View Full Version : The only two certainties in life are death and taxes
“The only two certainties in life are death and taxes.”
Did you know that "Denmark collects about 49 per cent of GDP in taxes, Finland about 44 per cent. In our case it is about 16 per cent."?
The Government collected abt $10 Billion from GST. Lower 60% of all earners contributed 15% of that, i.e $1.5 billion. But in 2015 the government is paying out $715 million in GST Voucher to help lower-income families offset about half of the GST they pay each year. Retiree couples living in smaller flats can expect to receive a GST Voucher that will more than fully offset their yearly GST expenses. Middle-income families can also expect to receive a GST Voucher that will partially offset their GST expenses.
Furthermore, the GST voucher is started in 2012 with an Endowment fund. The Government is committed to increase the payout as we build up this fund. Since 2012, the permanent Cash payout has been increase by $50 to $300. the Senior Bonus has also been doubled this year to up to $600.
The average worker in Denmark pays an income tax of about 36 per cent, consumption taxes about 25 per cent. Finland has a somewhat similar consumption tax, about 24 per cent. Even if we look at their discounted VAT tiers — for instance, in Finland it is about 14 per cent for food — the average worker pays a lot of taxes.
https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/11223646_884976518225024_312659515665015792_n.jpg?oh=c46b3e6161415a0fbe48624a46c88962&oe=5680455E
http://www.todayonline.com/commentary/how-spore-sustains-income-growth-tempers-inequality-and-keeps-social-mobility-alive?singlepage=true
One's should chose to give than to take.
With this mindset One's will be looking to how to give more instead of waiting for handout.
https://scontent-hkg3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtp1/t31.0-8/11145208_886039504785392_166528671813947709_o.png
How about share how much benefits the Finnish and Dannish get for what they pay???? :dog:
How about share how much Finnish and Dannish Ministers are being paid???? :monkey:
And why conveniently choose Finland and Denmark ONLY, why didn't comment on Singapore's 7% GST vs UK's 20% VAT, because people in the know will know that average Singaporeans pay MUCH more consumption taxes at 7% GST vs British paying 20% VAT!!!!!!!!!!!!! :gun4:
So General Election coming?
minority pushing Propoganda in full gear????
Don't make the same mistake again, like telling us that Singapore's Ministers earning OBSCENE salary OK?
https://scontent-hkg3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtp1/t31.0-8/11145208_886039504785392_166528671813947709_o.png
How about share how much benefits the Finnish and Dannish get for what they pay???? :dog:
How about share how much Finnish and Dannish Ministers are being paid???? :monkey:
And why conveniently choose Finland and Denmark ONLY, why didn't comment on Singapore's 7% GST vs UK's 20% VAT, because people in the know will know that average Singaporeans pay MUCH more consumption taxes at 7% GST vs British paying 20% VAT!!!!!!!!!!!!! :gun4:
So General Election coming?
minority pushing Propoganda in full gear????
Don't make the same mistake again, like telling us that Singapore's Ministers earning OBSCENE salary OK?
since u say Dannish and Finnish so good. You should share. Don't talk cock. and everyday KPKB GST on Sugar!!!! LOL!! NO GST REBATE? for low income? NO GST for poly clinic!!! So your bulls shit is very strong!
Singapore: Socialist Heart In Capitalist Clothing
Let me illustrate with fuel as the good.
Singaporeans always compare the high fuel prices in this country with those of neighbouring countries, where fuel is subsidized. And most Singaporeans hanker for lower prices and believe that lower prices are in their welfare. But is it really so?
Let’s take a look at a simple example below:
1st Scenario: Price of fuel was kept low at $1 per litre
Rich Man Average Man
Price of Fuel $1 per litre
Quantity Consumed per Month 200 Litres 100 Litres
Government Revenue $300
Outcome: The rich man pays $200 for fuel every month since he travels more on his oil-guzzling luxury European car while the average man pays $100 to run his no-frills and more fuel-efficient car.
