PDA

View Full Version : CM5 may be forever



phantom_opera
20-12-11, 11:05
The additional buyer’s stamp duty could become a permanent fixture in the residential property market even after prices cool, according to Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

Chua Hak Bin, an economist at the bank, said cooling measures implemented in 1996 to differentiate between local and foreign buyers were eventually repealed but this new measure is different.

“The 1996 measures were seen as more of a move to cool the market, but this round seems more like a political move,” he said.

He noted that the latest measures aim to differentiate between the rights and privileges of Singaporeans, permanent residents (PRs) and foreigners.

Under these rules, foreigners are required to pay an additional 10 percent stamp duty when acquiring residential property. PRs who purchase second and subsequent homes and Singaporeans who buy third and subsequent homes have to pay an extra three percent stamp duty.

“The measures come at a time when foreigners make up around 40 percent of the luxury market and are seen to be making headway into the mass-market home segment. Singapore is also seen as a good place to park capital,” he said.

Meanwhile, Sing Tien Foo, Associate Professor at the National University of Singapore's (NUS) department of real estate, cautioned that the effects of the new measures could be disastrous if the Eurozone debt crisis continues.

“While the measures will help stabilise the market and eliminate speculators, it will also block liquidity from entering the property market,” he said, adding that “this may result in a sharp downward spiral of prices.”

ysyap
20-12-11, 11:12
The govt reiterated that its because of escalating home prices that this latest measure was introduced, not so much a political move... it'll be political if its 2015 now... :rolleyes:

devilplate
20-12-11, 11:46
cannot be forever unless px only correct abit and stay flat?

vboy
20-12-11, 12:18
cant be forever if singapore wants to remain an attractive place for foreign investment for the long term, ie it cannot be seen as being discriminatory to foreign funds inflow.

imo, this is a temporary measure as singapore does not want to deal with the vestiges of a burst bubble later on. Huge liquidities are now flowing into safe haven hard assets as can be seen in the likes of London and Hong Kong, and are pushing up prices there to extreme levels.

rattydrama
20-12-11, 12:21
The govt reiterated that its because of escalating home prices that this latest measure was introduced, not so much a political move... it'll be political if its 2015 now... :rolleyes:

will gov lift this policy just before the next election in 2016? suspect by then there will be slow growth, all infrastructure could be ready and foreigners to up the price just comes in handy.

phantom_opera
20-12-11, 12:52
imo ... this is a pan-Asia phenomenon, our policy needs to catch up with China ... i.e. if China is measured 100 on draconian index, we must be at least 70 ... due to the macro environment hot money tends to flow into any Asian society that is less regulated ... next one probably Malaysia lol

cm6 is a possibility when mainland Chinese buying through proxy Singaporeans / SPRs

azeoprop
20-12-11, 12:59
Haa haa....all the investors will flock to iskandar :rolleyes:

rattydrama
20-12-11, 13:00
Haa haa....all the investors will flock to iskandar :rolleyes:

might get stuck high and dry......:scared-3:

yaozong7
20-12-11, 13:08
will gov lift this policy just before the next election in 2016? suspect by then there will be slow growth, all infrastructure could be ready and foreigners to up the price just comes in handy.

Errr....Are you an elite? Cos Sinkies will never ever contemplate to ask such a question, esp to consider removing it just before GE 2016?

jwong71
20-12-11, 13:11
cannot be forever unless px only correct abit and stay flat?

should be remain forever, until speculation season over:D

if crash 30-40%, and remove it. will see repeat cycle of speculation.

the govt want it to grow moderately

rattydrama
20-12-11, 13:12
Errr....Are you an elite? Cos Sinkies will never ever contemplate to ask such a question, esp to consider removing it just before GE 2016?

no need to be an elite... they need to make young voters happy. first getting a house, next is asset enhancement.

getting PR to buy so they can sell at good price or make it easy for singaporeans to buy more private ppty and rent out to non-sporeans.

yaozong7
20-12-11, 13:36
no need to be an elite... they need to make young voters happy. first getting a house, next is asset enhancement.

getting PR to buy so they can sell at good price or make it easy for singaporeans to buy more private ppty and rent out to non-sporeans.

But there will always be new batches of young Singaporeans coming on board. Where do these Sinkies stand then?

To put the housing question in perspective, high home prices only really became a political issue following sharp rises post 2005. Housing was never a real political headache previously. Besides sinkies, look around the world and Hong Kongers, Aussies, Israelies are all complaining.

The Govt may certainly remove the measure in due course but to remove it just before GE 2016 smacks of political suicide. Granted Pinky and Georgie were rather detached from sinkies world in the past, but they are certainly more aware now. Look at Lui Tuck Yew and KBW for instance...

ysyap
20-12-11, 13:55
should be remain forever, until speculation season over:D

if crash 30-40%, and remove it. will see repeat cycle of speculation.

the govt want it to grow moderatelyTo moderate growth, just reduce ABSD from 10% to 5% and 3% to 1.5% respectively lor... :rolleyes:

Eastboy
20-12-11, 22:14
To me whether CM5 (or any other CMs) stays or not really depends on the context. If government want to score political points, they will definitely demonstrate flexibility in removing or adding CMs based on economic situation. What the electorate wants to see is a nimble and responsive govt, not a static and bureaucratic one. So IMHO, CM5 will be a wild card that the government portrays its flexibility.