cock 

A pal of mine posted on the FB post where this quote originally appeared

The economists even factored in an increase in their analysis of GDP growth. Btw, I’m one who tot that GST would not go up this yr because it would contradict what Tharman said in 2015 and because it would make no sense effectively “locking up” the increase for 2018- 2020 because there’ll be a new govt by 2021.

The retired GIC Chief Economist waded in

…my respected economist friends were similarly unsure if GST would be raised this time after attending pre budget MOF briefings, even with Minister Heng.

Here’s what the constructive, nation-building rag of MediaCorp had to say about the economists changing their forecasts after the Budget speech

The Budget’s one-off cash handouts and delay in the goods and services tax (GST) hike, which will kick in sometime between 2021 and 2025, prompted Credit Suisse to raise its 2018 economic growth forecast for Singapore from 3 per cent to 3.3 per cent.

Taken together, these would boost growth domestic product (GDP) as well as private consumption, the bank said in a research note, as it raised its private consumption growth forecast to 3.6 per cent, up from 2.9 per cent.

Credit Suisse economist Michael Wan said the bank had previously factored in a 2-percentage point GST hike for its macro forecasts. “We, together with most other economists, were forecasting GST rates to rise this year,” wrote

Mr Wan, who described Monday’s announcement on the delayed GST increase as among the “surprises” of Budget 2018.

Other economists who had expected a GST hike to be implemented either this year or next agreed that the delay would bring a “minor boost” to consumption spending. Nevertheless, they left their GDP forecasts unchanged.

Commenting on the Credit Suisse report, Mr Bernard Aw, principal economist at IHS Markit, said consumers are expected to bring forward “large purchases” ahead of the GST hike.

UOB economist Francis Tan said he is keeping to his earlier forecast of 2.8 per cent GDP growth this year, which was based on a 1 percentage point GST hike this year. Nevertheless, he acknowledged that the delay of the GST hike “provides some upside”. He added: “Whenever there is a higher tax, people reduce their purchases.”

Maybank Kim Eng economist Chua Hak Bin is also maintaining his 2018 GDP forecast at 2.8 per cent, as he had expected the GST hike to be implemented next year. Private consumption is expected to improve from last year but it is unlikely to exceed 3 per cent this year, he said. “The jobs market looks to be improving and that will support consumer spending,” he added.

Both Mr Tan and Mr Chua, however, did not think that the impact of the hongbao handouts would be significant enough to lift GDP growth. Some Singaporeans may choose to save the money instead of spending it, Mr Tan noted. “In that aspect, these are not material handouts,” he said.

The reason I quoted so extensively is to show that “after attending pre budget MOF briefings, even with Minister Heng” the economists felt it necessary to factor in a GST rise in their forecasts.

 

PAP voter cheers on Auntie, says Fu talking cock

In Political governance, Uncategorized on 10/03/2018 at 11:28 am

Here’s two FB posts by a senior lawyer who admitted that he voted for the PAP in past elections

I think that Minister Grace Fu should drop the threat to refer to the Committee of Privileges.

Such a display of arrogance and high-handedness doesn’t impress me, and should not impress Singaporeans.

The facts are this, simply.

The G has said since 2013 that revenues must be raised. I was long aware of PM’s comments at the time. So we know that taxes are going up at some time in the future, but not when.

I was also aware of DPM’s 2015 remarks that the G had enough revenue for the decade. This implied that GST might not need to be raised this decade but it was not a clear, direct and explicit promise not too. Neither was PM’s remarks at the 2017 PAP Convention a categorical promise or confirmation.

The was much discussion in 2017 about an impeding announcement of a GST increase, promoted at least in part by PM’s and Minister Heng’s remarks.

Many economists speculated about the timing of the GST increase. Many of them thought it would be this decade, notwithstanding the G’s earlier comments.

For myself, I was not sure what the G would announce in Budget 2018. I expected an announcement of GST to be raised, but I had no confidence whether it would be after or before 2021.

Does this mean that I thought the G dishonest in its earlier comments?

No, not at all, because while earlier statements were made about having sufficient revenue for the decade, these statements did not amount to a clear promise not to raise the GST in this term of government.

If the G thinks the earlier remarks were clear and categorical, so that citizens could have no doubts, how does it explain why so many reputable economists were willing to entertain thoughts of an increase this decade?

