Page 4 of 20 FirstFirst 1234567891419 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 573

Thread: Significant Singapore News

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by proud owner View Post
    Question :

    are our gas price lowered ?

    oil price has fallen so much ... shouldnt they save quite a bit on that part of running cost ?
    Is it instant? Coz All transport company hedge their fuel. So depends how much they hedge it at and till when. If fuel price stays at the current level then the transport part might improve.
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”
    ― Martin Luther King, Jr.

    OUT WITH THE SHIT TRASH

    https://www.facebook.com/shutdowntrs

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,134

    Default

    SMRT

    Earlier than expected transition to GCM – Positive development for SMRT's
    beleaguered Bus business that has been operating at a loss since FY09. Shedding of lossmaking
    business and converting it to a profitable and sustainable model is a welcomed
    relief.
    Weak free cash flow persists – Despite registering an accounting profit, SMRT is still
    bleeding cash. Operating cash flow of S$33.6 million was not sufficient to cover Capex
    requirements. S$104.3 million from financing cash flow
    was used to fund S$111.5
    million of investing cash flow.
    Highlighted rising net gearing since previous quarter – We had highlighted in the
    previous quarter (2QFY15) that net gearing would rise further in 3QFY15. Net gearing
    did rise from 68% to 79%, and we think it will continue to rise
    . High gearing inhibits
    acquisition opportunities to grow the business.


    Investment Actions
    We still do not like SMRT for its non-existent cash generating ability, lack of clarity on the
    transition to the new RFF and limited inorganic growth opportunities due to its weak
    balance sheet.

    http://www.investingnote.com/system/...pdf?1422583132
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”
    ― Martin Luther King, Jr.

    OUT WITH THE SHIT TRASH

    https://www.facebook.com/shutdowntrs

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by minority View Post
    Is it instant? Coz All transport company hedge their fuel. So depends how much they hedge it at and till when. If fuel price stays at the current level then the transport part might improve.

    then that is not fair ... its bad hedging ... bad trader ...

    i am a currency trader .... if i hedge a currency position say for 1yr ... and within 3 mths mkt moves against me ... the bank cannot die die pass the bad position to consumers ... MAS will not allow ...

    how come oil trader/companies can ?

    isnt there some authority monitoring this ?

  4. #94
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    DUMB ASS???
    DUMB ASS the one like you who CANNOT ANSWER a simple question direct to the point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I repeat the Question again: What has CPF Life payout (I am talking about) to do with GST rebate (that you are replying with)?

    Quote Originally Posted by minority View Post
    HEY DUMD ASS!!!!! YOU ARE THE ONE THAT IS KPKB ABT GST!!!!!! I TELL YOU TO GET INTO YOUR STUPID SKULL THAT THERE IS GST REBATES THAT COVER BASIC COST !!! SO WHAT BLOODY BS YOU FLIP FLOPPING AGAIN?[/SIZE]

    [SIZE=7]WHY??? PRATA AGAIN!!!!
    Quote Originally Posted by teddybear View Post
    What has CPF Life payout to do with GST rebate?

    You mean every Singaporean receiving CPF Life payout is entitled to GST rebate????? minority, What bloody BIG LIE you are spinning!!!!!!!!!!!!

  5. #95
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    minority's reply open up more can of WORMS!

    So when transport companies like SMRT and ComfortDelgro make losses in hedging oil, they can pass on the LOSSES to CONSUMERS!

    HOWEVER, there will always be time when these transport companies like SMRT and ComfortDelgro make PROFITS in hedging oil, how come they NEVER PASS ON the PROFITS to CONSUMERS (and results in FARE CUTS)????? QUESTIONABLE!!!!!!!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by proud owner View Post
    then that is not fair ... its bad hedging ... bad trader ...

    i am a currency trader .... if i hedge a currency position say for 1yr ... and within 3 mths mkt moves against me ... the bank cannot die die pass the bad position to consumers ... MAS will not allow ...

    how come oil trader/companies can ?

    isnt there some authority monitoring this ?
    Quote Originally Posted by minority View Post
    Is it instant? Coz All transport company hedge their fuel. So depends how much they hedge it at and till when. If fuel price stays at the current level then the transport part might improve.

  6. #96
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default minority, Caught you LYING again and trying to con and mislead us!!!!!!!!!!!

    minority,
    Caught you LYING again and trying to con and mislead us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    Losing $ in buses business? That one I don't know, I only know SMRT as whole MAKES LOTS OF $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ in CASH and earns HUGE NET CASH MARGIN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Such is the TACTIC that LIARs and CHEATERs with NO INTEGRITY and MORAL CHARACTER like minority like to use - Point you to a place/segment where SMRT lose money, and then "conveniently" forget (well, to lie and cheat you lah!) to tell you all the other parts/segments of the SMRT business are racking in LOTS OF $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ in CASH !!!!!!!!!!!

    Payout out low % dividend yield? Then you should ask why the CEO is so stingy to recommend such low dividend yield! May be because SMRT stock price is too EXPENSIVE now and everybody is still BUYING to chase after this "FAT HIGH NET CASH MARGIN" cashcow???? (this is contrary to what you are saying that SMRT losing money! SMRT losing money and still got so many people chasing its stock price to the sky? minority, you think all those stock buyers are STUPID IDIOT?!)

    Another point to rebutt you LIAR!!!! You say "Free cash flow of -$414M"? If they really lose so much money in 2014, they can still pay dividend in 2014? SMRT still can pay their new CEO >$1 MILLION for just 6 MONTHS work? Are you telling us that SMRT is a PONZI scheme company? I seriously doubt so!!!!!!!!!!!!

    minority, you don't come and con people who don't know how to analyze financial statements and bullshit us with "free cash flow is -$414M"...
    When I was analyzing financial statements, you are still sucking nipples!

    For those who don't know what is "free cash flow" and why it is negative, it is because the company is gearing up HUGE EXPANSION INVESTMENTS! Wow! SMRT is going to MAKE EVEN MORE TONNES OF $$$ with the HUGE EXPANSION!!! No wonder SMRT stock price being bidded up to the SKY to $1.75 now (vs $1.02 just recently in 17 April 2014 or a stock price increase of 71.6% within 8 months!), resulting in such low dividend yield as of now! Stock buyers are looking into the FUTURE $$$ !!!!!!!!!!!!
    Since PTC and Ministry of Transport is promising SMRT Net CASH MARGIN of >20% (through public transport fare hike), hence more huge expansion means more $$$ to make! Is it any wonder why SMRT stock price increase by >71% within past 8 months?


    Quote Originally Posted by minority View Post
    Trying to smoke and lie to people again? DO you even read the annual report?

    http://www.smrt.com.sg/Portals/0/PDF...R14_040614.pdf

    2014 per share dividen pay out is 4.1c Bloody 2% yield! They are loosing $ in the BUS with a negative operating profit of -25M!!! the part that make $ is the advertising.!!! and for 2014 they have a free cash flow of -414M!!!

    Are you stupid complaining on dividend? Bloody capitalized on stock market for funds you don't pay dividend back? WHO THE F WANT TO TAKE YOU THE LISTING!!!!
    Last edited by teddybear; 15-02-15 at 10:27.

  7. #97
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default minority, Caught you trying to mislead again!!!!!!!!!!!!

    minority, Caught you trying to mislead again!!!!!!!!!!!!
    If stock analysts words can be believed, those stock analysts are already BILLIONAIRES, not writing stock reports for you to read!

    Let me show the stock analysts what COCK they are! If they understand what I am writing below, they would have upgraded themselves and make themselves more money investing on their own than writing stupid and useless stock reports like those quoted by minority!

