• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Property prices ought fall by up to 30% to match 2009 (pre-$$$ crisis) price levels.

bic_cherry

Alfrescian
Loyal
Property prices ought fall by up to 30% to match 2009 (pre-$$$ crisis) price levels.

Reference: Property curbs may be 'eased faster if prices drop sharply': Straits Times

Property prices ought fall by up to 38% to match 2009 (pre-financial crisis) prices.
("private home prices have climbed about 60% since the global financial crisis in 2009."), so for current property prices to return to pre-2009 prices, the price will have to FALL by= 1- (100/160)= 37.5%.

Okay, maybe I forgot to factor in inflation at say 2.5% p.a. (pegged to CPF rate) which will mean that the reasonable FY2014 property price level (5yrs after FY2009) should be 113.14% in FY2009dollars (used compound interest calculator to calculate), so for current property prices to return to pre-2009 prices (corrected for (high) annual inflation of 2.5%), the price will have to FALL by= 1- (113.14/160)= 29.287%.

As mentioned in the Straits Times report, "Housing Board resale flat prices have slid 5.3% since June last year while private home prices have fallen 3.2% since September, going by official figures out last week."

And given the potential increase in living costs with PAP advocating GST increase after GE2016 (in addition to incessantly high inflation in recent years): life is gonna be getting very tough for average Joe.

It is thus reasonable for home/ commercial/ industrial property prices to be reduced so that living/ business costs might decrease as a breather to man-on-the-street. Of course another option would be to increase property taxes on larger, more luxurious units so as to avert the need to raise GST after GE2016.

Also, smart and creative people know how much rent they should pay. If rent in Singapore goes too high, then that is the END of the future of creative industries in Sink@poor and then the economy will really tank. A safe and affordable living atmosphere where creativity, innovation, service and environmentalism thrive is the golden goose of Singapore economics. To raise rents excessively would be to kill the Singapore goose that lays the golden egg: for that reason, rents (and by proxy: property prices) must be TIGHTLY CONTROLLED NOT allowed rise as excessively as was seen in recent years.

Thus, private property prices having "fallen 3.2% since September,", ought have at least a reduction of 25% more drop to go...

Property curbs may be ‘eased faster if prices drop sharply’
Property curbs may be 'eased faster if prices drop sharply': Straits Times
July 28, 2014 | News
By Melissa Tan
While the Government has said it is not time yet to relax the property market cooling measures, analysts noted that certain developments could prompt policymakers to act faster.
One could be a sharp drop in property prices within a short period, the analysts said during a round- table discussion organised by The Straits Times last week. The other would be a groundswell of unhappiness from a large number of home owners caused by sharply falling prices, the panellists added.
Their comments at the discussion, held at the Singapore Press Holdings office, comes amid a backdrop of a continued slowdown in the public and private housing markets.
On Thursday last week, Monetary Authority of Singapore managing director Ravi Menon said even though prices had eased, it was too soon to lift restrictions.
The softening of prices has recently led developers such as Mr Kwek Leng Beng of City Developments (CDL) and Mr Cheng Wai Keung of Wing Tai to urge policymakers to review some curbs.
Housing Board resale flat prices have slid 5.3% since June last year while private home prices have fallen 3.2% since September, going by official figures out last week.
This was after tough home loan curbs were rolled out in June last year.
Even so, experts said prices would likely have to fall a lot faster for policymakers to ease curbs, given that private home prices have climbed about 60% since the global financial crisis in 2009.
“I think they (policymakers) are looking for something more pronounced, a double-digit kind of price decrease,” said Mr Donald Han, managing director of consultant Chestertons.
“There’s more geopolitics risk now… Perhaps next year the Government may want to keep their hands a little bit closer to the button in case they need to unpick certain measures,” he added.
However, the experts were also quick to stress that a large price drop alone was likely not going to be enough.
CIMB economist Song Seng Wun said the speed of a drop is also crucial. “It’s not just the quantum but the period of time. If there’s geopolitics risk that suddenly adds pressure, it could be compressed within a short period of time.”
Mr Han agreed: “A 12% drop in 6 months would be very drastic, but a 12% drop over a 2-year period would be quite acceptable. It’s a timeline kind of focus for everybody, not just a number.”
Even then, they agreed that the psychological threshold could be as much as a plunge of about 20% in home prices.
This is because many people tend to take a loan of up to 80% of their home’s value at the time they buy it. A subsequent 20% drop in the home value could trigger banks to ask borrowers to top up their loan in order to keep their home.
Hard data aside, policymakers are likely also keeping an eye on sentiment, experts said.
“There have to be a lot of genuine cases saying, ‘I cannot stomach a 10% drop’, and that will start to get the whole process of relaxation started sooner than later,” Mr Han said.
“But so far, it’s been very quiet.”
In the meantime, the curbs have helped to stabilise the property market, the experts said.
Mr Li Jun, general manager of Chinese developer Qingjian Realty, said the cooling measures benefit the market by preventing a price bubble.
“The economy is continuing to grow and the Government is stable in terms of its policies, so in the long term, Singapore is still an attractive place for investment,” he added.
The 4th panellist was Mr Eric Cheng, who runs real estate agency ECG.
(source: ST 28th July 2014)

