View Full Version : Mah says goodbye, accepts responsibility
http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/sub/news/story/0,4574,439689,00.html?
Published May 20, 2011
Mah says goodbye, accepts responsibility
By MINDY TAN
(SINGAPORE) 'My job is done,' says outgoing Minister for National Development Mah Bow Tan in a statement released on his retirement.
At the same time, he took responsibility for the unhappiness over rising housing costs.
Speaking to reporters at the sidelines of the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) Awards Ceremony 2011, he was asked yesterday if the housing portfolio had been politically costly.
To this, Mr Mah said: 'Housing is always a sensitive topic. In the last couple of years, housing prices went up very sharply, and (this) coincided with the very dramatic turnaround in the economy. . . That resulted in quite a lot of unhappiness on the ground. I accept responsibility for that.'
He also admitted that ground sentiments did impact his decision to retire. He said: '(The outcome of the elections) indicated that we needed fresh minds, fresh thinking, fresh ideas. . . After the elections, when the results came out, it was probably a clear signal that I should step down sooner rather than later in the term.'
Still, he looked back with satisfaction on his career. In his statement, he said: 'The last 23 years in government have been wonderful ones. . . I have been privileged to serve under three Prime Ministers, which has been an exceptionally satisfying and invaluable experience. I never imagined that I could have been given the great honour to serve my country in such a meaningful way,' he said.
In his opening speech at the BCA Awards Ceremony 2011, Mr Mah thanked the industry for its support, cooperation and friendship, and wished it success in the years ahead.
He said: 'We have gone through many ups and downs together over the last 12 years, many construction booms, construction busts, followed by booms again. But through it all, I have always enjoyed the support and cooperation of the members of the construction industry.'
In the watershed general election held earlier this month, the People's Action Party (PAP) team led by Mr Mah retained Tampines group representation constituency (GRC) with 57.2 per cent of the 127,002 valid votes, more than 10 percentage points lower than its 2006 score.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced that Mr Mah would be retiring from the Cabinet on Wednesday. Minister of Health Khaw Boon Wan will be taking over the portfolio and its accompanying hot-button issues including the rising costs of Housing and Development Board flats and the exuberant private property market.
Quek See Tiat, chairman of BCA, said: 'I would like to thank Minister Mah for his personal support to me in my role as BCA chairman.
Finally. Good bye, shrewd beady-eyed one.
People, prepare for CM4... or was it 5? :beats-me-man:
devilplate
21-05-11, 13:20
Finally. Good bye, shrewd beady-eyed one.
People, prepare for CM4... or was it 5? :beats-me-man:
We shall repent for nxt 5yrs
How to repent with KBW who is a taoist? Forgive and forget.
We shall repent for nxt 5yrs
But through it all, I have always enjoyed the support and cooperation of the members of the construction industry.'
Now I understand how come none of the last 4 CMs has any restrictions on the developers or contractors although they are also a major player in the housing industry...:doh:
kingkong1984
22-05-11, 07:47
Thats why it's a bunch of eagles praying together.
U can substitue it with wolfs too.
Now the eagles wings are clipped, may not fly as high anymore and the rare species has become endangered with one extinct, the horse leg eagle.
rattydrama
22-05-11, 21:17
Now I understand how come none of the last 4 CMs has any restrictions on the developers or contractors although they are also a major player in the housing industry...:doh:
SSD starts from S&P tells it all. :p
Most of us still prefer to buy from developers.....even thou the premium price is sometimes above 20% and smaller.
Straits times also nvr tale about cheaper resale as they need advertising $.:p
linchong84
22-05-11, 21:27
SSD starts from S&P tells it all. :p
Most of us still prefer to buy from developers.....even thou the premium price is sometimes above 20% and smaller.
Straits times also nvr tale about cheaper resale as they need advertising $.:p
I think that is fair lah. Imagine SSD starts from TOP, so from SNP to TOP can't sell? That will make pte housing almost equal to public housing.. The pte housing market will crash deep deep..
New ministerial salaries effective from 21 May
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has decided that the new salaries for political appointment holders will take effect from 21 May 2011, the date when the new government took office.
This suggests that recommendations by the committee appointed to review the ministerial salaries will be accepted once finalised.
Although the salary for the President will in principle commence from the new term of the President, the President has informed PM Lee that he will adopt the new salary from 21 May 2011.
The Chairman of the committee reviewing ministerial salaries, Mr Gerard Ee, has revealed that his committee will adopt a very different model to assess how much ministers should be paid.
Current salaries are benchmarked to two thirds of the median income of the top eight earners from six professions such as lawyers, in the private sector.
However, the committee will use job specifications of ministers as a starting point.
Mr Ee told Channel NewsAsia that there should also be other points of reference, such as a general wage level.
This means when the economy goes up or down, the salaries should also have a mechanism to reflect this.