    For your info, SMRT earned Net Cash Income = $61.5M + $181.2M + $22.3M = $265M !!!!

    SMRT has revenue = $1,163M.
    That means, SMRT has Net Cash Income Margin = 22.79% !!!!!! wow!

    All you businessmen out there, please tell us, how many PUBLIC TRANSPORT COMPANIES in the world can earn >10% Net Cash Income Margin?
    The answer is OBVIOUS - FEW, if any outside of Singapore!

    High net gearing? Stupid!
    SMRT has shareholder's equity of $801M, earns net cash of $265M, or a RETURN ON EQUITY = 33.1% !
    That means, for every $1 SMRT can borrow, it will earn $0.331.
    Borrow more at interest much less than 33.1% means make much more money! (It is a matter of whether banks willing to lend or not!).
    STUPID minority just DON'T UNDERSTAND or HE is just trying to CON and MISLEAD us into believing that SMRT earns much less than they really do!

    Quote Originally Posted by minority View Post
    SMRT

    Earlier than expected transition to GCM – Positive development for SMRT's
    beleaguered Bus business that has been operating at a loss since FY09. Shedding of lossmaking
    business and converting it to a profitable and sustainable model is a welcomed
    relief.
    Weak free cash flow persists – Despite registering an accounting profit, SMRT is still
    bleeding cash. Operating cash flow of S$33.6 million was not sufficient to cover Capex
    requirements. S$104.3 million from financing cash flow
    was used to fund S$111.5
    million of investing cash flow.
    Highlighted rising net gearing since previous quarter – We had highlighted in the
    previous quarter (2QFY15) that net gearing would rise further in 3QFY15. Net gearing
    did rise from 68% to 79%, and we think it will continue to rise
    . High gearing inhibits
    acquisition opportunities to grow the business.

    Investment Actions
    We still do not like SMRT for its non-existent cash generating ability, lack of clarity on the
    transition to the new RFF and limited inorganic growth opportunities due to its weak
    balance sheet.

    http://www.investingnote.com/system/...pdf?1422583132

    Quote Originally Posted by teddybear View Post
    minority,
    Caught you LYING again and trying to con and mislead us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    Losing $ in buses business? That one I don't know, I only know SMRT as whole MAKES LOTS OF $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ in CASH and earns HUGE NET CASH MARGIN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Such is the TACTIC that LIARs and CHEATERs with NO INTEGRITY and MORAL CHARACTER like minority like to use - Point you to a place/segment where SMRT lose money, and then "conveniently" forget (well, to lie and cheat you lah!) to tell you all the other parts/segments of the SMRT business are racking in LOTS OF $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ in CASH !!!!!!!!!!!

    Payout out low % dividend yield? Then you should ask why the CEO is so stingy to recommend such low dividend yield! May be because SMRT stock price is too EXPENSIVE now and everybody is still BUYING to chase after this "FAT HIGH NET CASH MARGIN" cashcow???? (this is contrary to what you are saying that SMRT losing money! SMRT losing money and still got so many people chasing its stock price to the sky? minority, you think all those stock buyers are STUPID IDIOT?!)

    Another point to rebutt you LIAR!!!! You say "Free cash flow of -$414M"? If they really lose so much money in 2014, they can still pay dividend in 2014? SMRT still can pay their new CEO >$1 MILLION for just 6 MONTHS work? Are you telling us that SMRT is a PONZI scheme company? I seriously doubt so!!!!!!!!!!!!

    minority, you don't come and con people who don't know how to analyze financial statements and bullshit us with "free cash flow is -$414M"...
    When I was analyzing financial statements, you are still sucking nipples!

    For those who don't know what is "free cash flow" and why it is negative, it is because the company is gearing up HUGE EXPANSION INVESTMENTS! Wow! SMRT is going to MAKE EVEN MORE TONNES OF $$$ with the HUGE EXPANSION!!! No wonder SMRT stock price being bidded up to the SKY to $1.75 now (vs $1.02 just recently in 17 April 2014 or a stock price increase of 71.6% within 8 months!), resulting in such low dividend yield as of now! Stock buyers are looking into the FUTURE $$$ !!!!!!!!!!!!
    Since PTC and Ministry of Transport is promising SMRT Net CASH MARGIN of >20% (through public transport fare hike), hence more huge expansion means more $$$ to make! Is it any wonder why SMRT stock price increase by >71% within past 8 months?
    Last edited by teddybear; 15-02-15 at 10:48.

  8. #98
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default talk online that say that PAP will raise GST again 'to help the poor'

    After raising public transport fare to help the transport companies (which are majority owned by Temasek), see the link where
    "There are some rumours online that say that PAP will raise GST again 'to help the poor'."

    However, some coffeeshop talk I heard is that they may implement other form of "wealth taxes" that will be spreaded out to everybody living in Singapore so that they don't need to increase GST (but really, no difference from increasing GST lah)! As usual, it will comes with some goodies to the "really poor" and the lower middle-income for a short period to season them lah, just like a frog in a pot of boiling water...........

  9. #99
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default GST hike ‘more likely’ if Govt needs to raise revenue for new initiatives

    Some say GST will increase after next GE in 2016/2017, some say may be some other form of "wealth tax", which is true?

    I like this statement though:
    "Ultimately, tax rates are just one of the determinants of Singapore’s business potential, said Mr Tay Hong Beng, KPMG’s head of tax in Singapore. “Investors also look at other factors such as political stability, business infrastructure and the ease of doing business,” Mr Tay said."

    What we can interpret is that it is OK to hike corporate taxes and the income taxes of top-tier earners, those earning >$500k a year to 33% because these businessmen and people don't just look at the absolute tax rate, but "other factors such as political stability, business infrastructure and the ease of doing business"!!!!!!!!!!!


    GST hike ‘more likely’ if Govt needs to raise revenue for new initiatives

    SINGAPORE — The Government is unlikely to raise income tax to pay for the slew of healthcare, housing and infrastructure initiatives announced by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong during the National Day Rally as doing so could risk damaging Singapore’s appeal for businesses and investors.

    The Goods and Services Tax (GST) might instead be the first in line for an increase should the Government need to raise revenue to help build a stronger social safety net, economists have told TODAY.

    “Raising income tax is not very possible if Singapore wants to remain relevant for multinational corporations and high-income global talents,” UOB economist Francis Tan said.

    “A more probable venue for change is the consumption tax bracket, and I do not think it’s impossible for us to increase GST from the current 7 per cent to 10 per cent. For years we’ve been cutting income-related taxes to move towards a more consumption-based system. This is to make Singapore more attractive than other developed countries where income tax rates are much higher. I don’t see us reversing this trend.”

    Barclays economist Joey Chew pointed out that in Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam’s Budget 2012 speech, he compared the Republic’s income tax levels with those of Hong Kong. Mr Tharman had said that income taxes are significantly higher at the top end of incomes compared with Hong Kong and, as result, there is a limit to how high taxes can go at the top end without hurting competitiveness.

    Hence, a GST hike is more likely, said Ms Chew, adding that the Government is well-prepared should such a move prove necessary.

    GST is regressive, but the government would provide offsets to lower-middle income households, as they have done so in previous rounds of GST hikes,” she said. “Now that we have the permanent GST Voucher Scheme, the offsets are even easier to implement. The groundwork has already been laid for an eventual increase in GST.”

    On Sunday, Mr Lee cautioned that “all good things must be paid for”, either by raising taxes or cutting other spending so that future generations will not be laden with debt. This follows previous statements made by Mr Lee and other ministers suggesting that higher taxes are on the cards in Singapore after years of relatively low rates.