Screen shots of state media reports warning of increase in GST after 2016:
120302-+New+ways+to+raise+revenue+needed,+says+DPM+Tharman,+quote.JPG
02March2012: DPM Tharman: Government revenues need to be raised.

Singapore%27s+growth+expected+to+slow+in+next+decade.JPG
Full text: 08June2012: Singapore's growth expected to slow in next decade

GST+hike+%E2%80%98more+likely%E2%80%99+if+Govt+needs+to+raise+revenue+for+new+initiatives-TDY+%2822Aug2013%29.JPG
22August2013: GST hike ‘more likely’ if Govt needs to raise revenue for new initiatives
 
Last edited:

bic_cherry

Alfrescian
Loyal
PAP must do MORE to narrow wealth divide if it wants to continue earning people's vot

PAP must do MORE to narrow wealth divide if it wants to continue earning people's vote...
beaverjuice said:
Thread source(discuss): Property prices ought fall by up to 30% to match 2009 (pre-$$$ crisis) price levels.
I think should be okay bah, they sell cheap but can buy cheaperer right? :confused:
in any case, those who has taken the bet that the property market is uni-directional had it coming. I think a lot of them had thought that making money in property is a sure thing and that prices can only go up.
but they failed to heed the warnings from the gah-ment despite 7 cooling measures.
I mentioned before that one should never underestimate the policy resolve of the gah-ment. never bet against them.

I believe that gahmen was LATE to implement its property cooling measures and still believe that these measures are too clumsy (bull in china shop) to say the least. PAP will pay for their inattention in terms of lost political support as the young remain unhappy with high property/ living costs prices (party due to high work permit levies for construction workers) and completion from foreign PMETs whilst over leveraged $inkies get upset with gahmen for being late in implementing cooling measures and then refusing to lift them early etc.

Point is that unless the gahmen does MORE to bridge the wealth divide growing in island state Singapore, no knee jerk property cooling measures will help them win votes. Maybe to maintain the semblance of policy work, but if the wealth divide persistently grows, then it shows that PAP is running Singapore like their own private property (bunch of rent seekers intent on lining their own pockets): in such circumstances: people will sooner rather than later, vote the PAP out...