"The big difference is that this (model), you look at the work and you say for this work, for this skill, for this knowledge in the private sector, how much will you have to pay to have someone perform such a work?," said the Chairman of the National Kidney Foundation and Changi General Hospital.
"It's a very different model altogether."
Mr Ee, who is a former Nominated MP, said he accepted the role after he was approached by Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam less than a week ago.
He said that the committee will need to collect a lot of data involving experts in human resource and it will come up with recommendations that still need to be robustly debated in Parliament.
Mr Ee added that the committee will not rush matters.
However, any changes to the salary scales will take effect retrospectively from the day the ministers were sworn in.
"You can expect, that in all probability it would be a cut," added Mr Ee.
The committee will have a total of eight members from the private sector, labour movement and social sector and it will be chaired by Mr Ee.
The seven other members are:
- Mr John De Payva, President of the National Trades Union Congress
- Ms Fang Ai Lian, Chairman of the Charity Council and Chairman of Methodist Girls' School Board of Management
- Mr Stephen Lee Ching Yen, President of Singapore National Employers Federation
- Mr Po'ad Shaik Abu Bakar Mattar, a member of the Council of Presidential Advisers and a member of the Public Service Commission
- Mr George Quek, founder and chairman of Breadtalk Group Ltd, Vice-President of Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan, Chairman of Xinmin Secondary School Advisory Committee
- Mr Lucien Wong, Managing Partner of Allen & Gledhill LLP and Chairman of Maritime and Port Authority
- Mr Wong Ngit Liong, Chairman of the National University of Singapore Board of Trustees and Chairman & CEO of Venture Corporation Limited
In a statement from the Prime Minister's Office on Sunday, it said that the committee's terms of reference will be to review the basis and level of salaries for the President, Prime Minister, political appointment holders and Members of Parliament to help ensure honest and competent government.
The committee should take into account salaries of comparable jobs in the private sector and also other reference points such as the general wage levels in Singapore.
The committee should also take into account the following guidelines:
While the salary of the President should reflect the President's high status as the head of state and his critical custodial role as holder of the second key, it should also take into account the fact that unlike the Prime Minister he does not have direct executive responsibilities except as they relate to his custodial role;
The salary of ministers should have a significant discount to comparable private sector salaries to signify the value and ethos of political service.
The government will base its new salaries on these recommendations.
What is the purpose of SSD? It is to encourage buyers to hold on to a physical property to live in or rent out for 4 years by then which SSD drops to zero. For new launch property how? They ink the S&P with just 20% downpayment and no loan required vs resale property with 40% downpayment and full loan 60% need to be taken. How to be fair and equitable? Why people can't sell new launch? We are saying from new launch S&P till TOP the SSD will be 16% same as starting from the 4th year mah since the property not even ready anyway. Only speculators would want to sell even before TOP. :cheers1:
Why will private properties crash deep deep because Start of decreasing SSD for new launch properties start from TOP? Anyway, the SSD already impacted the resale private properties very very seriously but prices still didn't crash. What is the purpose of the SSD? To rein in run-away property prices right? Since now the bubble seems to be very obvious in new launch selling at 20% to even 50% above nearby resale private properties, it is time to rein-in that run-away prices for new-launch by tweakling SSD to work more effectively for new launch properties. :D
I hear many coffee shop talk that SSD for new launch didn't start from TOP date is because they think this will seriously impact the prices of new land sale some people are trying to sell mah (machiam impact their self interests). Don't know real or not but the fact that SSD is so ineffective against new launch property prices and yet no effort has been done to tweak it does give many people reason to speculate and believe in this theory. :beats-me-man:
I think that is fair lah. Imagine SSD starts from TOP, so from SNP to TOP can't sell? That will make pte housing almost equal to public housing.. The pte housing market will crash deep deep..
By the way, is the Ministers' pension included in this New Ministerial salaries review? (including those staff of Elite Adminstrative Services). Private sector got no pension lah, still new review mah since they are still going to peg their salaries to private sector and not to others in the public sector in other countries? :beats-me-man:
New ministerial salaries effective from 21 May
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has decided that the new salaries for political appointment holders will take effect from 21 May 2011, the date when the new government took office.
This suggests that recommendations by the committee appointed to review the ministerial salaries will be accepted once finalised.
Although the salary for the President will in principle commence from the new term of the President, the President has informed PM Lee that he will adopt the new salary from 21 May 2011.
The Chairman of the committee reviewing ministerial salaries, Mr Gerard Ee, has revealed that his committee will adopt a very different model to assess how much ministers should be paid.
Current salaries are benchmarked to two thirds of the median income of the top eight earners from six professions such as lawyers, in the private sector.
However, the committee will use job specifications of ministers as a starting point.
Mr Ee told Channel NewsAsia that there should also be other points of reference, such as a general wage level.