    Regardless of how the government plans to fund the higher social spending, Singapore will not feel the pinch in the near future as it has ample financial resources to support the measures, said CIMB economist Song Seng Wun.

    “Take the last fiscal year ending March 2013 as an example. Singapore’s operating revenue — mainly from collection of taxes, including GST — was S$55.8 billion. Including other revenue such as land sales, the gross earning was S$80.4 billion,” Mr Song said. “Of that, we spent a total of S$46.2 billion. So, we have some S$34.1 billion in surplus.”

    He added: “Over the longer run, as our population ages, Singapore’s operating revenue might shrink, and spending rise — only then would we need to increase tax, in which case I think the government will more likely focus on GST ... Overall, I don’t see our business attractiveness or growth potential getting diminished (by the new measures).”

    Ultimately, tax rates are just one of the determinants of Singapore’s business potential, said Mr Tay Hong Beng, KPMG’s head of tax in Singapore. “Investors also look at other factors such as political stability, business infrastructure and the ease of doing business,” Mr Tay said.

    It is also possible for the Government to increase revenue without raising tax rates, he added, by improving Singapore’s competitiveness in the global marketplace. “(This will) lead to rising incomes, and hence tax collections.”



    Quote Originally Posted by teddybear View Post
    minority, Caught you trying to mislead again!!!!!!!!!!!!
    If stock analysts words can be believed, those stock analysts are already BILLIONAIRES, not writing stock reports for you to read!

    Let me show the stock analysts what COCK they are! If they understand what I am writing below, they would have upgraded themselves and make themselves more money investing on their own than writing stupid and useless stock reports like those quoted by minority!

    For your info, SMRT earned Net Cash Income = $61.5M + $181.2M + $22.3M = $265M !!!!

    SMRT has revenue = $1,163M.
    That means, SMRT has Net Cash Income Margin = 22.79% !!!!!! wow!

    All you businessmen out there, please tell us, how many PUBLIC TRANSPORT COMPANIES in the world can earn >10% Net Cash Income Margin?
    The answer is OBVIOUS - FEW, if any outside of Singapore!

    High net gearing? Stupid!
    SMRT has shareholder's equity of $801M, earns net cash of $265M, or a RETURN ON EQUITY = 33.1% !
    That means, for every $1 SMRT can borrow, it will earn $0.331.
    Borrow more at interest much less than 33.1% means make much more money! (It is a matter of whether banks willing to lend or not!).
    STUPID minority just DON'T UNDERSTAND or HE is just trying to CON and MISLEAD us into believing that SMRT earns much less than they really do!

  10. #100
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default Shanmugam reiterates AHPETC actions 'clearly unlawful' BUT didn't take any action?

    Ok, interesting to read that Shanmugam reiterates AHPETC actions 'clearly unlawful' at this URL........

    BUT then, why he as the Law Minister, didn't take any action already if he is so sure that what AHPETC did was 'clearly unlawful'?
    I am afraid that if he didn't take any concrete ACTION, he is sending us the wrong message and signal that despite being the Law Minister and knowing clearly that what AHPETC did was 'clearly unlawful', he is not going to do anything to right the wrong and bring justice to the AHPETC residents whom he said their money has been given to AHPETC management's friends?


    TITLE: Shanmugam reiterates AHPETC actions 'clearly unlawful'

    By Nur Afifah bte Ariffin, Channel NewsAsia
    POSTED: 15 Feb 2015 21:06
    URL:

    He said there are still big questions left unanswered, even after the debates in Parliament following the Auditor-General's discovery of lapses in the town council's financial and accounting systems.
    SINGAPORE: Law Minister K Shanmugam has reiterated that the actions of the Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) are "clearly unlawful".

    He said there are still big questions left unanswered, even after the debates in Parliament following the Auditor-General's discovery of lapses in the town council's financial and accounting systems.

    Speaking on the sidelines of a community event at his constituency on Sunday (Feb 15), Mr Shanmugam said the Town Council Act will have to be amended. He added that the government will have to see what the town council does before deciding what the other consequences should be.

    Mr Shanmugam said: "First and most important, Parliament agreed to the motion, noting with concern the Auditor-General’s report on the Aljunied Town Council. All the MPs accepted it, including the Workers' Party MPs, the NMPs and NCMPs. So they accept, everyone accepts, that this is serious...

    "What concerns me is that the (AHPETC) actions are clearly unlawful. But in Parliament, having accepted in theory the Auditor–General’s report, we were inundated with minutiae about how the safekeeping is going to be made better, how there’s going to be two locks and so on.

    "The big questions remain unanswered. Why did you hide information from your own auditors, Foo Kon and Tan? What are you going to do to recover monies that have been lost? Those are questions, because these are people’s monies. There will have to be consequences; we have to see what they do to recover lost money."

    Mr Shanmugam said that one clear consequence would be that the Town Council Act will have to be amended. He said: "While there is self-regulation, there has got to be, I think, more oversight. At the same time, there will have to be other consequences.

    "As Minister Khaw has said, we’ll have to see. Actions were unlawful, monies have been lost, what are they going to do? There have been breaches in fiduciary duties by the town councillors themselves. Now, if we apply these standards to any other company or any other town council. You know what Singaporeans will expect? They will expect things to be set right. We want to see what actions are going to be taken to set things right."

    Mr Shanmugam also said that the AHPETC actions are against not only the Town Council Act, but other legislation as well. "There are many laws...and the actions are, and I choose my words carefully, I have said that they are unlawful. That’s based on my knowledge and legal advice that we have received."

  11. #101
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default GST is unfair to the poor - raise taxes another way (sorry this is from Australia!)

    GST is unfair to the poor - raise taxes another way --- Sorry this is from Australia! (But could apply equally in Singapore!!!!!!!!!!!!) You can read from this URL here...........


    GST is unfair to the poor - raise taxes another way

    Published: April 4, 2014 - 10:55AM

    Not a day goes by now without another salvo softening us up for an increase in that most regressive of taxes, the GST ("GST budget warning’’, April 3). I'm all for taxes. Even though they're often used for bad purposes and used inefficiently, conceptually and on balance they're a good thing. But a fair tax system has two fundamental underpinnings: that it be progressive, i.e. the more you earn, the more you pay; and that everyone pays his/her fair share. The GST meets the latter criterion but fails spectacularly in the former; flat taxes always fall most heavily on those who can least afford to pay them.

    So why do governments love them (i.e. GST) so much? three reasons: They're easy to implement because retail establishments do the heavy lifting of collection; they're easier and more philosophically palatable (not to mention more beneficial to party coffers) than making wealthy individuals and corporations pay their fair share; and because they're a perfect implementation of the universal Tory philosophy of robbing the poor to pay the rich.

    Fred Pilcher Kaleen (ACT)

    I can’t understand the reluctance of both major parties to countenance reforms to the GST (‘‘Joe Hockey rejects Martin Parkinson's call to raise GST’’, smh.com.au, April 3). I think both Labor and the Coalition would be surprised to know just how many voters already accept that vital health, education and age support schemes can only be made possible if the GST is increased and extended. Properly costed and explained, GST reform should be a vote winner rather than a political liability.

    Col Nicholson Hawks Nest

    Comments that people would stop working if they faced increased taxation through "bracket creep" is patent nonsense. When I was transferred to Australia in 1983 the top individual tax rate was (as best I can recall) 60 per cent. Again, as best I can recall, there wasn’t a rush to quit work. On the contrary, only a very small percentage of individuals would prefer not to labour, and the vast majority take pride in their employment, even those doing the most menial work.

