View Poll Results: How much should ABSD be for Singaporeans to buy 2nd property?

Voters
12. You may not vote on this poll
  • 0

    7 58.33%
  • 3%

    4 33.33%
  • 4%

    0 0%
  • 5%

    1 8.33%
  • 7%

    0 0%
  • 10%+

    0 0%
Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: How much should ABSD be for Singaporean 2nd property?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,823

    Default How much should ABSD be for Singaporean 2nd property?

    With an aging population and low yield environment, rental income is a still a viable option for retirement planning. Would you think policy makers should encourage Singaporeans to own 2nd property? The current "temporary" rate is 7%. How much should ABSD be for Singaporeans to buy 2nd property?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,823

    Default

    Numer of votes: 2
    Mode: 3% (the most voted number)

    We need more votes - and you never know that the policy makers big data tool will pick it up!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    5,675

    Default

    Singaporeans should not be penalized for owning properties in their own country as long as it is within the tdsr framework.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by azeoprop View Post
    Singaporeans should not be penalized for owning properties in their own country as long as it is within the tdsr framework.
    I agree. Mistakenly voted 3% thinking that was the normal stamp duty.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by azeoprop View Post
    Singaporeans should not be penalized for owning properties in their own country as long as it is within the tdsr framework.
    yeah! yeah!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bargain hunter View Post
    yeah! yeah!
    Private property is not HDB (subsidized housing)
    should leave it to mkt forces

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    693

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bargain hunter View Post
    yeah! yeah!
    I think the purpose is to prevent the rich from hoarding to more properties. if this is the purpose, 2nd property should be 0% but when it comes to 3rd property, increase from 10 to 15% or even 17%. Like that at least give the middle income group a chance to own an investment property. The TDSR is already in place to ensure that the middle income group are not over stretched.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    Today's newspaper with a clear view of our Minister of Finance on taxes and a section on property taxes, and why property-based taxes are preferred by the Govt.


    http://www.straitstimes.com/business...policy-tharman


    Property tax is a second priority in tax policy, said Mr Tharman, as it is the least damaging to income growth. He noted that there is scope in many economies to increase taxes on immovable property - land as well as developed real estate - but in a progressive way, such as providing allowance for properties of low value and higher tax rates for properties of high value, as well as making the distinction between owner-occupied residences and investment properties for taxation purposes.

    Taxes on property transactions, such as through stamp duties, "have been especially useful in the Asian context, where speculation in the property market is almost a habit".

    While these taxes can be varied depending on the state of the property cycle, "they are also an essential part of the permanent landscape of taxes - always distinguishing purchases for owner-occupation from those for investment".

    His remarks suggested that some cooling measures such as the additional buyer's stamp duty - levied on foreign home buyers and Singaporeans who own more than one residential property here - could become a permanent feature.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,089

    Default

    A second priority in tax policy concerns property taxes. It is the most efficient tax; that is, the least damaging to income growth — that’s a long-standing tenet, and it’s backed by the evidence internationally. There is in fact more scope in many of our economies to increase taxes on immovable property: Land as well as developed real estate.

    But we also have to make property tax progressive, and there are examples of how this can be done. We need to provide allowance for properties of low value, and provide higher tax rates for properties of high value. And to distinguish between primary or owner-occupied residences, which should be taxed less, and investment properties.

    That’s our approach in Singapore. And we must tax land, even when it is not developed. In many countries, private land ownership is heavily concentrated, held mainly by the wealthy. From a growth and equity point of view, there is hence a good economic case for taxing land adequately.

    There is also a role for taxes on property transactions (such as through stamp duties), besides taxing ownership. The traditional, theoretical view is that taxes on transactions are distorting — they distort market decisions. But I would say it is the right sort of distortion. Not all distortions are bad.

    Taxes on property transactions have been especially useful in the Asian context, where speculation in the property market is almost a habit. Taxes on property transactions can be varied depending on the state of the property cycle.

    But they are also an essential part of the permanent landscape of taxes — always distinguishing purchases for owner-occupation from those for investment. They are a better way to collect tax than income taxes, with less harm to growth, and more likely to encourage an economic culture conducive to innovation and entrepreneurship.


    http://www.todayonline.com/commentar...clusive-growth


    Kelonguni u beat me in posting it, i share the sentiments. So is it an additional tax revenue or so called cooling measure?

    If it’s a tax on wealth then removal of ABSD is remote unless PPI index needed a resuscitation.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    Thanks. I read the hard copy of Today paper on this but when I googled only the ST copy came out. But the meaning is largely the same.

    These reinforce my previous posts on the roles these property taxes play, and my thoughts that in future, such taxes are likely to be raised further, rather than be reduced at all.

    One thing not mentioned by Tharman was that the population at large also supports such taxes. Ironical and paradoxical but true.



    Quote Originally Posted by maisonjai View Post
    A second priority in tax policy concerns property taxes. It is the most efficient tax; that is, the least damaging to income growth — that’s a long-standing tenet, and it’s backed by the evidence internationally. There is in fact more scope in many of our economies to increase taxes on immovable property: Land as well as developed real estate.