This means when the economy goes up or down, the salaries should also have a mechanism to reflect this.
"The big difference is that this (model), you look at the work and you say for this work, for this skill, for this knowledge in the private sector, how much will you have to pay to have someone perform such a work?," said the Chairman of the National Kidney Foundation and Changi General Hospital.
"It's a very different model altogether."
Mr Ee, who is a former Nominated MP, said he accepted the role after he was approached by Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam less than a week ago.
He said that the committee will need to collect a lot of data involving experts in human resource and it will come up with recommendations that still need to be robustly debated in Parliament.
Mr Ee added that the committee will not rush matters.
However, any changes to the salary scales will take effect retrospectively from the day the ministers were sworn in.
"You can expect, that in all probability it would be a cut," added Mr Ee.
The committee will have a total of eight members from the private sector, labour movement and social sector and it will be chaired by Mr Ee.
The seven other members are:
- Mr John De Payva, President of the National Trades Union Congress
- Ms Fang Ai Lian, Chairman of the Charity Council and Chairman of Methodist Girls' School Board of Management
- Mr Stephen Lee Ching Yen, President of Singapore National Employers Federation
- Mr Po'ad Shaik Abu Bakar Mattar, a member of the Council of Presidential Advisers and a member of the Public Service Commission
- Mr George Quek, founder and chairman of Breadtalk Group Ltd, Vice-President of Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan, Chairman of Xinmin Secondary School Advisory Committee
- Mr Lucien Wong, Managing Partner of Allen & Gledhill LLP and Chairman of Maritime and Port Authority
- Mr Wong Ngit Liong, Chairman of the National University of Singapore Board of Trustees and Chairman & CEO of Venture Corporation Limited
In a statement from the Prime Minister's Office on Sunday, it said that the committee's terms of reference will be to review the basis and level of salaries for the President, Prime Minister, political appointment holders and Members of Parliament to help ensure honest and competent government.
The committee should take into account salaries of comparable jobs in the private sector and also other reference points such as the general wage levels in Singapore.
The committee should also take into account the following guidelines:
While the salary of the President should reflect the President's high status as the head of state and his critical custodial role as holder of the second key, it should also take into account the fact that unlike the Prime Minister he does not have direct executive responsibilities except as they relate to his custodial role;
The salary of ministers should have a significant discount to comparable private sector salaries to signify the value and ethos of political service.
The government will base its new salaries on these recommendations.
New ministerial salaries effective from 21 May
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has decided that the new salaries for political appointment holders will take effect from 21 May 2011, the date when the new government took office.
This suggests that recommendations by the committee appointed to review the ministerial salaries will be accepted once finalised.
Although the salary for the President will in principle commence from the new term of the President, the President has informed PM Lee that he will adopt the new salary from 21 May 2011.
The Chairman of the committee reviewing ministerial salaries, Mr Gerard Ee, has revealed that his committee will adopt a very different model to assess how much ministers should be paid.
Current salaries are benchmarked to two thirds of the median income of the top eight earners from six professions such as lawyers, in the private sector.
However, the committee will use job specifications of ministers as a starting point.
Mr Ee told Channel NewsAsia that there should also be other points of reference, such as a general wage level.
This means when the economy goes up or down, the salaries should also have a mechanism to reflect this.
"The big difference is that this (model), you look at the work and you say for this work, for this skill, for this knowledge in the private sector, how much will you have to pay to have someone perform such a work?," said the Chairman of the National Kidney Foundation and Changi General Hospital.
"It's a very different model altogether."
Mr Ee, who is a former Nominated MP, said he accepted the role after he was approached by Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam less than a week ago.
He said that the committee will need to collect a lot of data involving experts in human resource and it will come up with recommendations that still need to be robustly debated in Parliament.
Mr Ee added that the committee will not rush matters.
However, any changes to the salary scales will take effect retrospectively from the day the ministers were sworn in.
"You can expect, that in all probability it would be a cut," added Mr Ee.
The committee will have a total of eight members from the private sector, labour movement and social sector and it will be chaired by Mr Ee.
The seven other members are:
- Mr John De Payva, President of the National Trades Union Congress
- Ms Fang Ai Lian, Chairman of the Charity Council and Chairman of Methodist Girls' School Board of Management
- Mr Stephen Lee Ching Yen, President of Singapore National Employers Federation
- Mr Po'ad Shaik Abu Bakar Mattar, a member of the Council of Presidential Advisers and a member of the Public Service Commission
- Mr George Quek, founder and chairman of Breadtalk Group Ltd, Vice-President of Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan, Chairman of Xinmin Secondary School Advisory Committee
- Mr Lucien Wong, Managing Partner of Allen & Gledhill LLP and Chairman of Maritime and Port Authority
- Mr Wong Ngit Liong, Chairman of the National University of Singapore Board of Trustees and Chairman & CEO of Venture Corporation Limited
In a statement from the Prime Minister's Office on Sunday, it said that the committee's terms of reference will be to review the basis and level of salaries for the President, Prime Minister, political appointment holders and Members of Parliament to help ensure honest and competent government.