And later

Having read all the transcripts, Minister Fu’s ability to understand the debate seemed dodgy at best. As Bertha has written elsewhere, she seemed out of her depth and one has to say that this impression is not without basis.

For example, she deplored the fact that Sylvia Lim “continued with this accusation” after the G’s explanations but what does the Honourable Minister mean by that? Sylvia said clearly that she can accept, in light of the G’s response as to its intentions, that her suspicions may be wrong, but she simply does not accept that there was no basis for suspicion when originally made.

I rather struggle to see how this position could reasonably found a complaint to the Committee of Privileges except for a hyper-sensitive government – and that should NOT be encouraged.

Minister Fu also failed to give any coherent explanation of how – if the G’s contention that their intentions not to raise taxes this decade has been made clear in numerous statements pre-budget 2018 – that numerous respected economists could have entered and speculated about exactly that possibility.

Her answer was this : “But having said so, after she has brought the matter here, we have laid down the facts to her. And yet she continued to insist on the allegation. This is the difference between what we say in this chamber and what economists, analysts say outside this chamber.”

This answer of course says nothing about whether Minister Fu would claim that the G had previously made its position so clear that entertaining the possibility of an increase this decade was an unreasonable idea. And probably Minister Fu would, with respect, struggle to make a convincing claim here.

Instead, Minister Fu focuses her complaint simply on Sylvia’s (alleged) continued maintenance of her claim despite the G’s response.

But what does this (alleged) continued maintenance consist of?

Sylvia made plain that in light of the G’s insistance on its position, her suspicion might be wrong as a matter of fact (although the true facts are only known to Cabinet).

But she maintains that, when made, the suspicion was not without basis and essentially Minister Fu had no coherent explanation for why that was the case. She simply is unhappy that Sylvia did not withdraw the original allegation or apologise.

But why should Sylvia, unless the G could demonstrate that there was no basis for suspicion when the claim was first made – and here Minister Fu has no explanation (see above). For example, she did not respond to the question of whether all the economists who speculated on a budget increase this decade after after DPM’s 2015 statement and PM’s PAP Convention speech were thinking in an unreasonable way.

So to threaten to refer to the Committee of Privileges in these circumstances simply reflects poorly on Minister Fu, with the greatest of respect.

 

 

Welfarism the PAP way/ The last word on GST

In Economy, Financial competency on 08/03/2018 at 9:54 am

Here corporates get welfare, not the people: and its foreign corporates that get the best goodies. PAP is not against welfarism so long as the beneficiaries are corporates, especially if they are foreign-owned. Ang moh tua kee kind of fascist movement?

Don’t believe me?

Well a friend, a respected economist, wrote

In Singapore’s case, there are other reasons to avoid the GST: In the context of an economy where there is an extraordinarily high profit share of GDP, is it appropriate that households bear a higher proportion of taxation than corporates? Our very rough estimate is that the direct taxes plus indirect taxes plus various levies paid by the household sector amount to about 11% of GDP, whereas the equivalent for the corporate sector is around 6%.

And

Given that foreign shareholders earn roughly half of the profits accruing to the corporate sector, the burden on Singapore households seems already to be unevenly high. This being the case, it does not seem appropriate to increase the burden on the household sector even more by increasing the GST rate.

Writer is Manu Bhaskaran. He was Tharman’s cell mate when they were convicted of breaching the Official Secrets Act. OK, OK, they were only fined. Btw, that incident showed that S’pore is a place of laws. Manu talked to his old boss in Mindef (Manu’s a scholar), BG Yeo, but BG Yeo couldn’t help. But maybe BG Yeo was ball-less or powerless, or both?

Sorry back to the article. Do read https://www.theedgesingapore.com/singapore-funding-its-rising-social-spending-right-way. Lots of other good stuff that show the fallacies of Hard Truths on Reserves, GST and govt spending.

Examples

And this brings us to the nub of the issue: What is the optimal savings rate for a country like Singapore? Savings is not an end in itself; it is the welfare of the citizens that is the end. Simply accumulating savings continuously is not the right thing to do — the right approach is to look holistically at all the determinants of welfare and then decide an optimal savings rate.

