From
Online Citizen:
By
Andrew Loh
On 24th January,
2007,
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said the following, when justifying
the increase of 2 per cent for the GST:
“Is it better to take your
medicine sooner or stretch it out? Take medicine once or two times?
I prefer to make (sic) my medicine early, why? This is something we
need to do, once we have done it, we can move on; we have the
resources to have the revenue from the GST that we
use….” (Channel
NewsAsia)
The PM was right in that
the increase by 2 percentage points in the GST brought in the
expected revenue for the government - $1.4 billion.
But do note that the $1.4
billion of GST collected so far is only for the months from July
2007 to March 2008. That is, 9 months,
and not a one year (12 months) total. It follows then that the
total one year collection of the 2% of GST could be as much as or
close to $2 billion – dwarfing the initial projected $1.5 billion.
(Singapore
Budget)
(I stand
corrected on the above but as far as I understand, that is what it
is. No one seem to know for sure.)
Even the
estimate for the total GST collection for FY2007 was way off the
mark. The estimate made last year was $4.85 billion. The revised
estimate in the 2008 Budget is $6 billion.
What was also unexpected
was a budget surplus of $6.45 billion, a stark contrast to the $0.7
billion deficit which the government had projected.
Now, questions are being
asked if the GST hike was needed in the first place. (See
here and
here.)
Why increase GST to 7%,
say that the extra $1.5 billion would help the lower income, that
the government would run a deficit of $700 million, and then have a
budget surplus of $6.45 billion?
As
my colleague Leong Sze Hian
said, this is probably one of the most inaccurate budget
forecasts in Singapore’s
history.
PAP MPs’
praises
Yet, if you recall some
PAP MPs’ reaction to Budget 2007, their praises were verging on the
ecstatic. Tampines GRC MP Irene Ng described it as “an
unprecedented new commitment”, and “incredibly
generous”.
MP
for Ang Mo Kio GRC, Lee Bee Wah, in defending the GST hike in 2007,
rebutted the Workers’ Party chairman, Sylvia Lim:
“On Ms Lim’s criticism of
the timing of the GST hike, she said it was better to raise the tax
now while the economy was doing well, rather then wait till things
took a turn for the worse. Using a Hokkien phrase, she warned
against ‘looking for a toilet only when one needs to pass motion’,
a comment that evoked laughter from the House.”
(Link)
Dr
Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade GRC) said:
“Let me share with her
(NCMP Sylvia Lim) that nowhere else in the world can you get a
Budget which includes love and compassion in abundance as this
one.”
Indeed, the prime minister
was the strongest defender of the GST hike:
“That’s the way the PAP is
– upfront – give the bitter medicine first and worry first and
enjoy later on.” (Channel
NewsAsia)
With the cost of living
increasing at an alarming rate and inflation breaching record
levels, one wonders when Singaporeans will get to “enjoy” the
fruits of this so-called “golden era”.
“Growth Dividend” –
really?
Instead of admitting and
taking responsibility for the atrocious forecast, the government is
now packaging the surplus as “Growth Dividends” and claiming to be
sharing the fruits of such “growth” with Singaporeans.
The Straits Times senior
writer, Chua Mui Hoong, describes it thus in the report titled,
“Budget goodies for all S’poreans”:
“Despite it not being an
election year, an impressive $865 million in ‘Growth Dividends’
will be given to all Singaporeans, with more rightly going to the
lower-income worst hit by rising costs.
The figure is about 62 per
cent of the $1.4 billion increased revenue from the hike in Goods
and Services Tax - which means that through the Growth Dividend,
the government is giving back to the man-in-the-street 60 cents of
every extra dollar it collected from the GST hike.”
I fail to
understand, as do many of my friends, how collecting GST of $1.4
billion and then giving back “60 cents of every extra dollar it
collected from the GST hike” can be called “Growth
Dividends”.
It is a
media spin which has not gone unnoticed by many – and I think
senior writers in the press should do better. It is like, I take
$100 from you, give you back $60 and then say I am sharing my
profits with you – and having the cheek to call it “growth
dividends” in the same breath!
Budget deficit forecast
not the only wrong forecast
If you
think the budget deficit forecast is the only one which is way off
the mark, my colleague Sze Hian offers the following examples as
well:
Real Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) expanded by 7.7%,
higher than the 4.5% to 6.5% growth projected when the Budget for
Financial Year (FY) 2007 was set out in February 2007.
FY2007 Operating
Revenue at $39.6 billion has been
revised upwards by $7.3 billion (22.5% higher), driven primarily by
active property market transactions and higher than expected
economic growth in 2007. Higher collections came from Stamp Duty,
Corporate Income Tax, Goods and Services Tax, property tax and
various fees and charges.
Corporate Income
Tax (CIT) collections are
estimated at $9.0 billion, or 7.1% higher than the budgeted FY2007
estimates. This was driven by higher profits booked by companies
due to strong economic growth in 2006 and 2007.
