[BicCherry]

To promote inclusivity, top tier residential property tax should be up to 28.6% of AV  (annual value).
(Annotations, pls see bottom)

Currently, the max residential property tax is only 16% at max tier. https://www.iras.gov.sg/irashome/Proper ... culations/


For residential leasehold (LH) properties under 99 years, the max property tax tier shall be 22% of assessed annual value (AV) (in line with max personal income tax rate https://www.iras.gov.sg/irashome/Indivi ... Tax-Rates/ ) .


For freehold and LH above 99 years, an additional 30% surcharge will apply on the property tax charged, thus the total effective property tax for the grandest FH property would be effectively 28.6% of annual value.


This is because in a diverse economy there are many forms of income not adequately taxed by the current income tax methods of assessment. These include capital and investment gains, inheritance, undeclared earnings, stock trading profits, online earnings earned offshore etc. Singapore also has a low wage Vs capital share of GDP https://thehearttruths.com/2013/09/23/s ... countries/ thus suggesting that wealth from capital gains ought to be taxed more. Not few of these Uber expensive and massive properties also contain a treasure trove of expensive furniture and oft times, artwort, wines, jewellery and gold bullion worth much more than the property itself, since Singapore's gun free and safe environment, strong army and fast response time of home team services permits dual use of the large residence as a reliable physical wealth store.


It is thus not unreasonable to expect that the top tier of residential property taxes ought to exceed the top personal income tax bracket. (Due to lower tax levels of preceding tiers, the total tax payable shouldn't exceed 28%).


The Singapore PAP is also actively promoting rich foreign billionaires to live in Singapore https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/co ... s-14145418 the current residential property tax rates do injustice to the revenues that IRAS collects since the vast majority of Singaporeans live in LH properties and thus cannot effectively bequeath much property to their descendants, unlike the Singaporean billionaires who hold their FH property in perpetuity, thus the need for an additional FH surcharge to the ordinary LH property tax charged. Setting the top tier property tax level somewhat in stone and linked to the very competitive personal income tax levels  (one of lowest in the world) will give these billionaires more confidence that the government is not corrupt or confused and is able to give a coherent, reasonable and sustainable explaination of the methodology of property tax charged. In addition, having a consistent property tax rate which is largely tagged to the income tax and GST rate will serve as a sustainable property cooling measure and also leverage upon Asians often times maleficent obsession with property amassment to the detriment of society (like in Hong Kong where gross inequality of access to home is prevailent) - without the need for shallow, knee jerk, economically inefficient/disruptive and unjust  property cooling measures like additional stamp duties etc which instead caused a property buying frenzy the night of its implementation. Due to the one off surcharge of stamp duty, such cooling measures only create more unpredictability and instability of the property market in the long run.


All FH property owners may at any time excuse themselves from paying the FH additional property tax surcharge by converting their land titles to LH titles.


Government will not need to raise GST as a result of this increase in property tax, in part due to the probable overall increase in tax revenues collected ( especially from massive FH properties) an in part because the greater recycling of residential properties either due to FH property tax surcharge or the sale of recycled LH land will be a renewable source of government revenue income to fund government budgets for subsequent years.


In view of the high wealth inequality in Singapore, it is suggested that the per capita 50%tile of all residential property taxes is deposited into a 'living-costs' account if each citizen under the CPF umbrella (like skills future account).


This non-withdrawal cash account can be used for government sanctioned uses like fully paying residential property taxes or property rental (for rental tenants), a portion of utility and medical bills, educational courses etc etc. Upon death or relinquishing of Singapore citizenship, the balance of savings in this account cannot be withdrawn.


PS: for retirees who are asset rich and cannot afford the increased property taxes in their very large old properties, they can opt to tenant out additional rooms, convert their land titles to LH to avoid the FH additional tax surcharge or even opt for a reverse mortgage to draw income from their wealth assets and let the next generation repay the reverse mortgage, which is normally at the low interest rate for property loans due to the a/m stable property tax regime to keep property prices in Singapore always stable and free from mad swings in prices etc. Retirees shouldn't grumble about the higher property tax rates for FH/ large landed properties because they must remember that by property value, they are probably the biggest beneficiaries of the SAF, Home team etc protecting their wealth with zero inheritance tax. As of 2019, budget for SAF, home team were $15.5B and $10.7B, despite massive costs savings from non-salaried service of citizens serving NS: these are very large costs and it is much more likely that the large sized dwelling is a discretionary item and due to Singapore's progress, their residences are worth much more now, thus the need for progressive property taxes, where by the top tier rates exceed that of the respective income tax bracket rates and the need for FH property tax surcharges to ensure the fair recycling of land for property uses in land scarce Singapore.





https://thehearttruths.com/2013/09/23/singapore-has-the-lowest-wage-share-among-high-income-countries/

[BicCherry]

TS mai la mai la. Property Tax already bery high and errode away much of the profits from rental.