And

The thrust of the discussion above essentially leans to a view that Singapore is probably already saving enough and may even have exceeded the optimal savings rate. In that context, the better approach to funding rising social spending is to use more of the income from investments and to not raise taxes, be it the GST or some other tax.”

 

PAP is losing the war to keep S’poreans in ignorance

In Economy, Financial competency, Media on 02/03/2018 at 11:01 am

Be of good cheer, those of us who want the PAP lose its hegemony (Cybernuts excluded because like TRE’s Oxygen, they think a crushing defeat of the PAP is just another GE away: they’ve been thinking that since before Cyberspace came into existence), the PAP is losing the war on keeping S’poreans financially illiterate with comments like:

GST hike ‘the responsible way’ to fund areas of collective need: Heng Swee Keat

(Today)

Preserving reserves signals to markets strength of Singapore dollar: Chan Chun Sing

(ST)

Let me explain.

When two natural PAP supporters make the comments I report below, it’s clear that the retired chief economist of GIC (Known as LKY on FB), Donald Low, Chris K and others (including little old me) have not wasted our time raving and ranting that

— S’pore has too much reserves and that they can and must be used to make life better for S’poreans.

— And that tax rises show that the PAP administration are reckless prudent, or at least are mindlessly prudent.

FB post by a retired SAF officer, now active in mental welfare causes. He was one of the first Black Knights.

Maybe what the Government needs to do is to show to the citizens various scenarios (given some assumptions) about how to cater for the future financially. Period 2021-2025…, Scenario1…use of GST hike and 50% of Investment returns to manage the budget; Scenario 2…use of all reserves to do the same. Then show Sporeans what is left at end 2025, and how the projected financial state will affect Spore’s future financial health.

And this FB post by a lawyer who has said he voted for the PAP

The G says that Singapore’s reserves must be kept secret as a defence against speculative attack.

Whether true or false, there is an obvious price to pay in that if there is no public information about Singapore’s reserves, intelligent debate about Singapore’s fiscal policy becomes well nigh impossible.

The debate in Parliament currently appears to be rather sterile in the absence of meaningful facts and figures.

I am not in favour of the G’s current approach to the (non)transparency of Singapore’s reserves, which to me is not justified and makes no sense, on balance. We are better off having the knowledge to chart our national destiny.

People like Dr Tay Kheng Soon should take heart that the 70%ers can change their mind. He has often mused that educating S’poreans to realise that the PAP articulated alternative is not the only “right” way is a thankless, long and tedious task.

Whatever, remember that half of the 70% voted for Dr Tan Cheng Bock as president. He only lost because of Tan Kin Lian and Goh Meng Seng decision to fix S’poreans. As a TRE reader put it

Sabo King help Tony Tan by persuading Tan Kin Lian to steal 4.91% votes which is enough to prevent Tony Tan from winning.
Sabo King sabo TKL and made him lost his deposit.

 

 

HoHoHo: More money for Budget

In Banks, China, Emerging markets, Hong Kong, Temasek on 28/02/2018 at 5:50 am

Soon, Temasek will be contributing a bit more to the Budget.

“StanChart restarts dividends as profit returns” is the FT’s headline on the turnaround in StanChart. It stopped paying dividends several years ago.
And there’s still plenty of room for it to improve
[D]espite stellar economic growth in Asia, which accounts for over two-thirds of underlying pre-tax profit, the group is still destroying economic value. Return on equity, at 1.7 percent or 3.5 percent excluding exceptional items, is still far below the group’s cost of equity, which is probably more like 10 percent. Costs are rising, even as the group clamps down on loan losses.

After years of retrenchment, Winters needs turbocharged revenue growth and restraint on costs to hit his modest medium-term target for an ROE of 8 percent. Suppose operating costs grow just 2 percent annually, with flat loan losses and restructuring charges and taxes at 30 percent. StanChart would need 7 percent annual revenue growth to fulfil its aim by 2020, according to a Breakingviews calculation. That is more than double last year’s rate and at the top of the bank’s projected 5 to 7 percent range.

https://www.breakingviews.com/considered-view/stanchart-shareholders-pay-winters-a-compliment/

If things work out at StanChart (and elsewhere), maybe GST increase can be delayed? Dream on, pigs will fly first.

Update at 7.30am Chris K responded:

News like this does not impact the NIR Temasek delivers the budget becos the contribution is based on expected real returns over the long run.