    Ron Fellows Kensington

    It's about time we grew up and accepted a consumption tax increase that will still leave us with a GST lower than those in the rest of the world. Having said that, if we are going to have an increase in GST let's roll back tax cuts for the wealthy; means test or restrict family tax benefits A and B, cut out the baby bonus after the second child, remove assistance to wealthy private schools, apply negative gearing only to new dwellings, and remove the private health rebate for those earning over $150,000 and drop the over-generous paid parental leave scheme.

    If we are all in for a round of severe belt tightening let's start with middle-class welfare.

    Nicholas Triggs Katoomba

    It would be a mistake simply to concentrate on fixing our long-term budget problem. If we want a prosperous future we also need to improve productivity so that our non-mining sector can underpin much more of our economic growth. Increasing taxes is not going to do that, as necessary as it may be from a narrower budget perspective. In fact with the backdrop of a still relatively fragile world economy, excessive tax increases and across-the-board spending cuts could be a risk now.

    Martin Parkinson is right, we need to do what we can to fix our significant long-term budget problem but also to take a hard look at our poor productivity starting with the massive spending projects we have in the pipeline – NDIS, Gonski and the NBN – and ask can their laudable objectives be met in a way which is more compatible with budget imperatives and our dire need to lift productivity? They almost certainly can.

    We can't just brush these massive projects aside as Parkinson seems to have done by saying they are insignificant compared with other likely budget impacts in 2023-2024. These projects are hitting us now and their short- and long-term impacts should not be understated.

    George Finlay Balaclava

  12. #102
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,134

    Default

    TCSS KAR KI KONG KAR KI SONG.................. CoZ RICH PEOPLE STINGY DONT WANT TO PAY GST FOR ALL THE GOOD THINGS THEY WANT TO ENJOY.

    LET ME REPEAT!!!!!

    GOT GST VOUCHERS DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”
    ― Martin Luther King, Jr.

    OUT WITH THE SHIT TRASH

    https://www.facebook.com/shutdowntrs

  13. #103
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    minority,
    Still around to spread your lies and to con people?

    Rich people don't want to pay GST?
    I think rich people don't want to pay income tax!
    No wonder, reduce income tax from 33% to 20% in Singapore and introduce GST! The policy implementers are also considered RICH people because of their $MILLIONS salary right?

    Oh another thing, got GST VOUCHERS lah?
    Why those people like govt and CPF Advisory Panel says $650-700 per month payout from CPF Life not enough and must increase CPF Life Minimum Sum by 3% every year from 2017 onwards?
    Sort of like telling us GST VOUCHERS are useless lah, for you people to use as excuse only?!

    oh by the way, you still haven't explain why $308 per month is enough for a person to basic necessities living in Singapore when CPF Advisory Panel says that $650-700 per month payout from CPF Life is not enough and must increase CPF Life Minimum Sum by 3% every year from 2017 onwards? minority, YOU LYING right? Or you telling us you are saying that CPF Advisory Panel is LYING? If got GST VOUCHERS still recommend to increase CPF Life Min Sum for what when CPF Life payout of $650 per month is way much more than $308 per month you said is enough?

    Quote Originally Posted by minority View Post
    TCSS KAR KI KONG KAR KI SONG.................. CoZ RICH PEOPLE STINGY DONT WANT TO PAY GST FOR ALL THE GOOD THINGS THEY WANT TO ENJOY.

    LET ME REPEAT!!!!!

    GOT GST VOUCHERS DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Quote Originally Posted by teddybear View Post
    GST is unfair to the poor - raise taxes another way --- Sorry this is from Australia! (But could apply equally in Singapore!!!!!!!!!!!!) You can read from this URL here...........


    GST is unfair to the poor - raise taxes another way

    Published: April 4, 2014 - 10:55AM

    Not a day goes by now without another salvo softening us up for an increase in that most regressive of taxes, the GST ("GST budget warning’’, April 3). I'm all for taxes. Even though they're often used for bad purposes and used inefficiently, conceptually and on balance they're a good thing. But a fair tax system has two fundamental underpinnings: that it be progressive, i.e. the more you earn, the more you pay; and that everyone pays his/her fair share. The GST meets the latter criterion but fails spectacularly in the former; flat taxes always fall most heavily on those who can least afford to pay them.

    So why do governments love them (i.e. GST) so much? three reasons: They're easy to implement because retail establishments do the heavy lifting of collection; they're easier and more philosophically palatable (not to mention more beneficial to party coffers) than making wealthy individuals and corporations pay their fair share; and because they're a perfect implementation of the universal Tory philosophy of robbing the poor to pay the rich.

    Fred Pilcher Kaleen (ACT)

    I can’t understand the reluctance of both major parties to countenance reforms to the GST (‘‘Joe Hockey rejects Martin Parkinson's call to raise GST’’, smh.com.au, April 3). I think both Labor and the Coalition would be surprised to know just how many voters already accept that vital health, education and age support schemes can only be made possible if the GST is increased and extended. Properly costed and explained, GST reform should be a vote winner rather than a political liability.

    Col Nicholson Hawks Nest

    Comments that people would stop working if they faced increased taxation through "bracket creep" is patent nonsense. When I was transferred to Australia in 1983 the top individual tax rate was (as best I can recall) 60 per cent. Again, as best I can recall, there wasn’t a rush to quit work. On the contrary, only a very small percentage of individuals would prefer not to labour, and the vast majority take pride in their employment, even those doing the most menial work.

    Ron Fellows Kensington

    It's about time we grew up and accepted a consumption tax increase that will still leave us with a GST lower than those in the rest of the world. Having said that, if we are going to have an increase in GST let's roll back tax cuts for the wealthy; means test or restrict family tax benefits A and B, cut out the baby bonus after the second child, remove assistance to wealthy private schools, apply negative gearing only to new dwellings, and remove the private health rebate for those earning over $150,000 and drop the over-generous paid parental leave scheme.

    If we are all in for a round of severe belt tightening let's start with middle-class welfare.

    Nicholas Triggs Katoomba

    It would be a mistake simply to concentrate on fixing our long-term budget problem. If we want a prosperous future we also need to improve productivity so that our non-mining sector can underpin much more of our economic growth. Increasing taxes is not going to do that, as necessary as it may be from a narrower budget perspective. In fact with the backdrop of a still relatively fragile world economy, excessive tax increases and across-the-board spending cuts could be a risk now.

    Martin Parkinson is right, we need to do what we can to fix our significant long-term budget problem but also to take a hard look at our poor productivity starting with the massive spending projects we have in the pipeline – NDIS, Gonski and the NBN – and ask can their laudable objectives be met in a way which is more compatible with budget imperatives and our dire need to lift productivity? They almost certainly can.

    We can't just brush these massive projects aside as Parkinson seems to have done by saying they are insignificant compared with other likely budget impacts in 2023-2024. These projects are hitting us now and their short- and long-term impacts should not be understated.

    George Finlay Balaclava
    Last edited by teddybear; 17-02-15 at 06:52.

  14. #104
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    Very interesting facts about Town Council MA rates, read here at this URL...

    MA rates for Pasir Ris-Punggol Town Council (per unit per month):
    (Residential) (Commercial) (Residential Change) (Commercial Change)
    FY-2011 $6.11 N.A. N.A. N.A.
    FY-2012 $6.20 N.A. +1.5% N.A.
    FY-2013 $6.25 $11.50 +0.8% N.A.
    FY-2014 $5.50 $5.50 -12.0% -52.2% (!!!)