Hi bus freaks,


So all these low wage citizens in the photo have to suffer higher GST, just so that you can enjoy living off rent from your 2nd property?

Normal times will have inheritance tax. Rental property is also a service, so by right u have to pay GST (service tax), also u received more protection from SAF/ home team than most others by virtue that u own more than one property.

It is also quite possible that much or some of your past income from investments, capital gains, inheritance, foreign based, tax evaded / undeclared, etc or excessive enjoyment of low income tax rates etc allowed u to purchase the 2nd property.

[Igor Antunov]

So in short, punish the best and brightest so that the masses can continue subsisting on welfare? Punish the industrious risk takers and reward the demure leeches?

Nope. Get back in your cagie, wagie.

[BicCherry]

So in short, punish the best and brightest so that the masses can continue subsisting on welfare? Punish the industrious risk takers and reward the demure leeches?

Nope. Get back in your cagie, wagie.

Hi, Singapore is not quite a democracy and many rich and politically connected are easily able to free ride on the system actually. There is also hardly any welfare in Singapore and the elections are routinely slanted by the GRC system which favours the incumbent significant and is structurally biased against the opposition gaining a foot hold in parliament. Opposition politicians are routinely harassed and Draconian laws apply against political dissent in many ways.
Dignity is a substitute by the leaders for decency I guess.






https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2018/08/10/esm-gohs-1m-criterion-deems-all-first-world-leaders-too-mediocre-to-become-pap-ministers/


"If the annual salary of the Minister of Information, Communication and Arts is only $500,000, it may pose some problems when he discuss policies with media CEOs who earn millions of dollars because they need not listen to the minister's ideas and proposals. Hence, a reasonable payout will help to maintain a bit of dignity."
- MP Lim Wee Kiak apologises for comments on pay
[IMG URL]



https://www.usnews.com/news/world/artic ... gn-protest

[BicCherry]

Not another new tax scheme. If want to get the rich to pay more, why not just classify capital gains as income?

Hi soaresb,
I dunno if u are planting a decoy idea to derail my proposal.

I think we all know very well that it is fool hardy and inefficient to tax capital gains because the vast majority of which cannot be effectively tracked and too many variances exist to formulate a workable tax plan.

Firstly, the richest folks around only accumulate and given to fact that to be practical, capital gains tax can only apply when the asset is gifted/sold, the really rich people never encounter this tax because they are either smart enough to sell off the item in another jurisdiction (nobody there knows how much was paid for it to begin with) and no tax officer will want to wrangle with the mid-range tycoons accountants and lawyers over the original value, especially when that would involve complex calculations to minus the inflation rate whilst richest tycoons who never sell and only accumulate are never exposed to the capital gains tax liability of this sort.

Due to the inherent difficulty, complexity of classifying the largest capital gains situations as income, every sensible person knows what a Sisyphean (extremely unproductive and difficult) task that would entail and probably cost more to implement (in an inherently flawed and thus biased manner) and yield little in revenue for effort to properly implement such an (impossible to do properly) taxation system.

Singapore previously had the inheritance tax system as a more practical proxy to tax capital gains or general wealth vz the inheritance method but according to PAP, they scrapped this category of taxes altogether because:


“In fact, if I can get another 10 billionaires to move to Singapore and set up their base here, my Gini coefficient will get worse but I think Singaporeans will be better off, because they will bring in business, bring in opportunities, open new doors and create new jobs, and I think that is the attitude with which we must approach this problem.”
Lee Hsien Loong at the inaugural DBS Asia Leadership Dialogue (July 2013)
https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/p ... ical-spore

[BicCherry]

Following the same logic, hdb in prime district should pay high property tax rate

Hi undiscern,
Actually you have a point although this opens yet another can of worms which deserves a new thread to discuss.

Probably PAP should not have built their exceptionally subsidised public housing called Pinnacle at Duxton for a very minority few, because it isn't sustainable and the rest of Singapore like Yishun is so severely neglected just so that PAP can use Pinnacle as poster boy to deceive more CECA and other immigrants to live here to work in sweatshops run under PAP mast head etc.

It would be much better if PAP controlled all the property prices vz progressive property tax (by this thread recommendations) so that city property prices didn't exceed affordability norms and would also be a good renewable revenue source (99LH land sales) for the government so that those who lived in city centre paid consistently more in property taxes and land prices (driven by local and foreign demand) and the whole Singapore was united by cheap or almost free public transportation so those living in less wealthy areas could also visit town on occasion albeit after traveling an hour etc in public transportation when the need arises on occasion.