I responded:

So long as no transparency shows how flakely is NIR. It’s want the PAP administration says it is.

What about benefits comparison table too?

In Economy, Media on 20/02/2018 at 7:31 am

When I saw this bit of propoganda for the GST increase, I couldn’t help but think:

They should also put the benefits alongside the comparison of the GST rates.

Whatever, I note that HK does not impose GST.

4000% increase if estate duty replaces GST increase

In Economy on 31/01/2018 at 12:47 pm

There’s a lot to talk in cyberspace of reintroducing estate duty in place of a GST rise.

But none of the people proposing the reintroduction of estate duty seems to have gone thru the numbers.

We had estate duty and it brought in

an estimated S$75 million a year — the average annual amount collected before it was scrapped.

Compare that $75m to the rumoured GST rise expected to bring in $3 billion to $3.6 billion a year.

Experts have said they expect the GST to be raised by 2 percentage points to 9 per cent — translating to additional tax revenue of between S$3 billion to S$3.6 billion a year.

http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/where-spores-additional-tax-revenue-could-come-experts

So do the people who propose the return of estate duty really expect estate duty to be raised from its previous level so that it can replace the GST increase? From $75m to $3bn means a humongous increase: 4000%.

Did they do their sums? Did they analyse where $3bn a year in estate duty can come from? Is it targeted only at the super rich or is it across the board? And, if the latter, will S’poreans want such a high estate duty tax? And if targeted at the super rich, have the proposers taken into account the lumpiness of the tax. When there was such a tax, one year there was a big jump because Khoo Teck Puat died.

Or as usual, are the proposers: juz talking cock and singing song? They only want to show S’poreans that cybernuts don’t do their homework before opening their asses to fart?

There could be a case to revive estate duty as a means of redistributing income, but that is a different story from reviving it and increasing it by 4000% from the previous level to avoid an increase in the GST rate.

 

 

Uncharacteristic of Low/ Low rattled?

In Accounting, Malaysia on 06/09/2015 at 5:26 am

To be fair, Low said

“In Singapore, if we had committed any criminal offence, we would already been thrown in jail!

“If there were any corruption, would they still leave you alone?”

Seriously, I always tot that a lot of the ministers’ attacks on AHPTEC’s accounts and affairs were over the top and were actually damaging the PAP rather than WP: own goals.

But perhaps the PAP were trying to goad the WP into remarks like what Low did above. I personally find Low’s comments offensive because I know that if proper records were not kept*, it’s impossible to find out if crimes were committed. Low’s “But the most important is after the inspection of the accounts, they found no criminal offence,” is absurd. There may be none. But the only way to find out is to reconstruct the accounts using forensic analysis.

Here two comments by the Pet Minister are relevant: “Another observation the High Court made was that if this kind of conduct had taken place in a public company, it probably would attract criminal sanctions,” the Pet Minister said.

And, “The High Court said Ms Lim misled Parliament, was dishonest. She has not responded to that.”

Only a PAP victory in Aljunied will reveal if the WP leaders can be charged in court.

Low used to be known to use silence or non-action as a weapon effectively. Not anymore?

Take his comments on GST

I’m suggesting that we have enough representation in Parliament,” Mr Low said. “So that after the elections, they have to think twice if they want to do anything, including the GST hike.”

“From past experience, it shows that the PAP is always capable of doing something, revising policies which will affect the lives of people after the general election,” Mr Low said on Saturday.

 He forgot this?

The Ministry of Finance (MOF) says there is “no basis” to claims made by some online websites that the Government will raise the Goods and Services Tax (GST) after the upcoming General Election (GE).

In a post on the gov.sg website on Thursday (Aug 6), the MOF said that online chatter, which claimed that GST would be increased to 10 per cent, were “inconsistent with what the Government has recently stated”.

“In the 2015 Budget Statement in February, DPM Tharman Shanmugaratnam stated that the revenue measures the Government had already undertaken will provide sufficiently for the increased spending planned for the rest of this decade,” the MOF noted.

Among the measures is the inclusion of Temasek Holdings in the Government’s Net Investment Returns (NIR) framework from 2016, and the increase in the top marginal rates for personal income tax from Year of Assessment 2017. The statement added: “These measures came after moves in recent years to make Singapore’s property tax rates more progressive, with significantly increased tax rates for high value residential properties, offsetting reduced tax rates for lower value homes.”