    N.A. means "Not Available".

    Wow! MA rates for Commercial units dropped 52.2% from FY-2013 to FY-2014!

    Firstly, how can commercial MA rate be same as Residential rate when their rate of wear and tear and maintenance will be much higher?

    So isn't residential units owners being short-changed since theirs only drop 12.0%?
    The RICH always get more tax cut than the poorer people?!

    Shanmugan only shows the FY-2014 rates to show AHPETC overcharged!
    For more transparency, shouldn't he show us the FY-2011 to FY-2013 rates to show whether AHPETC overcharged from FY-2011 to FY-2013?


    Quote Originally Posted by minority View Post
    PROOF THAT ITS NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!! THEN!

  15. #105
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default More tax hikes 'inevitable, likely to come from higher GST

    So, people already started guessing when the higher GST will come, and whether the new GST rate will be 9% or 10% or even 12%!!!

    Actually, instead of rasing GST, I have a suggestion: The government should change the tax rate structure to something like this (top income tax rate):
    >=S$1M : 33%
    >=S$750k : 29%
    >=S$500k : 25%
    >= S$320k : 22%
    >= S$200k : 20%

    This is because the top earners actually earned much much more than the bottom of top 5% earners! Therefore, they have much more savings and can afford more taxes! Then, don't need to raise GST!


    More tax hikes 'inevitable, but not imminent'

    Observers say there is still room to strengthen Singapore's revenue base, whether by taxing more income earners or by raising the GST rate
    By Kelly [email protected]@KellyTayBT

    25 Feb5:50 AM

    BUDGET 2015's surprise hike in top personal income tax rates reflects the government's determination to strengthen future revenues, with the next iteration likely to come from higher Goods and Services Tax (GST) - though this may not happen anytime soon, observers have said.

    Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam had caught economists unawares on Monday with his announcement of an increase in the top marginal rate of personal income tax to 22 per cent from 20 per cent, and smaller adjustments for others in the top five per cent of income earners.

    Noting the inevitable increase in government spending in the future, driven largely by health-care and infrastructure needs, Mr Tharman had underscored the need to review Singapore's domestic taxes to bolster the country's fiscal position for the long term.

    "Our philosophy is to keep the burden on the middle-income low, and to target benefits at the most important needs of the poor and middle-income groups ... Hence, we have designed our system such that we have lower overall taxes than most countries, but nevertheless maintain a highly progressive regime," he said, adding that the lower-income group gets significantly more benefits than the taxes they pay.

    Still, observers told The Business Times that there is room to strengthen Singapore's revenue base - whether by way of higher marginal tax rates for a broader swathe of income earners, or through a rise in the GST rate.

    After all, they said, calls for greater social spending must come with a new social compact - where a stronger sense of collective responsibility augments the long-held foundation of personal effort. At present, the top 10 per cent of Singapore's taxpayers foot slightly over 80 per cent of personal income taxes.

    Nanyang Technological University (NTU) associate professor of economics Walter Theseira said: "I think the main motivation for widening the tax base is, honestly, not the revenue. It's more about the principle of solidarity, which is that everybody contributes something, even if it's not a very large amount. To give the idea that we'll tax you only if you're very rich and the rest of you get redistribution from the rest of these guys - that's not the message to send."

    Indeed, Mr Tharman had said on Monday that "it would be naive to think that we can keep raising tax rates without affecting our competitiveness", and noted that many Singaporean professionals are in fact working abroad, in places like Hong Kong.

    Still, Laurence Lien, chairman and chief executive of Asia Philanthropy Circle, said there is still room for top marginal tax rates to increase further: "Whether it's 22, 24, or 25 per cent - it's still more than bearable for high income earners, who get a lot of value out of being here."

    Even so, now that steps have been taken to make Singapore's income tax regime more progressive - especially with the introduction of various negative income taxes for lower-income groups in recent years, such as Workfare and the Silver Support Scheme - private-sector economists say a rise in consumption taxes, particularly GST, will be next.

    Mizuho's Vishnu Varathan, noting that top-end tax rates cannot keep rising without adjustments to consumption tax, said: "It's like eating a fishball on a stick - you don't keep biting on one side because half your fishball is going to drop off on the other side."

    He added: "There is a bona fide intent to have our tax system be very progressive, but at the same time, Mr Tharman has emphasised that we have to look at the entire suite of measures to see the progressivity of this.

    "So at some point - maybe five or eight years down the road - our GST will have to rise to 10, or maybe even 12 per cent."

    Even though the GST is a broad-based, regressive tax system, economists do not think that increasing it would undermine recent efforts to make the income tax regime more progressive.

    UOB's Francis Tan said: "As long as the government is efficient and sufficient in identifying the bottom tier who need GST vouchers, they can increase intensity of subsidy to help those suffering from an additional three percentage point GST hike."

    Still, several observers pointed out that this is unlikely to materialise anytime soon, citing the government's assurance in 2011 that the GST rate would not be increased for at least the next five years.

    Mr Tharman had also said in his Budget speech that, based on current projections, the revenue measures introduced in Budget 2015 "will provide sufficiently" for the increased spending needs planned for until the end of this decade.


  16. #106
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default Will GST increase (or other taxes imposed) after this coming General Election?

    Will GST increase (or other form of taxes imposed that will hit most Singaporeans) after this coming General Election?

    I think this is the most important question almost every Singapore will ask!
    If GST increases after the coming General Election (and before the next General Election), then all about the "Ang Bao" Budget 2015 are just smoke screen to please people temporarily and hoping to get more votes?

    Quote Originally Posted by teddybear View Post
    So, people already started guessing when the higher GST will come, and whether the new GST rate will be 9% or 10% or even 12%!!!

    Actually, instead of rasing GST, I have a suggestion: The government should change the tax rate structure to something like this (top income tax rate):
    >=S$1M : 33%
    >=S$750k : 29%
    >=S$500k : 25%
    >= S$320k : 22%
    >= S$200k : 20%

    This is because the top earners actually earned much much more than the bottom of top 5% earners! Therefore, they have much more savings and can afford more taxes! Then, don't need to raise GST!


    More tax hikes 'inevitable, but not imminent'

    Observers say there is still room to strengthen Singapore's revenue base, whether by taxing more income earners or by raising the GST rate
    By Kelly [email protected]@KellyTayBT

    25 Feb5:50 AM

    BUDGET 2015's surprise hike in top personal income tax rates reflects the government's determination to strengthen future revenues, with the next iteration likely to come from higher Goods and Services Tax (GST) - though this may not happen anytime soon, observers have said.

    Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam had caught economists unawares on Monday with his announcement of an increase in the top marginal rate of personal income tax to 22 per cent from 20 per cent, and smaller adjustments for others in the top five per cent of income earners.

    Noting the inevitable increase in government spending in the future, driven largely by health-care and infrastructure needs, Mr Tharman had underscored the need to review Singapore's domestic taxes to bolster the country's fiscal position for the long term.

    "Our philosophy is to keep the burden on the middle-income low, and to target benefits at the most important needs of the poor and middle-income groups ... Hence, we have designed our system such that we have lower overall taxes than most countries, but nevertheless maintain a highly progressive regime," he said, adding that the lower-income group gets significantly more benefits than the taxes they pay.

    Still, observers told The Business Times that there is room to strengthen Singapore's revenue base - whether by way of higher marginal tax rates for a broader swathe of income earners, or through a rise in the GST rate.

