Originally Posted by eleong
I'm not "in the know" but here's what I think.
xebay11 is right that Govt can take back any land that it needs through the land acquisition act.
To me, practically, L999 and FH lands are pretty similar, because all L999 lands have many hundreds of yrs left in the lease. If there are 2 devlopments side by side, one L999 and other is FH, ceteris paribus, I will at most pay maybe, up to 5% more for the FH, perhaps, for the perceived "prestige" of telling others it's FH.
Of course, if it's L99, then it's a different ball game. For one, if I'm not wrong, when there's less than 60 yrs left in the lease, you can't use your CPF to purchase. I think banks probably will also be more cautious in lending to old L99 properties. The depreciating value of the L99 land is also very significant.
Perhaps, the only possible difference between L999 and FH is that in an enbloc situation, the original land-owner (ie. the one that grants the lease) may have a say over whether the remaining lease of the land can be transferred to another developer. If the original land-owner is the Govt, then I don't think it's normally an issue, unless the Govt has some alternate plan for the site some 800 yrs down the road. If the land-owner is a private party, it may throw a spanner in the works.
Please correct me if i'm wrong.