Related posts:

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2014/11/20/why-wp-low-is-silent-about-almost-everything-silence-is-no-longer-golden/

— https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/02/25/budget-ask-in-a-very-loud-voice/

—————————————–

*When the AGO auditors went in to do a special audit of the TC , they were horrified to find that the TC’s archival and record system consisted of a room full of piled up boxes overflowing with documents.  No proper record keeping and many missing records, some conveniently so for FMSS as related third party transactions were found to be an issue by the AGO and even later by the TC’s own auditors. What was Sylvia and her MPs doing during all this time?  To be blunt, they had been sleeping on the job, underestimated the challenge of running a GRC TC and trusted the wrong people to do it but who screwed them. The only problem is because the monies are all residents’ monies, the ones who got royally screwed are the residents of AHPETC and many of them till today don’t even know it.

http://sggeneralelections2016.blogspot.sg/2015/09/the-story-of-fmss-ahpetc-more-than-meets-eye.html

Warning, blogger is pro-PAP.

 

 

 

After the goodies, GST hikes a’coming soon

In Economy, Political governance on 02/03/2015 at 5:05 am

So says tax expert: PricewaterhouseCoopers tax partner Koh Soo How … said any hike would probably take place in 2016 or 2017*. (CNA last week)

And constructive, nation-building MediaCorp:While the Government has raised income tax rates for top earners in Singapore for a more progressive tax system, taxes paid by a broader swathe of Singaporeans, such as the Goods and Services Tax (GST), will probably go up in the coming years to pay for social spending, said tax experts and economists.

The GST could go up after next year to 9 or 10 per cent, in line with the Asia-Pacific average. Other taxes the Government could raise include consumption taxes, stamp duties and property taxes, they said. (CNA)

Err, wonder if Mr Koh and the MediaCorp executives are secretly rooting for the SDP which said around the same time:The people must also beware that while the Government makes these concessions before the elections, it can always make the money back after the next GE through a myriad of taxes, fees and levies.

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2015/02/sdp-budget-shows-why-singaporeans-should-support-the-opposition/

Is Jos Teo also a subversive and secret SDP member?

Jos Teo double confirms GST rise?

At a forum on 26 Feb organised by government feedback unit Reach to discuss Budget 2015, Senior Minister of State for Finance and Transport Josephine Teo said that Singapore is in the unusual position of being able to tap more sources of revenue to fund its increased spending needs.

“Many other countries around the world actually need additional revenue sources to help pay for programmes that benefit citizens, but not that many have the courage to raise taxes,” she added.

“But we think that it is the responsible thing to do.”

Seriously, it’s very, very important, as I said last week, to ask loudly and at every appropriate opportunity :“After GE, will the PAP administration raise GST rates and by how much?”

The answer, we should want to hear is what Tharman said in 2011 about future GST rises:“As Finance Minister, I have made that very clear in Parliament that at least for the next five years – it does not mean we will raise it in five years’ time – but at least for five years, there is absolutely no reason to raise the GST, because this was the whole idea – we strengthen our revenue base in time. (CNA)

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/02/25/budget-ask-in-a-very-loud-voice/

If we don’t get this answer, then we can expect GST rises after the GE, as sure as Zorro smiles at his monthly CPF statement everytime he receives it.

If we get this answer , then this lady is right:Ernst & Young Solutions head of tax Chung-Sim Siew Moon does not expect a hike in the GST before 2020. “The minister has indicated that the revenue measures that have been put in place will be sufficient for the increased planning needs until the end of the decade,” she noted.

But in the long term, we have to be be realistic if we want more welfare for the born-loser cybernuts who expect something while biting the hand that feeds them: Nanyang Technological University economist and Assistant Professor Walter Theseira said taxpayers can expect to pay more in the medium and long term, with higher-income earners contributing a larger share. The proceeds can fund social initiatives to help the unemployed, and support medical expenses and retirement provisions for middle- and lower-income groups.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Budget: Ask in a very loud voice:

In Economy, Financial competency, Political governance on 25/02/2015 at 4:34 am

“After GE, will the PAP administration raise GST rates and by how much?”