    After all, they said, calls for greater social spending must come with a new social compact - where a stronger sense of collective responsibility augments the long-held foundation of personal effort. At present, the top 10 per cent of Singapore's taxpayers foot slightly over 80 per cent of personal income taxes.

    Nanyang Technological University (NTU) associate professor of economics Walter Theseira said: "I think the main motivation for widening the tax base is, honestly, not the revenue. It's more about the principle of solidarity, which is that everybody contributes something, even if it's not a very large amount. To give the idea that we'll tax you only if you're very rich and the rest of you get redistribution from the rest of these guys - that's not the message to send."

    Indeed, Mr Tharman had said on Monday that "it would be naive to think that we can keep raising tax rates without affecting our competitiveness", and noted that many Singaporean professionals are in fact working abroad, in places like Hong Kong.

    Still, Laurence Lien, chairman and chief executive of Asia Philanthropy Circle, said there is still room for top marginal tax rates to increase further: "Whether it's 22, 24, or 25 per cent - it's still more than bearable for high income earners, who get a lot of value out of being here."

    Even so, now that steps have been taken to make Singapore's income tax regime more progressive - especially with the introduction of various negative income taxes for lower-income groups in recent years, such as Workfare and the Silver Support Scheme - private-sector economists say a rise in consumption taxes, particularly GST, will be next.

    Mizuho's Vishnu Varathan, noting that top-end tax rates cannot keep rising without adjustments to consumption tax, said: "It's like eating a fishball on a stick - you don't keep biting on one side because half your fishball is going to drop off on the other side."

    He added: "There is a bona fide intent to have our tax system be very progressive, but at the same time, Mr Tharman has emphasised that we have to look at the entire suite of measures to see the progressivity of this.

    "So at some point - maybe five or eight years down the road - our GST will have to rise to 10, or maybe even 12 per cent."

    Even though the GST is a broad-based, regressive tax system, economists do not think that increasing it would undermine recent efforts to make the income tax regime more progressive.

    UOB's Francis Tan said: "As long as the government is efficient and sufficient in identifying the bottom tier who need GST vouchers, they can increase intensity of subsidy to help those suffering from an additional three percentage point GST hike."

    Still, several observers pointed out that this is unlikely to materialise anytime soon, citing the government's assurance in 2011 that the GST rate would not be increased for at least the next five years.

    Mr Tharman had also said in his Budget speech that, based on current projections, the revenue measures introduced in Budget 2015 "will provide sufficiently" for the increased spending needs planned for until the end of this decade.


  17. #107
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by teddybear View Post
    So, people already started guessing when the higher GST will come, and whether the new GST rate will be 9% or 10% or even 12%!!!

    Actually, instead of rasing GST, I have a suggestion: The government should change the tax rate structure to something like this (top income tax rate):
    >=S$1M : 33%
    >=S$750k : 29%
    >=S$500k : 25%
    >= S$320k : 22%
    >= S$200k : 20%

    This is because the top earners actually earned much much more than the bottom of top 5% earners! Therefore, they have much more savings and can afford more taxes! Then, don't need to raise GST!


    [/COLOR][/I]
    I think the background to GST is to encourage top high income earner.
    They want to encourage these people and corporate and hence cut the top income tax bracket and corporate tax to compete for these talent.
    However govenment need revenue and the popular thinking was to tax those who spent rather than those who earn. Hence GST.

  18. #108
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    693

    Default

    I will not be surprise the GST will increase further with the generous social spending.

  19. #109
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    Been hearing such comments and opinions from many people!

    "Raise GST to help the poor"! - This is the slogan right?
    But what about the middle-income? The middle-income need to pay more GST but don't get GST voucher and rebates etc?
    Paying GST is every year forever affair, "Ang Bao" budget usually only last for 1 year............. Many people say "Ang Bao" budget is specifically prepared for coming General Election, likely to held before next Budget in Feb 2016? Then next Budget raise GST???

    Interesting read at this URL...

    Budget: Ask in a very loud voice:
    25/02/2015 at 4:34 am

    “After GE, will the PAP administration raise GST rates and by how much?”

    After all, an ally and cheer leader of the PAP administration wrote about the Budget:

    Mr Tharman flagged this gap … about the 1 percentage point projected gap between long-term revenues and long-term spending. The latter is tipped to go up to 19 to 19.5 per cent of GDP from now, as Singapore opens its coffers to spend on health care, retirees, and on infrastructure and investment in education. The former hovers around 18 to 18.5 per cent of GDP.

    How to make up the shortfall of about 1 per cent of GDP?

    This is a structural issue that will have resonance beyond this Budget.*

    As it’s unlikely that the Wayang Party will raise the issue about the rise in GST rates after the GE in Parly* because it may still be hoping to curry favour with the MIW by not asking difficult questions, responsible bloggers and cyber-warriors should ask the question.

    So should all voters (pro PAP or anti-PAP alike, GST affects everyone) who meet their PAP MPs and their PA grassroot hangers-on when they come to lobby for votes. Especially when the MPs and hangers-on boast of all the goodies voters are getting, parroting a gushing a PAP apologist, if ever there was one,who wrote in ST:.

    I tried frantically to keep up with noting down the giveaways as Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam reeled them off as he announced the Budget 2015. …

    All in, it can be said to be a sensible yet generous Budget, albeit at the expense of the very high-income. It may disappoint those who wanted a big SG50 Bonus to celebrate the nation’s Jubilee. But it does give out a mass hongbao to all Singaporeans, via top-ups to education funds for children and students, and via the new $500 SkillsFuture Credit for workers. – See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/opi....0xjbXaNf.dpuf

    The answer we want to hear is what Tharman said in 2011

    Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam has reiterated that the goods and services tax (GST) will not be raised for at least another five years …“As Finance Minister, I have made that very clear in Parliament that at least for the next five years – it does not mean we will raise it in five years’ time – but at least for five years, there is absolutely no reason to raise the GST, because this was the whole idea – we strengthen our revenue base in time. (CNA)

    And finally let’s remember that all this money the PAP administration is throwing at us is our money, not that of the PAP’s administration.



    Quote Originally Posted by stl67 View Post
    I will not be surprise the GST will increase further with the generous social spending.
    Last edited by teddybear; 26-02-15 at 11:49.

  20. #110
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    693

    Default

    Recently a lot of talk about Robin Hood.... So next time will be Hood Robin.. then Robin Hood...it will probably go round and round.. To be fair, the rich are paying a lot more on GST.. My take is how much can the lower income group spend/consume.. do these group eat out often, buy luxury items. Just one big ticket item paid by the rich will cover many many times the lower income paid on GST.. I am just using simple logic and don't read any statistics.

    I still think GST is fair.. the more you consume the more you pay.. at least my income tax remains low..

  21. #111
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    So the old, the sick, the young who can't work still have to consume and have to pay when they have no income?

    Your income tax low doesn't mean you benefit from GST...
    Unless you earn lots of money and/or you don't intend to retire, GST will cost much more to you (and to >90% of the Singaporeans)!


    Imagine, you and your spouse retire at 50 years old, live until 85 years old, spend average $120k a year, that is $4200k over 35 years and you pay average 12% GST or $504k over that 35 years. You work from 25 years old to 50 years old, save 5% on income tax, and that means you need to be earning average at least $403k a year just to break even from income tax savings vs GST!

    So, as a rough guide, GST penalizes 98% of Singaporeans while benefiting only the top 2% earners (those earning >$320k a year)!