The committee should take into account salaries of comparable jobs in the private sector and also other reference points such as the general wage levels in Singapore.
The committee should also take into account the following guidelines:
While the salary of the President should reflect the President's high status as the head of state and his critical custodial role as holder of the second key, it should also take into account the fact that unlike the Prime Minister he does not have direct executive responsibilities except as they relate to his custodial role;
The salary of ministers should have a significant discount to comparable private sector salaries to signify the value and ethos of political service.
The government will base its new salaries on these recommendations.
I actually expect the formula to make the salary to decrease in the 1st year, then increase in subsequent years.
It is just the distance-based charging and other fare tweaks for public buses. It may seem fair at first and disadvantages the bus operators, until you realise that there will be an increase in number of residents staying in new BTOs/ECs in Seng Kang/Punggol/Choa Chu Kang who need to travel further to offices, leisure places or schools. Now most people including retirees have to pay more. That new formula was approved by the PTC chaired by the same person reviewing the Ministerial salary.
What is the purpose of SSD? It is to encourage buyers to hold on to a physical property to live in or rent out for 4 years by then which SSD drops to zero. For new launch property how? They ink the S&P with just 20% downpayment and no loan required vs resale property with 40% downpayment and full loan 60% need to be taken. How to be fair and equitable? Why people can't sell new launch? We are saying from new launch S&P till TOP the SSD will be 16% same as starting from the 4th year mah since the property not even ready anyway. Only speculators would want to sell even before TOP. :cheers1:
Why will private properties crash deep deep because Start of decreasing SSD for new launch properties start from TOP? Anyway, the SSD already impacted the resale private properties very very seriously but prices still didn't crash. What is the purpose of the SSD? To rein in run-away property prices right? Since now the bubble seems to be very obvious in new launch selling at 20% to even 50% above nearby resale private properties, it is time to rein-in that run-away prices for new-launch by tweakling SSD to work more effectively for new launch properties. :D
I hear many coffee shop talk that SSD for new launch didn't start from TOP date is because they think this will seriously impact the prices of new land sale some people are trying to sell mah (machiam impact their self interests). Don't know real or not but the fact that SSD is so ineffective against new launch property prices and yet no effort has been done to tweak it does give many people reason to speculate and believe in this theory. :beats-me-man:I have a slightly different explanation from what what you've read on why SSD for new launch didn't start from TOP date. My personal reason is as follows... For resale, it is clear that once purchased, after renovation (if necessary) the unit is ready for self occupation or rental. Income starts to roll in for rental so that explains the SSD. However for new launch, even if one pays only 20% increasing to 80% or something at TOP, no rental income can be obtained. The buyer continually pump in cash to either pay developer or bank from S&P to TOP so it is still a trade off. Instant rental income for resale vs continue to pay bank/developer for new launch. Not so unfair lah...:D
I actually expect the formula to make the salary to decrease in the 1st year, then increase in subsequent years.
It is just the distance-based charging and other fare tweaks for public buses. It may seem fair at first and disadvantages the bus operators, until you realise that there will be an increase in number of residents staying in new BTOs/ECs in Seng Kang/Punggol/Choa Chu Kang who need to travel further to offices, leisure places or schools. Now most people including retirees have to pay more. That new formula was approved by the PTC chaired by the same person reviewing the Ministerial salary.The more important question is, 'is the method of calculation recommended by PAP or suggested by him?' Hmmm... :spliff2:
linchong84
22-05-11, 23:05
What is the purpose of SSD? It is to encourage buyers to hold on to a physical property to live in or rent out for 4 years by then which SSD drops to zero. For new launch property how? They ink the S&P with just 20% downpayment and no loan required vs resale property with 40% downpayment and full loan 60% need to be taken. How to be fair and equitable? Why people can't sell new launch? We are saying from new launch S&P till TOP the SSD will be 16% same as starting from the 4th year mah since the property not even ready anyway. Only speculators would want to sell even before TOP. :cheers1:
Why will private properties crash deep deep because Start of decreasing SSD for new launch properties start from TOP? Anyway, the SSD already impacted the resale private properties very very seriously but prices still didn't crash. What is the purpose of the SSD? To rein in run-away property prices right? Since now the bubble seems to be very obvious in new launch selling at 20% to even 50% above nearby resale private properties, it is time to rein-in that run-away prices for new-launch by tweakling SSD to work more effectively for new launch properties. :D
I hear many coffee shop talk that SSD for new launch didn't start from TOP date is because they think this will seriously impact the prices of new land sale some people are trying to sell mah (machiam impact their self interests). Don't know real or not but the fact that SSD is so ineffective against new launch property prices and yet no effort has been done to tweak it does give many people reason to speculate and believe in this theory. :beats-me-man:
True lah.. But if 16% for first 4-5 years, and until 8th year then no penalty, it will be very painful cos it's as good as a mini MOP.. Like that the gap betw pte condo and EC will close a lot..