Currently, there is great unhappiness and jealousy dividing the country from lottery flats https://www.propertyguru.com.sg/propert ... fect-40479 and most likely the greater invitation to tabloid journalist to document the failures of the PAP government due to their obsession with producing misleading political propaganda worldwide like Pinnacle to deceive the world that quality of life and equality/ equitablity is high in Singapore under PAP government rule.

[Unthinking Majority]

Hi undiscern,
Actually you have a point although this opens yet another can of worms which deserves a new thread to discuss.

Probably PAP should not have built their exceptionally subsidised public housing called Pinnacle at Duxton for a very minority few, because it isn't sustainable and the rest of Singapore like Yishun is so severely neglected just so that PAP can use Pinnacle as poster boy to deceive more CECA and other immigrants to live here to work in sweatshops run under PAP mast head etc.

I don't understand the logic behind public housing. If you want somebody to have a home, just give them the money so they can go rent a home. That way the gov doesn't have to worry about buying or maintaining any properties.

If you can't help but spend that money on drugs then offer free help for these people. If they refuse help, their fates are their own. I don't believe in making people dependents of the state, it's not good for them in the longterm. It's inhumane to act as an enabler.

[BicCherry]

I don't understand the logic behind public housing. If you want somebody to have a home, just give them the money so they can go rent a home. That way the gov doesn't have to worry about buying or maintaining any properties.

If you can't help but spend that money on drugs then offer free help for these people. If they refuse help, their fates are their own. I don't believe in making people dependents of the state, it's not good for them in the longterm. It's inhumane to act as an enabler.

Haha, hi Unthinking Majority,
A bit off topic your question but I think this pertains to cultural difference. Think Asians have a certain hierarchy or paternalism mixed with capitalism system whereby the government exercises very strong control over the welfare and movements of the people and in some way, the Asian way is somewhat superior to the Western (USA) way as illustrated by how badly USA is now divided, sickly and has trade deficit with much of the world.

In short, the Singapore government feels that citizens are part of the government assets inventory and in order to make profitable use of an asset, (like farm chickens), u cannot just dump the resources on them in a disorganized way (u say "give rent"). The government gives nothing for free and everything is condition on a profitable return mostly.

Thus public housing, state run education in Singapore, as it is in China is very much politically slanted to the narrative of the ruling political party.

There is even a death penalty for the trafficking of arguably low quantities of drugs in many SE Asian countries.

Guess this is the way things work in Asia where governments have to be careful with money, unlike USA in which the FED is just printing lots of toilet paper money and exploiting it's fast eroding economic and moral capital now.

PS: think u contradicted yourself when u suggests offering free help to drug addicts whilst saying "I don't believe in making people dependents of the state, it's not good for them in the longterm."
Perhaps you mean well, however, it is not that the Asian way is wrong and in fact the Asian way has very valid results (Billion people out of poverty in China, exponential growth of Singapore GDP). Yes there is less freedom under a paternalistic government but many Singaporeans also choose the paternalistic option for its track record of building Singapore GDP up exponentially.

Anyway, this thread is about promoting progressive property taxation to help government collection of revenue equitably and equitablity needs to apply regardless of whether the government is paternalistic or not.

[Unthinking Majority]

Haha, hi Unthinking Majority,
A bit off topic your question but I think this pertains to cultural difference. Think Asians have a certain hierarchy or paternalism mixed with capitalism system whereby the government exercises very strong control over the welfare and movements of the people ...

Yes i've heard that east asian cultures are more paternalistic, and put emphasis on respect for elders more than in the West.

In short, the Singapore government feels that citizens are part of the government assets inventory and in order to make profitable use of an asset, (like farm chickens), u cannot just dump the resources on them in a disorganized way (u say "give rent"). The government gives nothing for free and everything is condition on a profitable return mostly.

I suppose this makes sense. But governments in the West also have public housing.

PS: think u contradicted yourself when u suggests offering free help to drug addicts whilst saying "I don't believe in making people dependents of the state, it's not good for them in the longterm."

No, what I'm saying is you should help people in the short or medium term to help them get on their feet. Public housing doesn't sound like a short-term solution like unemployment insurance. If somebody can't be given welfare and allocate that money properly to pay for basic housing needs, well then they have bigger problems they need to deal with and will never be able to get off the welfare system. As I said, the state should help people solve those problems with the goal of people eventually becoming independent, self-reliant individuals no longer dependent on the state.

Perhaps you mean well, however, it is not that the Asian way is wrong and in fact the Asian way has very valid results (Billion people out of poverty in China, exponential growth of Singapore GDP). Yes there is less freedom under a paternalistic government but many Singaporeans also choose the paternalistic option for its track record of building Singapore GDP up exponentially.