    Quote Originally Posted by stl67 View Post
    Recently a lot of talk about Robin Hood.... So next time will be Hood Robin.. then Robin Hood...it will probably go round and round.. To be fair, the rich are paying a lot more on GST.. My take is how much can the lower income group spend/consume.. do these group eat out often, buy luxury items. Just one big ticket item paid by the rich will cover many many times the lower income paid on GST.. I am just using simple logic and don't read any statistics.

    I still think GST is fair.. the more you consume the more you pay.. at least my income tax remains low..

  22. #112
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    Interesting news at this URL...

    The world's richest 1%, around 70 million people (or the population of the UK and Ireland), will own more than the other 99% put together by next year.


    I wonder whether the top 1% income earners in Singapore earned more than the other 99% Singaporeans in Singapore?


    How much are you worth: The world's wealth in pictures
    By Del Crookes
    Newsbeat reporter
    19 January 2015

    Richest 1% to own more than the rest

    Do 85 rich people have same wealth as half the world?

    The world's richest 1%, around 70 million people (or the population of the UK and Ireland), will own more than the other 99% put together by next year.

    A research paper from Oxfam suggests that the wealthiest 1% own on average £1.8m each of global assets and they'll own more than 50% of the world's assets by next year.
    There are approximately seven billion people in the world.

    Eighty per cent of the world's population (about 5.6 billion people) own just 5.5% of wealth - an average of £2,500 each.

    The 80 richest people in the world have the same wealth as the poorest 50% (around 3.5 billion people).

    Those 80 people could fit into a double-decker bus.
    It would take nearly 44 million buses to transport the world's poorest 50% of people.

    Oxfam says that 52% of global wealth not owned by the richest 1% is owned by those in the richest 20% (1.4 billion people).

    With 80% of the population owning 5.5% of global wealth (£2,544 per adult in 2014), the world's elite 1% has an average wealth of £1.8m per adult.
    That could buy you quite a few gold bars.

  23. #113
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default those earning about $160,000 annually income is minuscule

    According to this forum letter below, beware of wealth taxes!

    Wealth taxes should tax the genuinely rich more, and not trying to spread the taxes to the general population (e.g. like GST!)!!!
    Those earning $160,000 annually are just upper-middle class lah!

    Who are the really rich top income earners????
    Easy, those whose earned income are more than $1 MILLION a year!
    Many of the top super-scale servants and Ministers fall into this category!
    As are the top management in the listed companies and many big private companies!

    Who are the genuinely wealthy?
    Easy, those living in bungalows! Many, especially those living in Good Class Bungalows!
    As land are preciously, if the government genuinely want to implement property taxes and wealth taxes, they should tax the landed properties more! May be there should be an overloaded tax for landed properties because their plot ratio are too low and wasting more land space (compared to condos that can build up to 30 storeys or more higher)?


    The Straits Times
    www.straitstimes.comPublished on Mar 18, 2015

    Beware downsides of wealth taxes

    MR CALVIN Cheng is to be lauded for his perspicacity in pointing out that the marginally wealthy in Singapore, like those earning about $160,000 annually, assume a disproportionate tax burden while also not qualifying for most governmental handouts ("Tax the wealthy more, not the high-wage earners"; Monday).
    Their earned income is minuscule compared with the diverse sources of income of the truly ultra-high-net-worth individuals. To lump the first group with the true Midases seems truly regressive.
    Still, I don't agree with the imposition of capital gains or estate taxes. These are not as progressive as they seem.
    A capital gains tax is fair only if tax deductions are also offered to capital losses, a situation that happens often in business and investment. To have the former without the latter stifles entrepreneurial risks and financial derring-do, qualities already lacking in our culture.
    Capital gains involve risks, which must be recognised and rewarded, as compared with income derived through work.
    While estate taxes appear fairer because they seem like windfall taxes and are apparently progressive (applying only to those who are affluent enough to leave assets behind), they discourage saving and financial prudence, while incentivising the development of sophisticated and manipulative tax planning, which the truly rich have easy access to.
    To avoid estate taxes, people may decide to just spend the money, instead of saving it for the next generation.
    Before the abolition of Singapore estate taxes in 2008, there was an exemption threshold of $9 million for dwelling houses. Much of the capital gains in houses have come about directly through inflation. Any new reimposition of estate taxes must take this into consideration.
    If, as Mr Cheng cites, the top 1 per cent of Singapore's rich possess 25 per cent of the country's private household wealth, then this should be the group returning their wealth to the community and not those who have small plots of land bought decades ago, whose values have appreciated simply because of inflation, but who are still impecunious otherwise.
    Yik Keng Yeong (Dr)

  24. #114
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default Police: The distribution of flyers in itself is not an offence in Singapore

    So, we are told by Police, in consultation with Attorney-General’s Chambers that:
    The distribution of flyers in itself is not an offence in Singapore

    Then, could the Police explain why in 2010, an SDP member was jailed for handing out flyers?

    I am referring to what has been mentioned in that webpage:

    (Let me quote part of what they wrote there for easier reference):
    "Before that, SDP members were also prosecuted for handing out flyers. Chee Siok Chin even served 1 week in jail in January 2010 for the incident.

    In this case, the SDP Members were prosecuted because it was apparently not allowed for political flyers to be distributed and also because they had done so in a group of more than 5 people, constituting an illegal assembly.

    As it can be seen from Victor Lye's selfie, there were at least 7 people involved in the distribution of Anti-WP flyers and they have openly admitted that they were obviously given out by the PAP given the content of the flyers. If this is the case, shouldn't they be classified as political flyers and therefore not allowed?

    It was also raised previously by netizens that because of the content of the flyers, they could be considered campaigning or election material and therefore be illegal under the Parliamentary elections Act as it is not presently campaigning time. (PAP Activists May have Broken the Law with their Anti-WP Flyers)

    So, when Anti-PAP flyers were distributed, there were investigations for sedition, prosecutions for illegal assembly and illegal political material. There is also a potential breach of the Parliamentary Elections Act. Will the police take any action under any one of these laws for the Anti-WP flyers?"


    In both cases, political party members are handling out flyers (1 is anti-PAP, the other is anti-WP), so what is the difference?

    Does it mean that now WP activists can go around handling out fliers delving into AIM's issue and PAP involvement and also not an offence?


    TITLE: Distribution of flyers by PAP activists in Aljunied 'not an offence': Police

    POSTED: 19 Mar 2015 21:11
    URL: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...y/1727322.html

    PAP activists had given out flyers in the area to urge residents to quiz their Workers' Party MPs on alleged funds mismanagement in Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council.
    SINGAPORE: The Singapore Police Force has issued a statement on a police report made about PAP activists' distribution of flyers in Aljunied GRC.

    Activists had gone around last week, urging residents to question opposition Workers' Party Members of Parliament about accounting and governance lapses by Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC).

    In a statement on Thursday (Mar 19), police said: “In consultation with the Attorney-General’s Chambers on the police report made on the distribution of flyers at Aljunied Group Representation Constituency, it has been determined that there is no offence disclosed.”

    "The distribution of flyers in itself is not an offence in Singapore," police added.
    Last edited by teddybear; 19-03-15 at 22:33.

  25. #115
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,134

    Default

    TCSS

    http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking...gn-wp-20130111

    DID THE POLICE STOP HIM? NO?

    2010 case pls read with your eyes bigot. JAIL IS FOR THE ILLEGAL PROCESSION NOT FLYERS.

    WP been charging $2 for their flyers every weekend HOW ABT THAT ? WHERE THEY STOP? NO!


    WP have 3 bloody lawyers in their them they are not KPKB coz they know its not illegal. They are not KPKB ing coz they want to keep quiet on the missing $$$$.
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”
    ― Martin Luther King, Jr.