Where got? EC MOP start from TOP date and not from S&P date and cannot sell at all. private SSD start from S&P date and not TOP date and can anytime, just pay SSD only mah. Why so much difference in treatment on "MOP" hah? :banghead:
True lah.. But if 16% for first 4-5 years, and until 8th year then no penalty, it will be very painful cos it's as good as a mini MOP.. Like that the gap betw pte condo and EC will close a lot..
If logic should flow as you mentioned, shouldn't EC's MOP start from S&P date and not TOP date? :p
I have a slightly different explanation from what what you've read on why SSD for new launch didn't start from TOP date. My personal reason is as follows... For resale, it is clear that once purchased, after renovation (if necessary) the unit is ready for self occupation or rental. Income starts to roll in for rental so that explains the SSD. However for new launch, even if one pays only 20% increasing to 80% or something at TOP, no rental income can be obtained. The buyer continually pump in cash to either pay developer or bank from S&P to TOP so it is still a trade off. Instant rental income for resale vs continue to pay bank/developer for new launch. Not so unfair lah...:D
linchong84
22-05-11, 23:33
Where got? EC MOP start from TOP date and not from S&P date and cannot sell at all. private SSD start from S&P date and not TOP date and can anytime, just pay SSD only mah. Why so much difference in treatment on "MOP" hah? :banghead:
wah biang.. your 'just pay SSD only mah' say till very relac.. 16% how to pay.. pok gai..
If logic should flow as you mentioned, shouldn't EC's MOP start from S&P date and not TOP date? :pSimple... EC has most in fact more facilities than some private condos. These projects are heavily subsidized by govt. Imagine why an EC developer not sell Esparina at $950psf like Quartz which is just across the road? EC is a govt subsidized condo so it is treated more like HDB than private condo. :spliff: If like what you mentioned, all people will rush to buy EC instead of private condo le... :D
See, that is the problem. Everything not free market, regulations not applied across the board, rules not applied consistently, artificially created too many categories, ECs not look like private condos mah (except that they usually cramp more units into the estate, quality also lousier, but now mass market private condo also like that) and why there is such a big different in that for EC, MOP start from TOP & not S&P and yet private condos' SSD (which is can be regarded as modified "MOP" in another form) start from S&P & not TOP, some people coffeeshop talk say got self-interests at heart to apply differently for new launch blah blah blah... :doh:
Simple... EC has most in fact more facilities than some private condos. These projects are heavily subsidized by govt. Imagine why an EC developer not sell Esparina at $950psf like Quartz which is just across the road? EC is a govt subsidized condo so it is treated more like HDB than private condo. :spliff: If like what you mentioned, all people will rush to buy EC instead of private condo le... :D
There is never an end to the EC vs private condo argument... I don't think there's gonna ever be a conclusion coz sure got people not happy... miss the train and bite the bullet... just move on... hahaha!!!:D
linchong84
23-05-11, 10:09
EC mop starts from top is because it's subsidised public housing, just like bto so there is something like a 8 year inflexibility duration.. There's this inflexibility because the housing is subsidised.. So obviously pte has to be different since it's not subsidised, ie ssd start from time of purchase, which will equate to 4 years of inflexibility.. Pte has to be more flexible.. So it doesn't make sense to punish new launch with 7-8 years ssd..
EC mop starts from top is because it's subsidised public housing, just like bto so there is something like a 8 year inflexibility duration.. There's this inflexibility because the housing is subsidised.. So obviously pte has to be different since it's not subsidised, ie ssd start from time of purchase, which will equate to 4 years of inflexibility.. Pte has to be more flexible.. So it doesn't make sense to punish new launch with 7-8 years ssd..Exactly like what I wrote earlier... :D
linchong84
23-05-11, 11:51
Actually there is nothing as fair or unfair because no policy can be so uniformly fair to everybody. In fact ECs and DBSSs should have been even cheaper if govt is logical in their thinking.
BTO - govt subsidised price (cheap cheap since HDB claim to lose money on it) + rebates (first-timer): tagged with MOP (8-9 years inflexibility)
DBSS and EC - price determined by developer (expensive since developer wants to make profits and also depends on highest land bidder) but with govt rebates (first-timer): tagged with MOP (8-9 years inflexibility)
Saw the unfairness?
Actually there is nothing as fair or unfair because no policy can be so uniformly fair to everybody. In fact ECs and DBSSs should have been even cheaper if govt is logical in their thinking.