2nd Scenario: The price of fuel is taxed heavily and the price goes up to $2 per litre
Rich Man Average Man
Price of Fuel $2 per litre
Quantity Consumed per Month 200 Litres 100 Litres
Government Revenue $600
Outcome: Both the rich man and the average man pays double the amount and the Government Revenue increases to $600.
And this is when Singaporeans cry foul, castigating the government for profiteering from the hard-earned money of Singaporeans. But is that really the case? What if the extra $300 was redistributed back to the average man and the poor man in the form of social transfers?
Rich Average Poor Govt
Fuel Payment -$400 -$200 $0 $600
Transfers $0 $120 $180 -$300
Final Outcome -$400 -$80 $180 $300
In the end, compared to the 1st scenario, only the rich man is paying more. The average man saves $20 and the poor man, who can’t afford a car and doesn’t spend any money on fuel, actually gains $180 from others’ consumption of fuel.
I think most of us would agree on such a social contract, where the poor receives more help from the government. So isn’t Scenario B a better option?
This applies for GST on even basic items like rice and sugar since the richer are more likely to consume more. You could also replace fuel with other goods like COEs and alcohol and the argument and conclusion will stay the same.
Why Scenario B, Like The Government, Is Under-Appreciated
In Singapore, there’s actually a lot of social transfers back to the middle class and the lower income in the form of housing, education and healthcare subsidies. However, these transfers are not well-appreciated by the general population as they are largely undetected by most social indicators.
Moreover, in the hypothetical example, the average man sees the high price of fuel on a daily basis whereas the rebates are likely given only once a month. Therefore, psychologically, he’s likely to be full of angst whenever he has to top up his petrol and might easily “complain” about the government. And when rebates like GST vouchers get credited to his account, he tends to “forget” about them.
But sadly, in the name of effectiveness, the government has to stick with this arrangement and bear the brunt of psychological biases. Talk about getting the shorter end of the stick, even when the heart is socialist.
Singapore: Socialist Heart In Capitalist Clothing
Let me illustrate with fuel as the good.
Singaporeans always compare the high fuel prices in this country with those of neighbouring countries, where fuel is subsidized. And most Singaporeans hanker for lower prices and believe that lower prices are in their welfare. But is it really so?
Let’s take a look at a simple example below:
1st Scenario: Price of fuel was kept low at $1 per litre
Rich Man Average Man
Price of Fuel $1 per litre
Quantity Consumed per Month 200 Litres 100 Litres
Government Revenue $300
Outcome: The rich man pays $200 for fuel every month since he travels more on his oil-guzzling luxury European car while the average man pays $100 to run his no-frills and more fuel-efficient car.
2nd Scenario: The price of fuel is taxed heavily and the price goes up to $2 per litre
Rich Man Average Man
Price of Fuel $2 per litre
Quantity Consumed per Month 200 Litres 100 Litres
Government Revenue $600
Outcome: Both the rich man and the average man pays double the amount and the Government Revenue increases to $600.
And this is when Singaporeans cry foul, castigating the government for profiteering from the hard-earned money of Singaporeans. But is that really the case? What if the extra $300 was redistributed back to the average man and the poor man in the form of social transfers?
Rich Average Poor Govt
Fuel Payment -$400 -$200 $0 $600
Transfers $0 $120 $180 -$300
Final Outcome -$400 -$80 $180 $300
In the end, compared to the 1st scenario, only the rich man is paying more. The average man saves $20 and the poor man, who can’t afford a car and doesn’t spend any money on fuel, actually gains $180 from others’ consumption of fuel.
I think most of us would agree on such a social contract, where the poor receives more help from the government. So isn’t Scenario B a better option?
This applies for GST on even basic items like rice and sugar since the richer are more likely to consume more. You could also replace fuel with other goods like COEs and alcohol and the argument and conclusion will stay the same.
Why Scenario B, Like The Government, Is Under-Appreciated
In Singapore, there’s actually a lot of social transfers back to the middle class and the lower income in the form of housing, education and healthcare subsidies. However, these transfers are not well-appreciated by the general population as they are largely undetected by most social indicators.