After all, an ally and cheer leader of the PAP administration wrote about the Budget:

Mr Tharman flagged this gap … about the 1 percentage point projected gap between long-term revenues and long-term spending. The latter is tipped to go up to 19 to 19.5 per cent of GDP from now, as Singapore opens its coffers to spend on health care, retirees, and on infrastructure and investment in education. The former hovers around 18 to 18.5 per cent of GDP.

How to make up the shortfall of about 1 per cent of GDP?

This is a structural issue that will have resonance beyond this Budget.*

As it’s unlikely that the Wayang Party will raise the issue about the rise in GST rates after the GE in Parly* because it may still be hoping to curry favour with the MIW by not asking difficult questions, responsible bloggers and cyber-warriors should ask the question.

So should all voters (pro PAP or anti-PAP alike, GST affects everyone) who meet their PAP MPs and their PA grassroot hangers-on when they come to lobby for votes. Especially when the MPs and hangers-on boast of all the goodies voters are getting, parroting a gushing a PAP apologist, if ever there was one,who wrote in ST:.

I tried frantically to keep up with noting down the giveaways as Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam reeled them off as he announced the Budget 2015. …

All in, it can be said to be a sensible yet generous Budget, albeit at the expense of the very high-income. It may disappoint those who wanted a big SG50 Bonus to celebrate the nation’s Jubilee. But it does give out a mass hongbao to all Singaporeans, via top-ups to education funds for children and students, and via the new $500 SkillsFuture Credit for workers. – See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/opinion/columns/story/singapore-budget-2015-7-reasons-why-years-robin-hood-budget-matters-20150#sthash.CK7uOl8a.0xjbXaNf.dpuf

The answer we want to hear is what Tharman said in 2011

Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam has reiterated that the goods and services tax (GST) will not be raised for at least another five years …“As Finance Minister, I have made that very clear in Parliament that at least for the next five years – it does not mean we will raise it in five years’ time – but at least for five years, there is absolutely no reason to raise the GST, because this was the whole idea – we strengthen our revenue base in time. (CNA)

And finally let’s remember that all this money the PAP administration is throwing at us is our money, not that of the PAP’s administration.

*Yes, Yes I know: Mr Tharman has a way to close that 1 per cent gap: Use projected long-term returns from Temasek Holdings.

The Net Investment Return formula framework was implemented in 2009. He said: “Under the framework, the Government is allowed to spend up to 50 per cent of the expected long term real returns on its net assets managed by MAS and GIC.”

Temasek was left out as it was undergoing a major change in investment strategy. Mr Tharman said it was a good time to add Temsek to the mix.

So this Budget is important for signalling the long-term gap in revenue and spending.

It is also significant for using a new framework that allows Singapore to tap a wider pool of money from expected investment returns on its reserves into the future. 

“The move will bolster our fiscal resources at a time when we have to fund long-term critical infrastructure and develop the human talent and capabilities to secure our future.”– See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/opinion/columns/story/singapore-budget-2015-7-reasons-why-years-robin-hood-budget-matters-20150#sthash.CK7uOl8a.0xjbXaNf.dpuf

Doubtless, the cybernuts will say that their heloo, Roy the Hooligan is responsible for this change in govt policy, though I’m sure s/o JBJ would dispute this, saying Tharman stole his idea.

But do remember that the other cybernuts’ hero Ong Teng Cheong wanted all the returns from the resreves locked away for good. It’s in the DNA of the PAP to make life tough for us. So unless we get the PAP to rule out a GST increase after the election, we could get screwed.

This  is what a FT based here says: Ten years ago, the Singapore’s preferred choice would have been to raise its goods and services tax. Levies on consumption are easier to collect and less flighty than the incomes of high-earning expatriates. But that option is now politically infeasible. The People’s Action Party, which has ruled Singapore throughout its 50-year history as an independent nation and must call an election by January 2017, is wary of upsetting voters.

http://blogs.reuters.com/breakingviews/2015/02/24/piketty-meets-pragmatism-in-singapore-tax-hike/

But this cock (Trash?) forgets that the administration can raise GST after the GE, if no-one holds its feet to the fire on the issue in the run up to the GE.

**Mrs Chiam may have other issues that she thinks are more important and this batch of NMPs are not the kind to rock the boat. And I don’t blame them, if the co-driver (each MP getting $15,000 a month) sets a bad example, what can one expect?