TR EMERITUS

I am so much troubled by a letter written by the IRAS to my mother regarding a HDB property of which she is recorded as a co-owner. The owner of the property is my sister. The letter states that there is an outstanding property tax for the period ending 31 December 2010. The letter stated that my mother is remind to settle the property tax before 21 Jul 2010 failing which after this date, the IRAS will take recovery action such as appointing her banks, employer, tenant, or any third parties to pay any outstanding tax from moneys held by him for or due to her. The irony in this case is that my mother is 80 years-old and I fail to understand why the IRAS is writing such a horrible letter to an old lady of 80-year old and does not feel any compassion about it. I am disappointed on the way the matter is being conducted. Being a taxpayer, I am questioning whether such an action by the IRAS is justified as far as spending of taxpayer’s money is concerned. Being illiterate, she is unable to know the contents of this letter and in the event that the tax should remain unpaid, as she has neither employer nor tenant nor money in the bank, will the IRAS be taking legal action against her then, as I believe this is the norm with this government agency. The problem here is not whether the property tax will eventually be paid by the concerned party but WHY IS SUCH A LETTER WRITTEN TO AN 80-YEAR OLD PERSON even though she is recorded as a co-owner? It this necessary? I believe that all our government offices and departments now are very well equipped with the latest IT solutions and machines and the most efficient of staff and I cannot believe that the people employed to take care of such matters do not take time to at least make a simple check to verify on the identification of the person they are writing to and spare elderly people the pain of such unnecessary administrative procedures. Or do the IRAS has to resort to such desperate measures as to threaten an old lady who could not even understand what wrong she had committed? Is the recovery of a mere $265 so important that they would not have second thoughts to deprive her of her old age money? My question here is that why do elderly people who had “lent” their name to their children for the purchase of HDB properties under the government requirement had to undergo such ridiculous prosecution. I am sure that many elderly people would have met with the same dilemma and I am sure that most taxes would be settled in due course by the parties concerned. I am requesting the IRAS to review their actions against elderly people and spare them unnecessary sufferings.   Leong WF  Read More →

Singaporeans have been told to expect the number of foreign workers to increase by more than 100,000 this year by PAP Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. This is to meet the demands of businesses in a booming economy, he claimed. http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_553345.html The Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) said today that GDP grew an annualised 26% from the previous three months in the second quarter, compared with a revised 46% gain in the first quarter. MTI has revised its 2010 GDP growth forecast to 13-15% from 7-9%. The astounding high growth in the first half of this year means that Singapore overtakes China as the world's fastest-growing economy. According to economists’ estimates, the Singapore economy has exceeded its potential output by more than 5%, implying an overheated economy. This continued liberal foreign worker policy contradicts the earlier commitment by the PAP government to cap foreign workers at one-third of the total population, or at 50% of the number of Singapore citizens and permanent residents. It is plain obvious that the most appropriate time to push ahead with restructuring the economy is during boom times, and not when the economy is slowing down. PM Lee's words show that the PAP government is still addicted to short-term low quality GDP growth. It still lacks the determination to see through the much needed structural reforms to increase productivity and put the economy on a path of sustainable growth in the years ahead. While the increased intake of foreign workers may relief labour constraints, the inevitable problem facing Singapore is infrastructural and capacity constraints. It is highly questionable whether it is worthwhile to squeeze out that extra percentage of unsustainable GDP growth at the expense of increased inflation and externalities arising from overpopulation, and without the average Singaporeans benefiting from it. Singaporeans are unlikely to gain from this booming economy as the continued influx of foreign workers will keep wages down. Instead Singaporeans suffer in terms of overcrowding and higher inflation arising from pressures on rentals and housing costs. The question Singaporeans need to ask is whether they have really benefited from this push for high GDP growth? If not, for whom is this high growth for? Incidentally, the direct beneficiaries of the high GDP growth include PAP ministers, MPs and senior civil servants, who receive a GDP bonus pegged to GDP growth. Based on the latest details provided in April 2007 by PAP DPM Teo Chee Hean, ministers, MPs and senior civil servants stand to receive between 0 to 8 months of GDP bonus for GDP growth of 2 to 10%. It would seem that this PAP government is all out gunning for higher growth (never mind the issues of overcrowding and an overheated economy) to make up for the lower bonuses in the past two years.   Edmund Khor References: 1)       Press Release of Advance 2Q10 GDP Estimates.pdf 2)       Salary Components for Ministers  Read More →