BTO - govt subsidised price (cheap cheap since HDB claim to lose money on it) + rebates (first-timer): tagged with MOP (8-9 years inflexibility)
DBSS and EC - price determined by developer (expensive since developer wants to make profits and also depends on highest land bidder) but with govt rebates (first-timer): tagged with MOP (8-9 years inflexibility)
Saw the unfairness?Unfair unfair unfair.. stomp stomp stomp!!! :o
Sure, they can be very cheap indeed! Heard many people got their land "sold" (cannot say don't sell) to MND in early 1980s at $0.60-$1.00 psf and now the land has been resold at $300-400 psf in that similar location. :doh:
Actually there is nothing as fair or unfair because no policy can be so uniformly fair to everybody. In fact ECs and DBSSs should have been even cheaper if govt is logical in their thinking.
BTO - govt subsidised price (cheap cheap since HDB claim to lose money on it) + rebates (first-timer): tagged with MOP (8-9 years inflexibility)
DBSS and EC - price determined by developer (expensive since developer wants to make profits and also depends on highest land bidder) but with govt rebates (first-timer): tagged with MOP (8-9 years inflexibility)
Saw the unfairness?
So you are saying new launch cannot be punished and resale need to be punished? :doh:
What is the purpose of SSD? To rein-in speculation right? To force people to hold on to properties for proper intended use and not speculation right? People buy new launch and not even TOP already want to flip like crazy is not speculation then what is that? Isn't SSD suppose to be for this objective?
+ another thing, lowering LTV to 60% has no effect on new launch because buyers still is paying only 20% cash upfront (not 40% cash upfront + 60% loan upfront for resale). So there is such a big disparity between new launch sale and resale and isn't it apparent to anybody with the right sense of mind that new launch is better for speculation since SSD not effective since it expired by the time the property TOP, LTV no effect upon S&P inked? Policy makers implement policies that are they say are supposed to achieve some purpose but really only achieve the purpose for resale and yet have little effect for new launch? Is it any wonder that MBT was booted?
EC mop starts from top is because it's subsidised public housing, just like bto so there is something like a 8 year inflexibility duration.. There's this inflexibility because the housing is subsidised.. So obviously pte has to be different since it's not subsidised, ie ssd start from time of purchase, which will equate to 4 years of inflexibility.. Pte has to be more flexible.. So it doesn't make sense to punish new launch with 7-8 years ssd..
devilplate
23-05-11, 13:15
Ssd starts from top, new launches cfm drop px....resale px will drop too....
Lose-lose....
4yrs ssd at least prevent ppl from subsale n flipping
linchong84
23-05-11, 13:26
So you are saying new launch cannot be punished and resale need to be punished? :doh:
What is the purpose of SSD? To rein-in speculation right? To force people to hold on to properties for proper intended use and not speculation right? People buy new launch and not even TOP already want to flip like crazy is not speculation then what is that? Isn't SSD suppose to be for this objective?
+ another thing, lowering LTV to 60% has no effect on new launch because buyers still is paying only 20% cash upfront (not 40% cash upfront + 60% loan upfront for resale). So there is such a big disparity between new launch sale and resale and isn't it apparent to anybody with the right sense of mind that new launch is better for speculation since SSD not effective since it expired by the time the property TOP, LTV no effect upon S&P inked? Policy makers implement policies that are they say are supposed to achieve some purpose but really only achieve the purpose for resale and yet have little effect for new launch? Is it any wonder that MBT was booted?
I think when govt came out with SSD, the intent is to prevent people from flipping easily because there were many cases of buying in Jan, selling in Jun, which will create bubble. So they are trying to prevent this in the hope that price will not go up so fast due to speculation.
I dun think they are trying to make people hold for intended use (ie stay). Intended use is more like MOP which is being put on public housing. There needs to be some distinction if not pte's expensive tag will not be worth it.
1) reining in run-away prices is top govt agenda. Their policy has to be seen as equitable and fair across all categories of properties, and not seen as favorable to new launch of which they are deemed to have enormous self-interests through selling land at super high prices (which hopefully that is not the real reason otherwise :scared-2:) while penalizing the bigger resale segment (as in Govt beats property owners through their policies).
2) lowering LTV to 60% and increasing SSD to 4 years is suppose to achieve (1), so if prices drop, then too bad. Govt already considered and if they believe the prices won't drop, and they have power to reverse if drop, so no problem. Fact is, resale prices didn't drop, but volumes drop. We would expect same for new launch if the new launch buyers are forced to come up with 40% cash upfront and keep the physical properties after TOP for 4 years to eliminate effect of SSD just like new buyers. If they don't want, buy resale lah, cheaper by 20-35% and immediately can live in or rent out, sure can equalize the big gap between new launch prices and resale prices! Isn't that the purpose and way to rein-in run away prices (and this run-away price is only true for new launch and not resale property price)? :p :cheers1: Why need to buy new launch at 20-40% higher price for same tenure (e.g. FH) property and especially many older ones are more efficient and bigger land space UNLESS the purpose is just speculation? :doh:
Ssd starts from top, new launches cfm drop px....resale px will drop too....
