Car buyers want COE system reviewed

If I may weigh in on this discussion, I feel it is not the Government's job to micro-manage and ensure families who need a car on a case by case basis get a car. After all, who is to say who is more eligible? Correct me if I am wrong, but all of us in the 30-40 age range have ageing parents, some have kids and some may even have handicapped family members or relatives.

So who decides on priority and how should people be made to pay more? It's a very tough question with no definite answers.

A car is a necessity in countries with vast expanses of land (almost every other large country!), but in Singapore with a small and cramped area public transport would suffice most of the time. For any "gaps", taxis should do the trick.

(26-12-2012, 10:51 AM)yeokiwi Wrote:

(26-12-2012, 10:46 AM)Temperament Wrote: 1) how about every house-hold if they want to can ballot for a car?

Black market will emerge. I ballot the car successfully and rent the car to the rich. Every ah beng, ah lian, ahmad and mutu will chiong for the ballot.

Sorry. Shall we just generate as much as possible ideas first no matter what the idea? Then we go through them and pick the most suitable or workable or even with some modification the idea that is acceptable to most people shall be presented to PAPYs. Come on this is where if you don't think for yourself, the Papys will. That's why there is the COE. i am sure we can make it more equitable if everyone of us participate to generate ideas.

(26-12-2012, 10:26 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: On tax-avoidance perspective, staying elsewhere does not help?

Corporate tax remains as long as the company registered and doing business in Singapore

Personal income tax will increase as non-resident tax payer.

Allow me to explain my perspective.

Every year, businesses and people exit Singapore. It is not a figment of my imagination as I personally know several such cases. However, our economy is still growing in spite of that because on balance, more businesses are created and more people want to come to Singapore.

But this is not a given. The current judicious balance of policies have created a net positive environment for businesses to thrive. There will be external shocks and internal policy adjustments that will discourage businesses to grow. E.g. current manpower policies of restricting or reducing foreign labour will discourage some businesses to grow. Punitive taxes on the rich (and businesses) could be another possibility. And some policies have a lagged effect, i.e. you won't know the actual effect(s) until some time later, not unlike piloting a big ship.

Many companies are international in nature. Transfer pricing occurs all the time. If they are not treated well, why would they want to retain their core activities and profits in Singapore?

(26-12-2012, 11:03 AM)Temperament Wrote:

(26-12-2012, 10:51 AM)yeokiwi Wrote:

(26-12-2012, 10:46 AM)Temperament Wrote: 1) how about every house-hold if they want to can ballot for a car?

Black market will emerge. I ballot the car successfully and rent the car to the rich. Every ah beng, ah lian, ahmad and mutu will chiong for the ballot.

Sorry. Shall we just generate as much as possible ideas first no matter what the idea? Then we go through them and pick the most suitable or workable or even with some modification the idea that is acceptable to most people shall be presented to PAPYs. Come on this is where if you don't think for yourself, the Papys will. That's why there is the COE. i am sure we can make it more equitable if everyone of us participate to generate ideas.

I had gone through the thinking process for an alternative system many times and I had not found any feasible idea. You can carry on and maybe you can have a good solution for us.

(26-12-2012, 10:51 AM)yeokiwi Wrote:

(26-12-2012, 10:46 AM)Temperament Wrote: 1) how about every house-hold if they want to can ballot for a car?

Black market will emerge. I ballot the car successfully and rent the car to the rich. Every ah beng, ah lian, ahmad and mutu will chiong for the ballot.

(26-12-2012, 10:56 AM)Musicwhiz Wrote: If I may weigh in on this discussion, I feel it is not the Government's job to micro-manage and ensure families who need a car on a case by case basis get a car. After all, who is to say who is more eligible? Correct me if I am wrong, but all of us in the 30-40 age range have ageing parents, some have kids and some may even have handicapped family members or relatives.

So who decides on priority and how should people be made to pay more? It's a very tough question with no definite answers.

A car is a necessity in countries with vast expanses of land (almost every other large country!), but in Singapore with a small and cramped area public transport would suffice most of the time. For any "gaps", taxis should do the trick.

I actually suggested that each household with a child or elderly be allocated a COE. Then they can choose to sell it or use it. And child bearing/ parental policy incentive can be adjusted as well, for eg 2 parents staying with you, you get additional COE.

This serves 2 purposes: reallocating money to families that contribute to societal needs, and people cannot complain they don't have a choice in car ownership. And govt don't have to "pay" a cent. Downside is of course some fiscal revenue

That said, I agree that transportation in Singapore is relatively convenient. Private cars are priced vs convenience and prestige. If the former is diminished, it means the latter is paramount in our car demand. But luxury needs cannot override the basic needs of transportation. We could also limit the number of cars per household for example.

Transportation is important to our economy which is why traffic control is important as our population grows. COE is probably the lesser evil (compare with jams in other countries) but key is again in the details and how to execute it better.