Example of rent seeking:
"If the annual salary of the Minister of Information, Communication and Arts is only $500,000, it may pose some problems when he discuss policies with media CEOs who earn millions of dollars because they need not listen to the minister's ideas and proposals. Hence, a reasonable payout will help to maintain a bit of dignity."
- MP Lim Wee Kiak apologises for comments on pay
YqUYU.jpg
[IMG URL]

E.g. of political cheating during elections/ leveraging on the AGC being one's apostle/dog:
10390015_708862965841705_3579930549839911222_n.jpg
(Pict source)

Blackmailing Singaporeans to vote PAP and 'fixing' the opposition as the Prime Minister's chief focus:

Passing laws/ policy shifts to benefit oneself/ dynastic political gains:
'Without some assurance of a good chance of winning at least their first election, many able and successful young Singaporeans may not risk their careers to join politics,' Mr Goh Chok Tong, June 2006 ['GRCs make it easier to find top talent: SM'].
Intoparliamentjpg.jpg
[Pict= [URL=http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2012/04/disassembling-grc-benefits-pap-1/]Disassembling GRC system benefits PAP (Part 1 of 3)[/URL]]

Treating citizens like puppets dangled from strings:
MTy8nOC.jpg
[Letter to Today] NS a duty, not a job — thus no ‘salary’: Mindef

Cheating/ swindling one's way to the top and then even boasting about it:...
wsm.jpg
Wee Shu Min elitism controversy

This is what the PAP believes I bet:...
gap4.jpg
(Pict source)

To have Singapore remain a land of opportunities, rather than a playground for friends of the PAP, and for the a/m reasons:
43XpUz3.jpg
(Pict source)
 

bic_cherry

Alfrescian
Loyal
Increased property tax revenue through property tax rises (with targeted exemptions)

Increased property tax revenue through property tax rises (with targeted exemptions) to help every Singaporean.
focus1974 said:
bakuten said:
Thread source (HWZ): Property prices ought fall by up to 30% to match 2009 (pre-financial crisis) price levels.
15% GST.
but exclude necessities like food, transport and such.
confirm earn gao gao and wont affect most of the ppl.
Actually.. GST should be abolished.
It adds burden to the people on the street more than the rich.
Instead, it should be sometime call LUXURY TAX and probably any single piece of item above $500 will have a tax on it.
But i just think off the cuff... never go research ..
and it should be tax more of the rich instead of cutting off at 18%.
Rich rank should pay 25%.. it's not going to affect them as much

Circa FY2011, gahmen revenue from GST is S$8.75 billion (Top five revenue churners in Singapore*|*Support Site for The Unemployed & Underemployed), an amt so big, it is larger than work-permit and special-pass levy (S$4billion), COE collections ($2b p.a.) and casino etc betting taxes ($2.4b p.a.) put together: so a replacement for the S$8.75b p.a. revenue would be almost impossible to find.

However, rather than increasing GST by 3% to hit 10% (3/7= 42.86% increase), perhaps the expected shortfall of S$3.75b p.a. (42.86% of $8.75b) could be contributed by the rich from increased residential property taxes: perhaps each citizen could be entitled to a waiver/ tax exemption of say $6000 of annual value with the rest taxable at flat rate of 7%. Foreigners would of course not be entitled to ANY waiver and Singaporeans renting as tenants will get rental discounts from landlord since by registering their address with the ICA/NRIC department, the landlord would get property tax waiver of $6000 p.a. annual value computation per Singaporean tenant.

A rich foreigner tycoon living alone would of course pay higher tax for the luxury given the higher annual value of the property and the fact that foreigners enjoy ZERO property tax waivers.

Property tax waivers recognise the value of NSmen's contribution to the value of their OWN property (/rented property as the case may be) and places the onus to contribute to SAF >S$10b p.a. running costs on foreigners owning local property and those who live the high life (of spaciousness, central location/ ammenities) since all Singaporeans would be entitled to a STANDARD property tax exemption, just as each male Singaporean serves a STANDARD NS duration of 2 years.

Nothing of course precludes property tax from rising to 10% annual value (in tandem) should GST be similarly raised in so far that the gahmen's claims that social needs are valid and not sone corrupt gahmen Potemkin scheme to promote their cronies and stuff their own pockets with more and more $$$.
 

quelone

Alfrescian
Loyal
Re: Increased property tax revenue through property tax rises (with targeted exemptio

Prices are falling but without any crises I fear they will not fall to very affordable levels for the sandwiched middle class.
 
Top