Governments in asia are known to have done well in their economic development because they have found a productive mix of free markets and state guidance. Total state guidance (communism) has been a failure in asia, and very free open markets hasn't been good for development in many countries across the developing world because it leaves countries exposed to exploitation by foreign capital and foreign governments. To chalk it up to simply paternalism is too simplistic an explanation.

The USA's dogmatic ideological adherence to "freedom" domestically over the last 40 years has been destroying their country. They're fools and deserve their fate.

Anyway, this thread is about promoting progressive property taxation to help government collection of revenue equitably and equitablity needs to apply regardless of whether the government is paternalistic or not.

It sounds like you simply want wealth redistribution so the wealthy don't accumulate all the riches while the lower classes spin in hamster wheel. I agree with that, but there's many ways to tax beyond property taxes. First thing would be to close the legal offshore tax avoidance loopholes.

[BicCherry]

Yes i've heard that east asian cultures are more paternalistic, and put emphasis on respect for elders more than in the West.


I suppose this makes sense. But governments in the West also have public housing.


No, what I'm saying is you should help people in the short or medium term to help them get on their feet. Public housing doesn't sound like a short-term solution like unemployment insurance. If somebody can't be given welfare and allocate that money properly to pay for basic housing needs, well then they have bigger problems they need to deal with and will never be able to get off the welfare system. As I said, the state should help people solve those problems with the goal of people eventually becoming independent, self-reliant individuals no longer dependent on the state.



Governments in asia are known to have done well in their economic development because they have found a productive mix of free markets and state guidance. Total state guidance (communism) has been a failure in asia, and very free open markets hasn't been good for development in many countries across the developing world because it leaves countries exposed to exploitation by foreign capital and foreign governments. To chalk it up to simply paternalism is too simplistic an explanation.

The USA's dogmatic ideological adherence to "freedom" domestically over the last 40 years has been destroying their country. They're fools and deserve their fate.


It sounds like you simply want wealth redistribution so the wealthy don't accumulate all the riches while the lower classes spin in hamster wheel. I agree with that, but there's many ways to tax beyond property taxes. First thing would be to close the legal offshore tax avoidance loopholes.

Hi Unthinking Majority,
Thanks for the comprehensive reply.

Public housing in Singapore can be divided into monthly rentals and purchase of 99years leasehold (LH). The latter is categorised as public housing in so far that rules apply that forbid sale (but not rental) to foreigners etc and inability to mount an enbloc collective sale of the entire building etc. Some building racial mix quotas also apply so if there is a shortage of one particular racial group in the building, the next buyer must qualify to make up the deficit or else government will not authorize the sale to go through.
Guess Singapore is not like older democracies where private housing is long established since post WW2, most inhabitants were farmers and most living areas were either agriculture farmland or ghetto slums (besides some very rich tycoons in certain privileged districts of course), so the only way possible to modernize the economy would be by government mandate to confiscate farmland and convert to 99yr LH property and govt run industrial estates.

”Public housing doesn't sound like a short-term solution like unemployment insurance. ”
I don't accept your dogmatism even though you statement may not convey your full position. Whilst it is good for people to be 'independent', I do not think it wise to consider long term social assistance a failure, if the individual or social- economic circumstances results in such requirements for assistance. People with mental illnesses, sub-par IQ and poor health limiting income, will require systematic social assistance throughout their lives. The cat needs to be skinned and it is perhaps not necessary nor wise for us to force a particular solution nor standard without perceiving the needs fully, especially when many possible solutions and other limits exist. Many social and individual problems cannot be solved in the blink if an eye and even the UK parliament or US presidency is a problem because they are on 4years electorial cycle and are thus of times unable to solve any problem that takes more than a few years to overcome since the system self selects for populist personalities, better suited to populist policy decisions with oft times even shallower outcomes.

"To chalk it up to simply paternalism is too simplistic an explanation.":
I was just giving one explaination. Paternalism needs to be balanced with freedom to innovate and enterprise for the economy to grow.

"It sounds like you simply want wealth redistribution so the wealthy don't accumulate all the riches while the lower classes spin in hamster wheel. I agree with that, but there's many ways to tax beyond property taxes. First thing would be to close the legal offshore tax avoidance loopholes."
Off shore tax avoidance loopholes are also a problem (ironically, Singapore has been previously accused of being a tax heaven FYI, so consequently, your suggestion may not be relevant here).
Possibly, bigger countries may not be able to very successfully implement residential property taxes, especially in rural areas where that might be fully the purview of the local municipal government due to inability of a big country to ascertain each property annual value efficiently and fairly, suffice to say that progressive methods of taxation should apply to the largest taxation categories such as income, inheritance etc etc, which is the underlying principal guiding the FP of this thread.