    OUT WITH THE SHIT TRASH

    https://www.facebook.com/shutdowntrs

  26. #116
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by teddybear View Post
    So the old, the sick, the young who can't work still have to consume and have to pay when they have no income?

    Your income tax low doesn't mean you benefit from GST...
    Unless you earn lots of money and/or you don't intend to retire, GST will cost much more to you (and to >90% of the Singaporeans)!


    Imagine, you and your spouse retire at 50 years old, live until 85 years old, spend average $120k a year, that is $4200k over 35 years and you pay average 12% GST or $504k over that 35 years. You work from 25 years old to 50 years old, save 5% on income tax, and that means you need to be earning average at least $403k a year just to break even from income tax savings vs GST!

    So, as a rough guide, GST penalizes 98% of Singaporeans while benefiting only the top 2% earners (those earning >$320k a year)!

    TCSS always lie. GST REBATE DUHHH!!! POLY CLINICS NO GST!!! DUHHH!!!! WHAT COCK SHIT YOU TALKING?
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”
    ― Martin Luther King, Jr.

    OUT WITH THE SHIT TRASH

    https://www.facebook.com/shutdowntrs

  27. #117
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,134

    Default

    NAHHH HERE GOT WP GIVING FLY PAPER ! so is that illegal NOPE!


    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”
    ― Martin Luther King, Jr.

    OUT WITH THE SHIT TRASH

    https://www.facebook.com/shutdowntrs

  28. #118
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    As usual, the lying minority will go around telling lies and trying to mislead us!

    Did this WP MP give out fliers that are "anti-PAP" in content?

    Did he go around in a group of 5 or more that constitutes illegal assembly?

    Now we compare that to PAP activists going around in a group of 7 distributing fliers that are "anti-WP"!

    Wasn't the content distributed by the opposition activists in 2010 "anti-PAP" and there are 5 or more hence they are jailed and charged for "Sedition" and "illegal assembly"? So, what is the difference between the 2010 opposition activists case and the current 2015 PAP activists case?

    I really FEAR for PAP, because they have supporters like minority going around telling lies and propagating misleading information (or rather rumours and lies) and avoiding the hard questions, and thus giving a bad reputation for PAP, as though many PAP supporters are just like minority, a liar with NO MORAL CHARACTER and NO INTEGRITY and HONESTY value! Then, people would also wonder why PAP are surrounded by so many such people and they can condone such people??? If there more more of such cases, I am afraid it will be very bad for the votes for PAP in the coming General Election!

    Quote Originally Posted by minority View Post
    NAHHH HERE GOT WP GIVING FLY PAPER ! so is that illegal NOPE!



  29. #119
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    minority,

    As usual, want us to blindly believe your LIES and can't provide evidence to back up what you said!

    Quote Originally Posted by minority View Post
    TCSS always lie. GST REBATE DUHHH!!! POLY CLINICS NO GST!!! DUHHH!!!! WHAT COCK SHIT YOU TALKING?

  30. #120
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    Jail is for "ILLEGAL PROCESSION"? Wow!
    Now then I know?!

    In 2010, opposition activists case got jailed for "illegal assembly" or "illegal procession" for 5 people or more for distributing "anti-PAP" fliers!

    In 2014, the Funan food court debt collectors case got charged for "illegal assembly" for 5 people or more!

    Now, in 2015, we were told that PAP activists in a group of 7 DID NOT BREAK ANY LAW for distributing "anti-WP" fliers!!! Wow! I really don't understand the logic applied!

    minority, could please kindly explain to us the differences between the above few cases that give rise to different treatment?

    A clear and satisfactory explanation is VERY IMPORTANT so that there will be no more misunderstanding ok?

    I am not anti-PAP and I am not pro-WP, I only believe applying laws and rules universally and equally to all people! I would like to understand more about such cases so that I can explain to others who may also be mislead by others in the internet (like for example, by you who had time again shown that you lied and misled us here!)


    Quote Originally Posted by minority View Post
    TCSS

    http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking...gn-wp-20130111

    DID THE POLICE STOP HIM? NO?

    2010 case pls read with your eyes bigot. JAIL IS FOR THE ILLEGAL PROCESSION NOT FLYERS.

    WP been charging $2 for their flyers every weekend HOW ABT THAT ? WHERE THEY STOP? NO!


    WP have 3 bloody lawyers in their them they are not KPKB coz they know its not illegal. They are not KPKB ing coz they want to keep quiet on the missing $$$$.
    Quote Originally Posted by teddybear View Post
    So, we are told by Police, in consultation with Attorney-General’s Chambers that:
    The distribution of flyers in itself is not an offence in Singapore

    Then, could the Police explain why in 2010, an SDP member was jailed for handing out flyers?

    I am referring to what has been mentioned in that webpage:

    (Let me quote part of what they wrote there for easier reference):
    "Before that, SDP members were also prosecuted for handing out flyers. Chee Siok Chin even served 1 week in jail in January 2010 for the incident.

    In this case, the SDP Members were prosecuted because it was apparently not allowed for political flyers to be distributed and also because they had done so in a group of more than 5 people, constituting an illegal assembly.

    As it can be seen from Victor Lye's selfie, there were at least 7 people involved in the distribution of Anti-WP flyers and they have openly admitted that they were obviously given out by the PAP given the content of the flyers. If this is the case, shouldn't they be classified as political flyers and therefore not allowed?

    It was also raised previously by netizens that because of the content of the flyers, they could be considered campaigning or election material and therefore be illegal under the Parliamentary elections Act as it is not presently campaigning time. (PAP Activists May have Broken the Law with their Anti-WP Flyers)

    So, when Anti-PAP flyers were distributed, there were investigations for sedition, prosecutions for illegal assembly and illegal political material. There is also a potential breach of the Parliamentary Elections Act. Will the police take any action under any one of these laws for the Anti-WP flyers?"


    In both cases, political party members are handling out flyers (1 is anti-PAP, the other is anti-WP), so what is the difference?

    Does it mean that now WP activists can go around handling out fliers delving into AIM's issue and PAP involvement and also not an offence?


    TITLE: Distribution of flyers by PAP activists in Aljunied 'not an offence': Police

    POSTED: 19 Mar 2015 21:11
    URL: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...y/1727322.html

    PAP activists had given out flyers in the area to urge residents to quiz their Workers' Party MPs on alleged funds mismanagement in Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council.
    SINGAPORE: The Singapore Police Force has issued a statement on a police report made about PAP activists' distribution of flyers in Aljunied GRC.

    Activists had gone around last week, urging residents to question opposition Workers' Party Members of Parliament about accounting and governance lapses by Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC).

    In a statement on Thursday (Mar 19), police said: “In consultation with the Attorney-General’s Chambers on the police report made on the distribution of flyers at Aljunied Group Representation Constituency, it has been determined that there is no offence disclosed.”

    "The distribution of flyers in itself is not an offence in Singapore," police added.

Similar Threads

  1. Bear News - Singapore Total Deposits
    By Arcachon in forum Coffeeshop Talk
    Replies: 2
    -: 16-05-20, 11:55
  2. Significant Property News & Discussions
    By teddybear in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 871
    -: 05-06-17, 01:38
  3. Here’s why Brexit is bad news for Singapore property
    By reporter2 in forum HDB, EC, commercial and industrial property discussion
    Replies: 9
    -: 20-06-16, 23:39
  4. Replies: 0
    -: 19-01-14, 17:44
  5. Straits Times Singapore News flash
    By KTKW in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 34
    -: 21-06-12, 20:27

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •