Kindness Week
As this week is Kindness Week, could the govt show kindness by considering ex-NMP, Steve Chia's 2006 appeal "to reduce some indirect taxation and fees on our people, and allow them to truly grow richer by their efforts – not just from government dividend handouts."?
Some of these indirect taxes include TV & Radio Licences, Water Conservation Tax and Foreign Domestic Worker Levy.
As revealed in Steve Chia's 2006 Budget Debate speech, these "other taxes, other fees and charges, and others” account for a substantial amount of revenue for the govt: S$4.36 billion in FY2004, S$3.87 billion in FY2005, and estimated S$3.97 billion for FY2006.
Budget Debate 2006, Steve Chia
Tue, Feb 28, 2006
[snip]
Table 6.2 of the Budget Highlights shows that “other taxes, other fees and charges, and others” account for S$4.36 billion in FY2004, S$3.87 billion in FY2005, and estimated S$3.97 billion for FY2006 respectively. These revenue receipts are higher than total GST collections of S$3.47 S$3.6 and S$3.75 billion respectively for each of the following years. Yet, they are all lumped together as “others” – together with stamp duties, foreign worker levies etc.
Can the government be more specific about the etc etc? These are not small peanut amount of money that the government collects. The total revenue from these “others” is bigger than the revenue collected from the 5% GST, and I think it is important for these others to be more clearly and transparently reflected.
From the appendix 7.1 again, we understand that the government expects to collect S$870 million from stamp duties, S$160 million in water conservation tax, and S$1 billion from “other taxes”, although it is not reflected what this ‘other taxes’ is about – that it can amount to a billion dollars. Is the S$111 million collected from the Radio and TV licences reflected in this $1 billion too?
The point I am driving is this Sir: That the government should scrap (or at least drastically reduce) the water conservation tax, the radio and TV licenses, and the Domestic Foreign worker levy. They can afford to, and they should.
Water is an essential constituent for life. Without it, we all die. Thus the message to conserve is important. But to impose a ‘water conservation tax’ from the first drop of water coming out from the tap is wrong. People should not be taxed for at least the first 15 cubic meter of water needed for daily necessities and living. Any taxes imposed on the excess water used above that amount will be reasonable. Not below it.
This is especially so since the technology to produce desalinated water is here, and water is no longer a limited resource, constantly threatened to be cut off by our Malaysian neighbors. With this new secured source of unlimted water supply from the sea, residents should be charged fair market rate from the provision of such water, and not be imposed such out-dated unfair taxes. I hope the Ministry of Environment and water resources will expedite their reviews and remove it soon.
As for TV and Radio license fees, it is not fair for residents to do national service, and subsidize our national objective of promoting local content developers. That economic objective should be funded by the government. The government can afford to subsidize more than the current S$5 million given for this fledging industry. License fee holders should not be asked to fund this government objective. This is an out-dated tax and should be reviewed and abolished soon. Only England, Ireland and some other commonwealth states continue to impose this license fees. Other developed nations like America no longer impose such fees to subsidize national broadcasters. I hope MICA will act on this soon.
The Government should also reduce the foreign domestic worker levy, so that the minimum pay of these migrant workers can be raised. It is incredible that the government earns more from its levies than the domestic worker herself. This is cruel, and profits excessively from the undue hardship of migrant workers. With better pay, Singaporeans can recruit more experience maids to look after their families – and not the fresh young maids coming here with adjustment problems, and no experience of working in a high-rise flat. The experienced ones are going Hong Kong and other countries leaving Singapore with new inexperienced workers. Looking at total government receipts, the government can well afford to be kinder.
Some of these indirect taxes include TV & Radio Licences, Water Conservation Tax and Foreign Domestic Worker Levy.
As revealed in Steve Chia's 2006 Budget Debate speech, these "other taxes, other fees and charges, and others” account for a substantial amount of revenue for the govt: S$4.36 billion in FY2004, S$3.87 billion in FY2005, and estimated S$3.97 billion for FY2006.
Budget Debate 2006, Steve Chia
Tue, Feb 28, 2006
[snip]
Table 6.2 of the Budget Highlights shows that “other taxes, other fees and charges, and others” account for S$4.36 billion in FY2004, S$3.87 billion in FY2005, and estimated S$3.97 billion for FY2006 respectively. These revenue receipts are higher than total GST collections of S$3.47 S$3.6 and S$3.75 billion respectively for each of the following years. Yet, they are all lumped together as “others” – together with stamp duties, foreign worker levies etc.
Can the government be more specific about the etc etc? These are not small peanut amount of money that the government collects. The total revenue from these “others” is bigger than the revenue collected from the 5% GST, and I think it is important for these others to be more clearly and transparently reflected.
From the appendix 7.1 again, we understand that the government expects to collect S$870 million from stamp duties, S$160 million in water conservation tax, and S$1 billion from “other taxes”, although it is not reflected what this ‘other taxes’ is about – that it can amount to a billion dollars. Is the S$111 million collected from the Radio and TV licences reflected in this $1 billion too?
The point I am driving is this Sir: That the government should scrap (or at least drastically reduce) the water conservation tax, the radio and TV licenses, and the Domestic Foreign worker levy. They can afford to, and they should.
Water is an essential constituent for life. Without it, we all die. Thus the message to conserve is important. But to impose a ‘water conservation tax’ from the first drop of water coming out from the tap is wrong. People should not be taxed for at least the first 15 cubic meter of water needed for daily necessities and living. Any taxes imposed on the excess water used above that amount will be reasonable. Not below it.
This is especially so since the technology to produce desalinated water is here, and water is no longer a limited resource, constantly threatened to be cut off by our Malaysian neighbors. With this new secured source of unlimted water supply from the sea, residents should be charged fair market rate from the provision of such water, and not be imposed such out-dated unfair taxes. I hope the Ministry of Environment and water resources will expedite their reviews and remove it soon.
As for TV and Radio license fees, it is not fair for residents to do national service, and subsidize our national objective of promoting local content developers. That economic objective should be funded by the government. The government can afford to subsidize more than the current S$5 million given for this fledging industry. License fee holders should not be asked to fund this government objective. This is an out-dated tax and should be reviewed and abolished soon. Only England, Ireland and some other commonwealth states continue to impose this license fees. Other developed nations like America no longer impose such fees to subsidize national broadcasters. I hope MICA will act on this soon.
The Government should also reduce the foreign domestic worker levy, so that the minimum pay of these migrant workers can be raised. It is incredible that the government earns more from its levies than the domestic worker herself. This is cruel, and profits excessively from the undue hardship of migrant workers. With better pay, Singaporeans can recruit more experience maids to look after their families – and not the fresh young maids coming here with adjustment problems, and no experience of working in a high-rise flat. The experienced ones are going Hong Kong and other countries leaving Singapore with new inexperienced workers. Looking at total government receipts, the government can well afford to be kinder.
posted by locky2ky at 6:46 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home