Before increasing overall GST, Tax loopholes enjoyed by the rich MUST be closed ASAP.

wallacetan(11-05-2012, 12:45 PM) wrote:

Thread topic: Property in Singapore taxed less than food and water...why?
From your logic, if you purchase and own a piece of land, with only grass growing and nothing else. You don't have to pay the increased property tax (a consumption tax)?
Only when you develop the piece of land, like build a luxurious house, swimming pool, tennis courts, gymnasiums, parking lots and private pier with your own money, then you will be punished and have to pay the increased property tax (a consumption tax).
When you paid for the land and build the luxurious house, pool, etc. you have already paid GST to the building company.

But to have the luxury to enjoy the facilities that you own and developed with your own money, you will have to pay this newly proposed property tax (a consumption tax).
If the 'rich' feels this tax increase is 'equitable' and 'justified' they will stay put and pay the tax.
However, do remember that the 'rich' did not get rich because you can easily call 'Checkmate' on them. They always have another 'move' up their sleeve. The 'move' which you call a 'loophole'.

Before increasing overall GST, Tax loopholes enjoyed by the rich MUST be closed ASAP.
Hoho, before a month is up, I'm back...
"if you purchase and own a piece of land, with only grass growing and nothing else. You don't have to pay the increased property tax (a consumption tax)?"
Please note that as I have previously mentioned, my use of the term 'Consumption tax' is a fluid measure not restrained to the concept of GST/ VAT only- it encompasses anything from import duties, COE, road tax, liquor/ tobacco tax, ERP... and property tax not excepting ('consumption' literally). The 7% benchmark I use is so only because GST is the most obvious and applicable to all, and in this regard, the rich relatively are enjoying life at the expense of the poor.

Whilst 'consumption duration' is an insignificant factor in the context of 'perishables' of 'short' lifespan such as cigarettes, hamburgers and tap water- only purchase GST (and whatever additional taxes applicable) is charged [only once]; purchases of a capital nature such as immovable property, motor vehicles etc however are of a long lasting nature and thus attract additional 'consumption' taxes over the duration in which they are operational: property tax in the case of residence and road tax, ERP, carbon tax etc in the case of motor vehicles. You could think about taxation as paying for the SAF. the cost of which as I understand is ~S$12+Bil annually. One's enjoyment of a hamburger could be attributed to the safety and efficiency of Singapore retrospectively, however, due to the prospective nature of cars and property, shouldn't 'consumption' taxes on such be levied at a rate comparable to the hamburger prospectively as well? Thus the concept of taxes on such 'permanent' properties not just at inception (GST) but also prospectively (Road tax, fuel tax, ERP, property tax)- premised upon the concept of GST but termed differently.

"When you paid for the land and build the luxurious house, pool, etc. you have already paid GST to the building company."
When the man in the street wants to enjoy 'private' luxuries such as swimming, a tennis or club-gym use, his fees to the fitness establishment includes GST on the building costs AS WELL AS 10% (or higher), annual (non-residential) property tax on its premises- a liability automatically transferred to every member's monthly subscription fees, that is before the additional 7% GST on subscription payments is imputed. Please tell me why private luxuries such as boating bays, helicopter landing pads, tennis courts and swimming pools/ jacuzzi, golf putting ranges etc within residential properties are still included in the context of discounted residential property taxes of under 6%?- especially when PM Lee suggests that GST must go up [pict]?


"However, do remember that the 'rich' did not get rich because you can easily call 'Checkmate' on them. They always have another 'move' up their sleeve. The 'move' which you call a 'loophole'."
If these so called 'rich' friends of yours are merely freeloaders, seeking loopholes in the current taxation system to fund their otherwise unaffordable luxuries, then their absence is no 'loophole' but good riddance, Singaporeans do not need such freeloaders who exploit the loopholes of public charity.
The current stratospheric property prices could also be caused by the imputed (unwarranted) residential property tax discounts which unfairly benefit such large, expansive private residences over the poor who have to rent property- a correction in price would thus attract responsible rich people who appreciate sensible property prices and reasonable property taxes as their monetary contribution to the upkeep of society.

In the light of PM Lee warning about how the increasing cost of the social safety net will necessitate an increases in tax rates moving forwards, don't you think that where possible, the loopholes in tax collection as currently enjoyed by the rich should be closed ASAP before taxes upon the poor are once again increased?

Where is your humanity?

Rgds
B.C.

This image has been resized.Click to view original image

[pict source]

============

At:

10une2012: Property in Singapore taxed less than food and water...why?