Personal Income
Tax (PIT) collections are
estimated at $5.6 billion, or 7.9% higher than the budgeted FY2007
estimates, in line with strong wage growth in 2006 and
2007.
Assets Tax
collections
are estimated at $2.6 billion, or 23.0% higher than the budgeted
FY2007 estimates. This was largely due to the revision of Annual
Values to reflect the rise in residential and commercial
rents.
Goods and Services
Tax (GST) collections are
estimated at $6.0 billion, or 23.7% higher than the budgeted FY2007
estimates. This was due to higher than expected consumption
growth.
Motor Vehicle Related
Taxes and Vehicle Quota Premiums (i.e. receipts from
Certificate of Entitlement (COE) premiums) are expected to be
higher than budgeted by $0.7 billion. This was attributable to
lower rebates paid out with lower deregistration rates and fewer
cars with high rebate value.
Stamp Duty
collections are estimated at $3.8
billion, 155.0% higher than the budgeted FY2007 estimates. This was
due to a buoyant private residential property market, which saw a
price increase of 31% and a 60% jump in transaction volume
vis-à-vis 2006.
Net Investment Income
Contribution (NIIC) for FY2007 is
expected to be
$2.3 billion, or $0.3 billion above the budgeted 2007 estimate.
This is due to higher interest and dividend income from the
investment of the Government’s financial reserves.
While it
wouldn’t be fair to expect the government, or anyone, to be perfect
in their economic forecasts, nonetheless Singaporeans expect the
government to admit its mistakes and take responsibility for them
when they are wrong.
Using
nice-sounding phrases – “budget bonanza”, “growth dividends” and so
on – only obfuscates and do not address the problems which such
policies, based on faulty forecasts, create for the average
Singaporean.
This is
most obvious in the case of the GST hike last July, which even the
government admitted has contributed to rising cost and record
inflation since then. (Bloomberg,
Associated
Press)
Branded, non-branded,
frozen, unfrozen…
The spiraling cost of
living is of great concern to Singaporeans and a real one. The
prime minister tried to assuage such fears. He had two particular
pieces of advice for Singaporeans.
First, Singaporeans were
advised to buy “non-branded” bread on February 4:
“No need to
buy branded bread,’ he said in Mandarin to laughter. ‘Bread is
bread, rice is rice.” (PM Lee,
Feb 4)
The very next day, the
local media reported:
“House brands are flying
off the shelves.” (Straits
Times, Feb 5)
“More households opt for
house-brand items to cut grocery bills”
(Channel
NewsAsia, Feb 5)
Five days later, the PM
had new advice on how to cut cost – buy frozen food.
“But what you can do is to adjust, go for house
brands, maybe go for frozen food instead of fresh
food.” (PM Lee,
Feb 9)
Right on
cue, the media came up with:
“Picking frozen over fresh
food could halve your marketing bill”
(Straits
Times, Feb 13)
“Go for frozen food and
cut up to 50% off bill” (Straits
Times, Feb 14)
“More Singaporeans buying
cheaper frozen food products.”
(Channel
NewsAsia, Feb 22)
And all the while,
Singaporeans had no idea that the government would be reaping a
budget “surplus” of $6.45 billion.
What the government could
- and should - do
What the
government could do and should do with the “surplus” is to give the
entire $1.4 billion back to Singaporeans, and not only “60
cents of every extra dollar it collected from the GST hike.”
With a “surplus” of $6.45 billion, it would still have $5 billion
in its coffers.
The
government should also freeze prices of essential goods and
services such as electricity (which is adjusted every 3 months),
transport fares, healthcare cost, school/tuition fees, etc, which
are all within the control of the government.
I hope that
MPs will be more critical and think deeper before singing praises
of the government in the current budget debate in
Parliament.
Else, the
ones who will constantly be asked to swallow bitter medicine will
be Singaporeans who are already struggling to keep up – while also
being told that we are in a “golden
era” at the same time.
But that is
another story for another day.
“I have to make the
adjustments of 2% which I think is fair and I think Singaporeans
will support.” (PM Lee,
Nov 2006)
So, as the
prime minister asked last year:
“Is it better to take your
medicine sooner or stretch it out? Take medicine once or two
times?”
For me, I’d
first make sure the doctor is not a spin doctor.
————————
One last
note: I find it really
insensitive for the prime minister to be asking Singaporeans to,
effectively, scrimp and save by buying non-branded bread and
cheaper frozen food, while the government’s investment arms of
Temasek and the GIC spend billions on bailing out ailing foreign
banks.
In
the past year alone, both Temasek and the GIC have spent more than
$34 billion on these “investments” – an amount exceeding our entire
annual budget itself.
Read blogger Looking For
Lalaland’s write up on this:
“Please stop lying to us!”