Moreover, in the hypothetical example, the average man sees the high price of fuel on a daily basis whereas the rebates are likely given only once a month. Therefore, psychologically, he’s likely to be full of angst whenever he has to top up his petrol and might easily “complain” about the government. And when rebates like GST vouchers get credited to his account, he tends to “forget” about them.
But sadly, in the name of effectiveness, the government has to stick with this arrangement and bear the brunt of psychological biases. Talk about getting the shorter end of the stick, even when the heart is socialist.
Master Minority, very well illustrated. In life it is not always based on figured and facts. I met a guy who owned many super sport cars. He must b the world greatest fool to pay so much taxes to the govt. but after deep thought. Who actually pay his taxes. All of us come with nothing and go with nothing. Work hard and enjoy your life. He told me he rather be a fool driving Ferrari than a wise guy on MRT.
I think UK is good, because all their basic necessities and children stuffs are exempted from 20% VAT! Why are they able to do so but Singapore can't? Because they tax the SUPER RICH much more while Singapore cut TAXES of the SUPER RICH just to increase GST to 7% !!!!!!!!!!! :hopelessness:
However, I think Hong Kong is even better!
They have NO GST!!!!!!!!!!!!!
minority,
So you can't come up with better rebuttal?
Oh gosh!
Hopeless, that is what you should be called! :hopelessness:
Singapore cut top income tax rates from 33% to 20%, and corporate tax rates from 30% to 17%, but raised GST from 0 to 7%, so who paid for the income tax SAVINGS saved by the RICH? Can't be the rich right?
GST collect taxes from everybody, now the babies, the retirees, the sick, the poor, the middle-income, the low middle-incomers (of which >80% of Singaporeans are in these categories) have to pay GST to make for the tax savings by the RICH!
And who are the RICH and the HIGH-INCOME earners who got tax cuts and huge tax savings????? :topsy_turvy:
But obvious you can't reasonably rebutt the facts I raised isn't it? :smiley_simmons:
since u say Dannish and Finnish so good. You should share. Don't talk cock. and everyday KPKB GST on Sugar!!!! LOL!! NO GST REBATE? for low income? NO GST for poly clinic!!! So your bulls shit is very strong!
How about share how much benefits the Finnish and Dannish get for what they pay???? :dog:
How about share how much Finnish and Dannish Ministers are being paid???? :monkey:
And why conveniently choose Finland and Denmark ONLY, why didn't comment on Singapore's 7% GST vs UK's 20% VAT, because people in the know will know that average Singaporeans pay MUCH more consumption taxes at 7% GST vs British paying 20% VAT!!!!!!!!!!!!! :gun4:
So General Election coming?
minority pushing Propoganda in full gear????
Don't make the same mistake again, like telling us that Singapore's Ministers earning OBSCENE salary OK?
Socialist heart????? Not sure what you mean................
Is cutting the taxes of the OBSCENE INCOME earners from 33% to 20% and SUPER RICH corporate taxes from 30% to 17% while INCREASING GST to 7% (from 0) considered "Socialist heart"?
Singapore: Socialist Heart In Capitalist Clothing
Let me illustrate with fuel as the good.
Singaporeans always compare the high fuel prices in this country with those of neighbouring countries, where fuel is subsidized. And most Singaporeans hanker for lower prices and believe that lower prices are in their welfare. But is it really so?
Let’s take a look at a simple example below:
1st Scenario: Price of fuel was kept low at $1 per litre
Rich Man Average Man
Price of Fuel $1 per litre
Quantity Consumed per Month 200 Litres 100 Litres
Government Revenue $300
Outcome: The rich man pays $200 for fuel every month since he travels more on his oil-guzzling luxury European car while the average man pays $100 to run his no-frills and more fuel-efficient car.