In reference to the Straits Times dated 15th July 2010 “Singapore needs 100,000 foreign workers” I am uncertain where Mr Lee Hsien Loong or his advisers learnt their economics from, but to put it simply, when an economy ‘overheats’, it means productivity is unable to keep up with demand. Normally an ‘overheated’ economy lends its characteristic to tremendous economic growth otherwise known as a ‘Boom’ period. The global economy has barely recovered from the financial/banking collapse of the past year, and there are reports that Europe will face their own financial troubles soon. China is facing mounting pressure to revalue its Yuan so that her products and good are more competitive in the global market. If Europe’s financial and banking industry collapses (which we already have seen with Greece and Iceland) and China decides to revalue its Yuan, costs of goods will increase and demand will dampen. And as the global demand for goods slows down, it will hit Singapore’s exports hard, while imports are going to cost more. Already, the Monetary Authority of Singapore has increased the value of the Singapore dollar in April in anticipation of a coming inflation (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-20/singapore-says-yuan-move-won-t-affect-currency-regime-update1-.html). So where is this ‘Boom’ period that will cause Singapore’s economy to overheat? So, which sectors – manufacturing, construction, finance/banking sector, tourism/hotel/service, health, GLCs/GICs/SWF – is leading the so called ‘Boom’? If there is a ‘Boom’ period why are there still thousands unemployed? So I question the ruling party’s sudden growth forecast for Singapore this year, saying it will be 13% to 15%. Already they have given themselves a pay hike of 8.8 % based on the earlier 7% to 9% growth forecasts and I can’t imagine they are going to ask for more salary increase. Unless, their bonuses are linked to the GDP. These are questions that have been bothering me until I remembered this is the month of July. In reference to the Straits Times 22nd Feb 2010. Our ruling party are going to increase the foreign workers levies from 1st July 2010; claiming to force companies to reduce their dependence on Foreign Workers. The levy rates will go up by between $10 and $30 for most work permit holders, with adjustments in rates 2011 and 2012. It will amount to an average increase of $100 in levies for the manufacturing and service industries over the next three years. There will be two levy tiers for S Pass workers, up from the single rate of $50 currently. The rates for first and second tiers will be $100 and $120 from July, with adjustments phased in until the rates reach $150 and $250 by 2012 Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam quoted “these changes will provide clear incentives for businesses to restructure and upgrade their operations so as to rely less on lower skilled foreign workers. Businesses will receive significant support from the government through schemes to improve productivity, innovation and training to develop skilled local workers” Before the levy hike, an employer pays between $50 to $470 per month for a work permit pass holder. Now, it is about from $60 to $500. Companies are just going to pass the increased costs to their workers and to the consumers. But that is not the point of this article. Basing on the report that most of the 100,000 would be in the hospitality sector, lets assume they would be work permit pass holders and lets take the lowest levy of $60. If we take 100,000 foreign workers multiple by $60 by 12 months, it will net the ruling party $72 million dollars a year alone. And we have not included the taxes generated from these workers and also, the amount companies will have to pay to take advantage of the so-called government schemes to redesign jobs to improve productivity. Already the total for all foreign levy collection per year is close to $1 Billion and by 2012 it is expected to be close to $3 Billion (http://migrantworkerssingapore.blogspot.com/2010/02/raising-foreign-worker-levy-will-not.html). Not inclusive, monies earned from taxes and ‘productivity’/’educational’ schemes. In my opinion, our ruling party has taken the term ‘human trafficking’ to whole new level.     A Singaporean Patriot   Reference: https://www.tremeritus.net/2010/07/15/pm-lee-wants-to-bring-100000-foreign-workers-into-singapore/  Read More →