    But we also have to make property tax progressive, and there are examples of how this can be done. We need to provide allowance for properties of low value, and provide higher tax rates for properties of high value. And to distinguish between primary or owner-occupied residences, which should be taxed less, and investment properties.

    That’s our approach in Singapore. And we must tax land, even when it is not developed. In many countries, private land ownership is heavily concentrated, held mainly by the wealthy. From a growth and equity point of view, there is hence a good economic case for taxing land adequately.

    There is also a role for taxes on property transactions (such as through stamp duties), besides taxing ownership. The traditional, theoretical view is that taxes on transactions are distorting — they distort market decisions. But I would say it is the right sort of distortion. Not all distortions are bad.

    Taxes on property transactions have been especially useful in the Asian context, where speculation in the property market is almost a habit. Taxes on property transactions can be varied depending on the state of the property cycle.

    But they are also an essential part of the permanent landscape of taxes — always distinguishing purchases for owner-occupation from those for investment. They are a better way to collect tax than income taxes, with less harm to growth, and more likely to encourage an economic culture conducive to innovation and entrepreneurship.


    http://www.todayonline.com/commentar...clusive-growth


    Kelonguni u beat me in posting it, i share the sentiments. So is it an additional tax revenue or so called cooling measure?

    If it’s a tax on wealth then removal of ABSD is remote unless PPI index needed a resuscitation.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

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

    Default

    Really?
    Since the HDB property price is heavily subsidized, they should just increase the HDB property tax 5x and see whether the population at large still support or not........

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelonguni View Post
    Thanks. I read the hard copy of Today paper on this but when I googled only the ST copy came out. But the meaning is largely the same.

    These reinforce my previous posts on the roles these property taxes play, and my thoughts that in future, such taxes are likely to be raised further, rather than be reduced at all.

    One thing not mentioned by Tharman was that the population at large also supports such taxes. Ironical and paradoxical but true.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    174

    Default

    This is a very important policy shift. In the past, govt wants to make investment in real estate attractive so that people (including foreigners) have a permanent stake in the country. Now property investment is deemed as passive and will divert money from businesses and innovation.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    They must have learned much from 2011 elections.

    The left shift for the source of tax plus seeing the affluent groups grow rich and decreased income productivity as a whole.

    It's siong but healthier now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pynchmail View Post
    This is a very important policy shift. In the past, govt wants to make investment in real estate attractive so that people (including foreigners) have a permanent stake in the country. Now property investment is deemed as passive and will divert money from businesses and innovation.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

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

    Default

    Really?
    If so why we don't see the government do anything to rein in the rentals of commercial properties owned by the REITs, JTC, Keppel Land, Capital Land, CCT, CMT, Mapletree etc to enable more money to be diverted to businesses and innovation???????????????

    The commercial properties' rentals have been jacked up frequently and the SMEs are feeling great pain, rental costs are now a very big portion of their business costs..........
    Just to point out that the fact that the rentals of prime retail space in regional malls are now almost the same as Orchard Malls (some even more than obscure Orchard Malls)!

    Quote Originally Posted by Pynchmail View Post
    This is a very important policy shift. In the past, govt wants to make investment in real estate attractive so that people (including foreigners) have a permanent stake in the country. Now property investment is deemed as passive and will divert money from businesses and innovation.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    5,675

    Default

    Soon we might get quad key units and penta key units in the market ha ha.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    693

    Default

    yah.. then we can use it for AirBnB.. good idea

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,823

    Default

    Number of votes: 9
    Mode: 0

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,823

    Default

    Number of votes: 10
    Mode: 0
    Weighted average: 1.7%

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by azeoprop View Post
    Singaporeans should not be penalized for owning properties in their own country as long as it is within the tdsr framework.
    Yeah... you are absolutely right.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hellobicycle View Post
    Yeah... you are absolutely right.
    Private is ok , not HDB

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    7

    Default

    No to ABSD for 2nd Property for Singaporean.
    Let us stay in one, buy 2nd to collect rent for old age or sell 2nd Property to cash out during old age.
    http://kingsfordwaterbaycondo.sg

Similar Threads

  1. How property became the #1 Singaporean dream
    By Arcachon in forum Coffeeshop Talk
    Replies: 0
    -: 09-08-18, 19:33
  2. How much should ABSD be for singaporean 4th property?
    By richwang in forum Coffeeshop Talk
    Replies: 2
    -: 27-07-16, 21:21
  3. How much should the ABSD be for Singaporean 3rd property?
    By richwang in forum Coffeeshop Talk
    Replies: 3
    -: 27-07-16, 19:07
  4. Property curbs help the average Singaporean
    By reporter2 in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 4
    -: 14-04-16, 21:12
  5. Profile of the typical Singaporean Property Investor
    By carbuncle in forum HDB, EC, commercial and industrial property discussion
    Replies: 8
    -: 27-05-12, 07:22

Posting Permissions

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