2nd Scenario: The price of fuel is taxed heavily and the price goes up to $2 per litre
Rich Man Average Man
Price of Fuel $2 per litre
Quantity Consumed per Month 200 Litres 100 Litres
Government Revenue $600
Outcome: Both the rich man and the average man pays double the amount and the Government Revenue increases to $600.
And this is when Singaporeans cry foul, castigating the government for profiteering from the hard-earned money of Singaporeans. But is that really the case? What if the extra $300 was redistributed back to the average man and the poor man in the form of social transfers?
Rich Average Poor Govt
Fuel Payment -$400 -$200 $0 $600
Transfers $0 $120 $180 -$300
Final Outcome -$400 -$80 $180 $300
In the end, compared to the 1st scenario, only the rich man is paying more. The average man saves $20 and the poor man, who can’t afford a car and doesn’t spend any money on fuel, actually gains $180 from others’ consumption of fuel.
I think most of us would agree on such a social contract, where the poor receives more help from the government. So isn’t Scenario B a better option?
This applies for GST on even basic items like rice and sugar since the richer are more likely to consume more. You could also replace fuel with other goods like COEs and alcohol and the argument and conclusion will stay the same.
Why Scenario B, Like The Government, Is Under-Appreciated
In Singapore, there’s actually a lot of social transfers back to the middle class and the lower income in the form of housing, education and healthcare subsidies. However, these transfers are not well-appreciated by the general population as they are largely undetected by most social indicators.
Moreover, in the hypothetical example, the average man sees the high price of fuel on a daily basis whereas the rebates are likely given only once a month. Therefore, psychologically, he’s likely to be full of angst whenever he has to top up his petrol and might easily “complain” about the government. And when rebates like GST vouchers get credited to his account, he tends to “forget” about them.
But sadly, in the name of effectiveness, the government has to stick with this arrangement and bear the brunt of psychological biases. Talk about getting the shorter end of the stick, even when the heart is socialist.
I think UK is good, because all their basic necessities and children stuffs are exempted from 20% VAT!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VllsIcUPVIk
LKY when he was there say, their system cannot last long.
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/malaysian-encounter-singapore-minister-060046821.html?linkId=16425568
https://media.zenfs.com/en-SG/homerun/vulcanpost.com/30f4750bdbb142f4ca0bcdeb89695b1a
How about the following situation that happened in Singapore:
Rich men and high-income earners are getting better deal with below policies:
1) Income tax reduced from 33% to 20% and corporate tax reduced from 30% to 17%
2) Estate duties abolished
3) GST implemented and increased to 7% to make up for the short-falls due to (1) & (2).
Now, assuming a high-income earners (or businessmen) earning $10m a year.
Because of (1) above, he saved $1.3 MILLIONs a year in income taxes.
Because of (2), his wealth will not be taxed when he passed on to his children (contrary to what our minister saying that the way forward is to tax "wealth", and yet they removed the very grandfather scheme, i.e. estate duty, that really tax wealth!).
Now, people will say, rich people pay more GSTs wah. Well, they earn $10m a year, but there is a limit to what they can consume. So, most likely they only spend $1m a year on family expenses (say they do so before GST of 7% implemented), and after 7% GST they pay GST of $70k.
Wow, because of (1) & (3), the RICH have a net savings of $1.23 MILLIONs in taxes!
Oh my, I have not even mentioned that they will not even spend all $1m in Singapore, so the GST they pay is even less!
----------------------------
Next, we compare to the middle-income earner, say earning $100k a year.
Because of (1), they probably save 1% in tax or $1k a year.
They don't benefit from (2).
Now, with 7% GST, how much they pay in taxes for GST? Most middle income earners spent most of their money on living, most likely about $70k a year on their family expenses (say before GST implemented). After GST implemented, they will need to pay GST taxes of $4900 a year.
Wow! The poor middle income earners are now slapped with additional taxes of $3900 a year!
So, as we see, over the past few years, the tax changes actually favoured the rich and made them save more taxes vs the poor middle income earners who are made to pay more taxes!
Did the middle income earners earning $100k a year get back rebates to offset the additional taxes they paid?
If they do, then who is paying for the drop in income taxes of the rich?????
These short-fall in government tax revenue don't drop from the sky right? As far as we know, it has been more than made up by GST collections! Who pay more taxes than? Well, everybody, including the babies, the poor, the sick, the disabled, the retirees etc who don't even earn an income (not to mention the lower middle-income and middle income group)!
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/malaysian-encounter-singapore-minister-060046821.html?linkId=16425568
https://media.zenfs.com/en-SG/homerun/vulcanpost.com/30f4750bdbb142f4ca0bcdeb89695b1a
There is no such things call fair, only things fair is when you come empty and go empty.
All the money, asset, collector item you have, stay in this World.
Ok ok, if UNFAIR, then minority should just ADMIT IT and SAY SO, just admit that policy makers choose to do so, don't have to LIE to us and tell us that GST penalizes the RICH and HELP THE POOR! Then, what about GST penalizes all the LOWER MIDDLE-INCOME and MIDDLE-INCOME groups WHILE allowing the SUPER RICH and TOP INCOME EARNERS to REDUCE PAYING SO MUCH TAXES???? :hopelessness:
There is no such things call fair, only things fair is when you come empty and go empty.
All the money, asset, collector item you have, stay in this World.
How about the following situation that happened in Singapore:
Rich men and high-income earners are getting better deal with below policies:
1) Income tax reduced from 33% to 20% and corporate tax reduced from 30% to 17%
2) Estate duties abolished
3) GST implemented and increased to 7% to make up for the short-falls due to (1) & (2).
Now, assuming a high-income earners (or businessmen) earning $10m a year.
Because of (1) above, he saved $1.3 MILLIONs a year in income taxes.
Because of (2), his wealth will not be taxed when he passed on to his children (contrary to what our minister saying that the way forward is to tax "wealth", and yet they removed the very grandfather scheme, i.e. estate duty, that really tax wealth!).
Now, people will say, rich people pay more GSTs wah. Well, they earn $10m a year, but there is a limit to what they can consume. So, most likely they only spend $1m a year on family expenses (say they do so before GST of 7% implemented), and after 7% GST they pay GST of $70k.
Wow, because of (1) & (3), the RICH have a net savings of $1.23 MILLIONs in taxes!
Oh my, I have not even mentioned that they will not even spend all $1m in Singapore, so the GST they pay is even less!
----------------------------
Next, we compare to the middle-income earner, say earning $100k a year.
Because of (1), they probably save 1% in tax or $1k a year.
They don't benefit from (2).
Now, with 7% GST, how much they pay in taxes for GST? Most middle income earners spent most of their money on living, most likely about $70k a year on their family expenses (say before GST implemented). After GST implemented, they will need to pay GST taxes of $4900 a year.
Wow! The poor middle income earners are now slapped with additional taxes of $3900 a year!
So, as we see, over the past few years, the tax changes actually favoured the rich and made them save more taxes vs the poor middle income earners who are made to pay more taxes!
Did the middle income earners earning $100k a year get back rebates to offset the additional taxes they paid?
If they do, then who is paying for the drop in income taxes of the rich?????
These short-fall in government tax revenue don't drop from the sky right? As far as we know, it has been more than made up by GST collections! Who pay more taxes than? Well, everybody, including the babies, the poor, the sick, the disabled, the retirees etc who don't even earn an income (not to mention the lower middle-income and middle income group)!
Ok ok, if UNFAIR, then minority should just ADMIT IT and SAY SO, just admit that policy makers choose to do so, don't have to LIE to us and tell us that GST penalizes the RICH and HELP THE POOR! Then, what about GST penalizes all the LOWER MIDDLE-INCOME and MIDDLE-INCOME groups WHILE allowing the SUPER RICH and TOP INCOME EARNERS to REDUCE PAYING SO MUCH TAXES???? :hopelessness:
LOL!! YOUR ESTATE TAX!!! THE GUY DIE HE CARE HE GET TAX A NOT? OK IF HE WANT TO PASS ON DONT WANT TO GET TAX RICH ALWAYS HAVE RESORUCES TO BY PASS THAT!! DONT YOU KNOW MANY RICH BUY INSURANCE TO COVER ESTATE TAX!!!! DONT YOU KNOW IF U TRANSFER UR ESTATE 5yr BEFORE YOU DIE NO TAX?? THERE ARE SO MANY BLOODY WAY TO BY PASS THAT AND MOVE THE $$ OUT OF THE COUNTRY!!!
SO DONT COME BULL SHIT!!
U THINK THE RICH WORRY 7% GST MEH. THEY CARE LIFE STYLE!! THEIR BIG CAR, BIG HOUSE THEIR DINNING OUTSIDE , THEIR SHOPPING , THEY GO SEE SPECIALIST DOCTOR !! SO THEY SPEND MORE GET TAX MORE!!
WHILE THE LOW INCOME HAVE GST REBATE !!!! HAVE NO GST FOR POLY CLINIC NO GST!!! SO WHAT GST IMPACT THE POOR!!! TALK COCK LIKE SING SONG.
SO DONT COME TALK COCK LAH!!! YOU 160K IS MIDDLE INCOME HERE IS REALLY BULLSHIT!
WHERE IN MY POST I SAY THE WORLD IS FAIR? BUT I STAND BY THE FACT GST COST THE RICH MORE!! AND DO NOT PENALISE THE POOR! SO DONT AS USUAL PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH N LIE !
How about the following situation that happened in Singapore:
Rich men and high-income earners are getting better deal with below policies:
1) Income tax reduced from 33% to 20% and corporate tax reduced from 30% to 17%
2) Estate duties abolished
3) GST implemented and increased to 7% to make up for the short-falls due to (1) & (2).
Now, assuming a high-income earners (or businessmen) earning $10m a year.
Because of (1) above, he saved $1.3 MILLIONs a year in income taxes.
Because of (2), his wealth will not be taxed when he passed on to his children (contrary to what our minister saying that the way forward is to tax "wealth", and yet they removed the very grandfather scheme, i.e. estate duty, that really tax wealth!).
Now, people will say, rich people pay more GSTs wah. Well, they earn $10m a year, but there is a limit to what they can consume. So, most likely they only spend $1m a year on family expenses (say they do so before GST of 7% implemented), and after 7% GST they pay GST of $70k.
Wow, because of (1) & (3), the RICH have a net savings of $1.23 MILLIONs in taxes!
Oh my, I have not even mentioned that they will not even spend all $1m in Singapore, so the GST they pay is even less!
----------------------------
Next, we compare to the middle-income earner, say earning $100k a year.
Because of (1), they probably save 1% in tax or $1k a year.
They don't benefit from (2).
Now, with 7% GST, how much they pay in taxes for GST? Most middle income earners spent most of their money on living, most likely about $70k a year on their family expenses (say before GST implemented). After GST implemented, they will need to pay GST taxes of $4900 a year.
Wow! The poor middle income earners are now slapped with additional taxes of $3900 a year!
So, as we see, over the past few years, the tax changes actually favoured the rich and made them save more taxes vs the poor middle income earners who are made to pay more taxes!
Did the middle income earners earning $100k a year get back rebates to offset the additional taxes they paid?
If they do, then who is paying for the drop in income taxes of the rich?????
These short-fall in government tax revenue don't drop from the sky right? As far as we know, it has been more than made up by GST collections! Who pay more taxes than? Well, everybody, including the babies, the poor, the sick, the disabled, the retirees etc who don't even earn an income (not to mention the lower middle-income and middle income group)!
So in you ANAL LOGY... BY Taxing the Rich 2-3M TAX And they are force to seek haven other countries or move $$$ offshore and they spend good life here dont pay GST will benefit singapore? And after that how Rich evaded tax or left? Tax the poor coz the top tier spends have left? SO WHO PAY FOR THE INFRA DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER SOCIAL SUPPORT SCHEMES? $$$ FALL FROM SKY? COME FROM YOUR ASS?
TALK COCK LIKE PANG SAI.
I think UK is good, because all their basic necessities and children stuffs are exempted from 20% VAT! Why are they able to do so but Singapore can't? Because they tax the SUPER RICH much more while Singapore cut TAXES of the SUPER RICH just to increase GST to 7% !!!!!!!!!!! :hopelessness:
However, I think Hong Kong is even better!
They have NO GST!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HK!! LOL they have a army to maintain to defend themselves? Thier poor still living in CAGES!!!!! and RICH ARE ON MOUNTAIN TOP! AND THE HK PEOPLE ENVY SINGAPOREAN PUBLIC HOUSING SCHEME WHICH THEY HAVE TO WAIT LIKE 10YRS EVEN TO STAND A CHANCE?
SO ???? NO GST WORKS??? WOW... you ANAL LOGY IS SO STRONG!
http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1774202/hong-kongs-public-housing-model-shaky-ground
Despite their similar nature, there is a reason Hong Kong's public housing programme is less sustainable than its Singaporean counterpart. Singapore's one million Housing and Development Board flats have all been sold to qualified applicants, generating revenue to sustain its long-term public housing initiatives, lessening the likelihood of speculation, while increasing social stability and homeowners' sense of belonging.
Contrast that with Hong Kong. Each of the city's 744,000 public rental housing units under the Housing Authority cost about HK$1.2 million to build, at today's prices, while their land premium - estimated at HK$1 million per unit - is absorbed by the government. There is no way these amounts can be covered by the HK$1,550 average monthly rent per flat. If we add another HK$2,000 to HK$3,000 to cover annual maintenance and management expenses per flat, the total hidden cost of the current stock of public rental units easily hits HK$1.6 trillion-plus at today's market value.
Guess who's footing the bill? Taxpayers. Furthermore, of the current stock of 420,000 Home Ownership Scheme flats and other similar subsidised flats, only around 20 per cent of owners have paid their subsidised land premiums, leaving some 340,000 HOS flats where premiums are unpaid. This means the Housing Authority is owed some HK$340 billion in land premium revenue, assuming an average of HK$1 million for each redemption. This deprives the second-hand market of these flats, given that such apartments can't be sold or rented out in the open market.
Minority,
Don't talk cock lah!
The SUPER RICH obviously don't care about 7% GST, and don't care about 13% INCOME TAX CUT as well!
Why policy makers so worried about them then so must cut their income taxes and corporate taxes?????
LOL!! YOUR ESTATE TAX!!! THE GUY DIE HE CARE HE GET TAX A NOT? OK IF HE WANT TO PASS ON DONT WANT TO GET TAX RICH ALWAYS HAVE RESORUCES TO BY PASS THAT!! DONT YOU KNOW MANY RICH BUY INSURANCE TO COVER ESTATE TAX!!!! DONT YOU KNOW IF U TRANSFER UR ESTATE 5yr BEFORE YOU DIE NO TAX?? THERE ARE SO MANY BLOODY WAY TO BY PASS THAT AND MOVE THE $$ OUT OF THE COUNTRY!!!
SO DONT COME BULL SHIT!!
U THINK THE RICH WORRY 7% GST MEH. THEY CARE LIFE STYLE!! THEIR BIG CAR, BIG HOUSE THEIR DINNING OUTSIDE , THEIR SHOPPING , THEY GO SEE SPECIALIST DOCTOR !! SO THEY SPEND MORE GET TAX MORE!!
WHILE THE LOW INCOME HAVE GST REBATE !!!! HAVE NO GST FOR POLY CLINIC NO GST!!! SO WHAT GST IMPACT THE POOR!!! TALK COCK LIKE SING SONG.
SO DONT COME TALK COCK LAH!!! YOU 160K IS MIDDLE INCOME HERE IS REALLY BULLSHIT!
WHERE IN MY POST I SAY THE WORLD IS FAIR? BUT I STAND BY THE FACT GST COST THE RICH MORE!! AND DO NOT PENALISE THE POOR! SO DONT AS USUAL PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH N LIE !
Minority,
Don't talk cock lah!
The SUPER RICH obviously don't care about 7% GST, and don't care about 13% INCOME TAX CUT as well!
Why policy makers so worried about them then so must cut their income taxes and corporate taxes?????
WAT TALK COCK WAT INCOM TAX THEY ALL OWN COMPANIES PAY ROLL OUT OF HK!! NO NEED PAY ROLL HERE! U IDOIT!
minority,
Why you keep flip-flopping and twist and turn??????
In another post you said "U THINK THE RICH WORRY 7% GST MEH. "!
THEN you flip-flop again and say that by taxing the RICH more "BY Taxing the Rich 2-3M TAX And they are force to seek haven other countries or move $$$ offshore"!!!!!!!!!!!!
Implementing GST is not taxing them MORE???????? Ha ha ha!!!!!!!!!!!!
Or rather, the truth is the RICH and TOP INCOME EARNERS pay so much less taxes from GST (at 7%) than they what they pay in REDUCED INCOME TAXES (by 13%) so the RICH SUPER HAPPY and will live in Singapore forever?????? :panda:
Then, might as well do nothing, that is, DON'T REDUCE their INCOME TAX and DON'T IMPLEMENT GST, then the RICH will also not move right since they care paying 7% GST, they also don't care about INCOME TAX cut by 13% right?????? :topsy_turvy:
What epict STUPID and CONFLICTING COMMENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BLOODY STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So in you ANAL LOGY... BY Taxing the Rich 2-3M TAX And they are force to seek haven other countries or move $$$ offshore and they spend good life here dont pay GST will benefit singapore? And after that how Rich evaded tax or left? Tax the poor coz the top tier spends have left? SO WHO PAY FOR THE INFRA DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER SOCIAL SUPPORT SCHEMES? $$$ FALL FROM SKY? COME FROM YOUR ASS?
TALK COCK LIKE PANG SAI.
LOL!! YOUR ESTATE TAX!!! THE GUY DIE HE CARE HE GET TAX A NOT? OK IF HE WANT TO PASS ON DONT WANT TO GET TAX RICH ALWAYS HAVE RESORUCES TO BY PASS THAT!! DONT YOU KNOW MANY RICH BUY INSURANCE TO COVER ESTATE TAX!!!! DONT YOU KNOW IF U TRANSFER UR ESTATE 5yr BEFORE YOU DIE NO TAX?? THERE ARE SO MANY BLOODY WAY TO BY PASS THAT AND MOVE THE $$ OUT OF THE COUNTRY!!!
SO DONT COME BULL SHIT!!
U THINK THE RICH WORRY 7% GST MEH. THEY CARE LIFE STYLE!! THEIR BIG CAR, BIG HOUSE THEIR DINNING OUTSIDE , THEIR SHOPPING , THEY GO SEE SPECIALIST DOCTOR !! SO THEY SPEND MORE GET TAX MORE!!
WHILE THE LOW INCOME HAVE GST REBATE !!!! HAVE NO GST FOR POLY CLINIC NO GST!!! SO WHAT GST IMPACT THE POOR!!! TALK COCK LIKE SING SONG.
SO DONT COME TALK COCK LAH!!! YOU 160K IS MIDDLE INCOME HERE IS REALLY BULLSHIT!
WHERE IN MY POST I SAY THE WORLD IS FAIR? BUT I STAND BY THE FACT GST COST THE RICH MORE!! AND DO NOT PENALISE THE POOR! SO DONT AS USUAL PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH N LIE !
Wow! More lame excuses again! Ha ha ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Even my toes are laughing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :smiley_simmons:
WAT TALK COCK WAT INCOM TAX THEY ALL OWN COMPANIES PAY ROLL OUT OF HK!! NO NEED PAY ROLL HERE! U IDOIT!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.