Lose-lose....
4yrs ssd at least prevent ppl from subsale n flipping
Yes, flipping easily with low cash upfront. That is what the new launch buyers are doing and will continue to do because lowering LTV to 60% (from 80%) have no effect on them as they still pay only 20% cash upfront and no loan effected vs resale property buyers having to pay 40% cash upfront (previously only 20% just like new launch buyers) and loan immediately drawn down. :beats-me-man:
I think when govt came out with SSD, the intent is to prevent people from flipping easily because there were many cases of buying in Jan, selling in Jun, which will create bubble. So they are trying to prevent this in the hope that price will not go up so fast due to speculation.
I dun think they are trying to make people hold for intended use (ie stay). Intended use is more like MOP which is being put on public housing. There needs to be some distinction if not pte's expensive tag will not be worth it.
linchong84
23-05-11, 13:46
Yes, flipping easily with low cash upfront. That is what the new launch buyers are doing and will continue to do because lowering LTV to 60% (from 80%) have no effect on them as they still pay only 20% cash upfront and no loan effected vs resale property buyers having to pay 40% cash upfront (previously only 20% just like new launch buyers) and loan immediately drawn down. :beats-me-man:
They can no longer flip easily cos no one will want to pay 16%. Previously sub-sale happens too fast, one unit must change hands several times before it even TOP, which will definitely results in a bubble. So, now this SSD will prevent bubble from forming due to the much slower flipping which satisfy the govt's likely intent. Govt seldom want to do extreme things, they are not out to totally curb speculation. They are just trying to limit speculation to the $$-thick people.
Why they can buy their 2nd property if buying new launch with 20% cash upfront vs resale buyers having to come up with 40% cash upfront? How can that be equitable and fair? :p
They can no longer flip easily cos no one will want to pay 16%. Previously sub-sale happens too fast, one unit must change hands several times before it even TOP, which will definitely results in a bubble. So, now this SSD will prevent bubble from forming due to the much slower flipping which satisfy the govt's likely intent. Govt seldom want to do extreme things, they are not out to totally curb speculation. They are just trying to limit speculation to the $$-thick people.
linchong84
23-05-11, 13:58
Why they can buy their 2nd property if buying new launch with 20% cash upfront vs resale buyers having to come up with 40% cash upfront? How can that be equitable and fair? :p
If you buy resale you immediatly can move in and 'enjoy/use' the house. But new launch cannot leh, gotta wait so long so why should they pay so much in the beginning.
Yes, they need otherwise what is the purpose of cooling measure reducing LTV to 60%? Last time buying resale and new launch all pay 20% CASH upfront. After the new cooling measure reducing LTV to 60%, resale buyers need to pay 40% CASH upfront and yet new launch sale buyers still only pay 20% CASH upfront. Ironic? Cool measure to cool resale but not new launch sale when it is the new launch price that is escalating out of control and selling at 25-50% above resale property prices in same neighbourhood? :doh:
If based on what you say makes sense, then last time resale buyers need to pay 20% CASH upfront, new launch buyers can pay 0% CASH upfront since they need to wait so long?
If you buy resale you immediatly can move in and 'enjoy/use' the house. But new launch cannot leh, gotta wait so long so why should they pay so much in the beginning.
linchong84
23-05-11, 17:37
They are trying to reduce property flipping, ie reduce amt of changing hands because this changing hands have been forming a bubble.. That's their motive for coming out with ssd, ltv, to prevent bubble.. No single solution can solve all problems, and there are some problems the govt dun see it as big enough so bochap first loh.. Whether it's right to bochap or not is another thing lah..
So you are saying new launch cannot be punished and resale need to be punished? :doh:
What is the purpose of SSD? To rein-in speculation right? To force people to hold on to properties for proper intended use and not speculation right? People buy new launch and not even TOP already want to flip like crazy is not speculation then what is that? Isn't SSD suppose to be for this objective?
+ another thing, lowering LTV to 60% has no effect on new launch because buyers still is paying only 20% cash upfront (not 40% cash upfront + 60% loan upfront for resale). So there is such a big disparity between new launch sale and resale and isn't it apparent to anybody with the right sense of mind that new launch is better for speculation since SSD not effective since it expired by the time the property TOP, LTV no effect upon S&P inked? Policy makers implement policies that are they say are supposed to achieve some purpose but really only achieve the purpose for resale and yet have little effect for new launch? Is it any wonder that MBT was booted?As much as I agree with the points you've raised, you are merely painting the strength of buying new launch for investors but failed at describing the weaknesses. Like what I've written earlier... there are 2 types of investments. 1st is for flippers which is severely handicapped with the 4 yr SSD. 2nd is for rental income and waiting patiently for price to climb. You are talking only on the 1st type of investment.