Methink there should not be loan for car. Those who wants to buy car should pay in cash! Demand should drop, coe should drop but at least can stop those who should not even own a car in the first place from taking up more debt.
Seriously, rich people still buy car even if coe doubled or tripled!It is their money i don't care as long as it does not concern taxpayer money.
Those with handicap children or elderly, car should be the last thing they would want to spend their money on!
People always compare abt life but they never want to make a difference to it.

(26-12-2012, 11:12 AM)yeokiwi Wrote:

(26-12-2012, 11:03 AM)Temperament Wrote:

(26-12-2012, 10:51 AM)yeokiwi Wrote:

(26-12-2012, 10:46 AM)Temperament Wrote: 1) how about every house-hold if they want to can ballot for a car?

Black market will emerge. I ballot the car successfully and rent the car to the rich. Every ah beng, ah lian, ahmad and mutu will chiong for the ballot.

Sorry. Shall we just generate as much as possible ideas first no matter what the idea? Then we go through them and pick the most suitable or workable or even with some modification the idea that is acceptable to most people shall be presented to PAPYs. Come on this is where if you don't think for yourself, the Papys will. That's why there is the COE. i am sure we can make it more equitable if everyone of us participate to generate ideas.

I had gone through the thinking process for an alternative system many times and I had not found any feasible idea. You can carry on and maybe you can have a good solution for us.

Good to hear that. So can you just tell us your idea/ideas? Then may be more people who care about making our society more equitable will be encourage to participate. If we all can't reach a suitable idea, so be it. At least no one can say we didn't try. No use just talking and complain about it. It won't change a thing,. Will it? i may be an ignoramus but i know and can see what is equitable and what is not.

(26-12-2012, 11:07 AM)HitandRun Wrote:

(26-12-2012, 10:26 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: On tax-avoidance perspective, staying elsewhere does not help?

Corporate tax remains as long as the company registered and doing business in Singapore

Personal income tax will increase as non-resident tax payer.

Allow me to explain my perspective.

Every year, businesses and people exit Singapore. It is not a figment of my imagination as I personally know several such cases. However, our economy is still growing in spite of that because on balance, more businesses are created and more people want to come to Singapore.

But this is not a given. The current judicious balance of policies have created a net positive environment for businesses to thrive. There will be external shocks and internal policy adjustments that will discourage businesses to grow. E.g. current manpower policies of restricting or reducing foreign labour will discourage some businesses to grow. Punitive taxes on the rich (and businesses) could be another possibility. And some policies have a lagged effect, i.e. you won't know the actual effect(s) until some time later, not unlike piloting a big ship.

Many companies are international in nature. Transfer pricing occurs all the time. If they are not treated well, why would they want to retain their core activities and profits in Singapore?

I agree with your view. Just to add-on my opinion, incentive for international companies should be viewed as a complete package, rather on individual issues. There are other good incentive to stay e.g. lower corporate tax etc.

(26-12-2012, 11:13 AM)specuvestor Wrote:

(26-12-2012, 10:51 AM)yeokiwi Wrote:

(26-12-2012, 10:46 AM)Temperament Wrote: 1) how about every house-hold if they want to can ballot for a car?

Black market will emerge. I ballot the car successfully and rent the car to the rich. Every ah beng, ah lian, ahmad and mutu will chiong for the ballot.

(26-12-2012, 10:56 AM)Musicwhiz Wrote: If I may weigh in on this discussion, I feel it is not the Government's job to micro-manage and ensure families who need a car on a case by case basis get a car. After all, who is to say who is more eligible? Correct me if I am wrong, but all of us in the 30-40 age range have ageing parents, some have kids and some may even have handicapped family members or relatives.

So who decides on priority and how should people be made to pay more? It's a very tough question with no definite answers.

A car is a necessity in countries with vast expanses of land (almost every other large country!), but in Singapore with a small and cramped area public transport would suffice most of the time. For any "gaps", taxis should do the trick.

I actually suggested that each household with a child or elderly be allocated a COE. Then they can choose to sell it or use it. And child bearing/ parental policy incentive can be adjusted as well, for eg 2 parents staying with you, you get additional COE.

This serves 2 purposes: reallocating money to families that contribute to societal needs, and people cannot complain they don't have a choice in car ownership. And govt don't have to "pay" a cent. Downside is of course some fiscal revenue

That said, I agree that transportation in Singapore is relatively convenient. Private cars are priced vs convenience and prestige. If the former is diminished, it means the latter is paramount in our car demand. But luxury needs cannot override the basic needs of transportation. We could also limit the number of cars per household for example.

Transportation is important to our economy which is why traffic control is important as our population grows. COE is probably the lesser evil (compare with jams in other countries) but key is again in the details and how to execute it better.

Firstly, this is like giving free monies ... from national reserve and let those who decides want to buy COE or not .... If we cannot afford to give good subsidy to baby, why can we be so generous on this one.

Secondly, I think the price can also crash. We may end up worse.

For me, I think COE cost should be separated from car price. It will be already effective, if COE is paid in cash and without loan.