For this 2nd type of investment, it is clear that once a resale unit is purchased, after renovation (if necessary) the unit is ready for self occupation or rental. Income starts to roll in for rental so that explains the SSD. However for new launch, even if one pays only 20% increasing to 80% or something at TOP, no rental income can be obtained. The buyer continually pump in cash to either pay developer or bank from S&P to TOP so it is still a trade off. Instant rental income for resale vs continue to pay bank/developer for new launch. Not so unfair lah...
Why they can buy their 2nd property if buying new launch with 20% cash upfront vs resale buyers having to come up with 40% cash upfront? How can that be equitable and fair? :pLet's hypothetically provide a scenario. A bought a new launches and put down 20% for that unit. B bought 1 resale and put down 40% for his unit. Both A paid $400k and B paid $800k in total. Let's analyse 2 cases.
Case A: Let jus say both sell their units immediately and incur the 16% SSD so unless they can find a buyer willing to pay more than 16% appreciation (extremely unlikely), both A and B will lose out.
Case B: If say both decides to sell only after 2 years, A would have easily paid another 20% for the various stages of the building to the developer so both have paid 40% for each unit but A received nothing from his unit unlike B who have received maybe $3k/month rental for the last 24 months = $72k.
We agree that case A is difficult to achieve, leaving majority of the buyers with case B. So who will benefit? Isn't it buyer B, the one you've been complaining about?
If it is so simple, then why all those new launch buyers don't buy resale paying 40% CASH upfront but paying 30-50% cheaper price than new launch property and instead opt for new launch paying 20% CASH upfront but pay 30-50% higher price? There must be something you are missing here otherwise these people must have been dumb, stupid idiot to pay 30-50% more for new launch property and yet loose out on rental income? :doh:
Let's hypothetically provide a scenario. A bought a new launches and put down 20% for that unit. B bought 1 resale and put down 40% for his unit. Both A paid $400k and B paid $800k in total. Let's analyse 2 cases.
Case A: Let jus say both sell their units immediately and incur the 16% SSD so unless they can find a buyer willing to pay more than 16% appreciation (extremely unlikely), both A and B will lose out.
Case B: If say both decides to sell only after 2 years, A would have easily paid another 20% for the various stages of the building to the developer so both have paid 40% for each unit but A received nothing from his unit unlike B who have received maybe $3k/month rental for the last 24 months = $72k.
We agree that case A is difficult to achieve, leaving majority of the buyers with case B. So who will benefit? Isn't it buyer B, the one you've been complaining about?
If it is so simple, then why all those new launch buyers don't buy resale paying 40% CASH upfront but paying 30-50% cheaper price than new launch property and instead opt for new launch paying 20% CASH upfront but pay 30-50% higher price? There must be something you are missing here otherwise these people must have been dumb, stupid idiot to pay 30-50% more for new launch property and yet loose out on rental income? :doh:Well just look at the recent CM introduced only in Jan (4 months back) where the 4 yr SSD was imposed. Before that, flippers were rampant and both the new launches and resale also allow flippers. No rental income was in play. Those who invest longer term would prefer resale naturally. However, with Jan's CM, flippers disappeared effectively.
Those who prefer to buy new launch are therefore mostly for self-stay since no incentive for rent. Also, they may not have upfront cash of 40% plus renovation for resale (easily costing $480k for a $1m property) so they opt for new launch ($240k for a $1.2m property). Those who opt for resale still has the option of long term investment in mind through rental.
Btw, the new launches are not 30% to 50% more than resale lah... maybe for psf its about 10% to 20% more. However, their floor area shrunk drastically so the total amount for a single unit may be similar with resale. Furthermore, new launches now don't need to have those undesirable bay windows, etc. Having said that, location, whether new launches or resale is still of great importance to buyers and potential investors... :p
rattydrama
24-05-11, 00:21
if the policy of SSD effective on S&P for new launch and buyer still flock cost of 20% dp, then more land sales price and psf launch price will continue to achive record price. Once the music stops, who will suffer? new minister surely have to do something.
This will create spiral effect - a constant price increase of ppty price and those late entrance become less affordable/carry more debts. More complaint will come. :2cents:
if the policy of SSD effective on S&P for new launch and buyer still flock cost of 20% dp, then more land sales price and psf launch price will continue to achive record price. Once the music stops, who will suffer? new minister surely have to do something.
This will create spiral effect - a constant price increase of ppty price and those late entrance become less affordable/carry more debts. More complaint will come. :2cents:Hopefully KBW and his able team will be on their toes and foresee such tricky situations...:p In the mean time, if for own stay, just go ahead and buy the choicest unit... if for investment, maybe just hang on and see what new measures are dished out... Think he will do something more comprehensive than his predecessor... :D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.