GST increase vs GST credits

[Jman888]

http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNew...207-251222.html

 

when is the next payout any idea?

 

 

this year is a good year, where got payout??

 

anyway wait for the next budget lor.... he say it is going to be a 'good' one

[RadX]

this year is a good year, where got payout??

 

anyway wait for the next budget lor.... he say it is going to be a 'good' one

 

yah...we all know

[Robo]

this year is a good year, where got payout??

 

anyway wait for the next budget lor.... he say it is going to be a 'good' one

 

erections coming???

 

[RadX]

this year is a good year, where got payout??

 

anyway wait for the next budget lor.... he say it is going to be a 'good' one

 

btw...your Crumpler etz Thursday nioght....u dun come...i sell Ebay already...your sex toy no have yet....will be in next wk

[Ben5266]

btw...your Crumpler etz Thursday nioght....u dun come...i sell Ebay already...your sex toy no have yet....will be in next wk

[laugh]

[RadX]

 

customs evaluating to see fit for local use

[relacker]

using the the $ screwed from me to buy my vote??? kai wan siao

[TandemAssassin]

I guess I may be flamed. But I vote for GST increase even if there are no GST credits. Provided it is revenue neutral. This means any increase in GST revenue is used to reduce Personal and Corp Income Tax.

 

Simple reason. To me it is a fairer form of tax. Income tax hits you regardless of how much you spend. So long as you earn more. But GST only hits you when you spend. So if you are very capable and thrifty, you get taxed less. You don't tax someone just because he is good at making money or more capable. Rather, you only tax him more if he wants to spend more. Personally, I think it is good to incentivise ability and frugality.

 

And high earners no longer have any incentive to resort to hiring tax accountants to help them reduce their taxes. Which is even more wasteful if you ask me.

 

 

[Tom_kkh]

And high earners no longer have any incentive to resort to hiring tax accountants to help them reduce their taxes. Which is even more wasteful if you ask me.

 

that shows u are not a high earner yet.

 

an example of how yr so call high earners escape GST.

 

Business partners or friends or relatives comes from oversea. Rich local guy A asked them to buy stuff that can be exempted from GST when they leave the country.

 

reach airport, proceeded to GST refund counter.

 

Get the stuff checked, take the refunds, collect back the stuff, and walaaaa. Rich cheepo guy A "evaded" GST for his DSLR($5K), Rolex($30K) and all.

 

btw this is based on a true incident...

 

Try asking the toilet lady to find oversea friend to "offset" her $3 chicken rice.

Edited December 7, 2010 by Tom_kkh

[TandemAssassin]

that shows u are not a high earner yet.

 

an example of how yr so call high earners escape GST.

 

Business partners or friends or relatives comes from oversea. Rich local guy A asked them to buy stuff that can be exempted from GST when they leave the country.

 

reach airport, proceeded to GST refund counter.

 

Get the stuff checked, take the refunds, collect back the stuff, and walaaaa. Rich cheepo guy A "evaded" GST for his DSLR($5K), Rolex($30K) and all.

 

btw this is based on a true incident...

 

Try asking the toilet lady to find oversea friend to "offset" her $3 chicken rice.

 

It is because the toilet lady does not buy anything expensive enough to make it worth doing so, isn't it?

 

In any case, I stand corrected about this point then. I am most definitely not a high earner. I make about $500 per month. And my family is lower middle class. So I won't know all these tricks that you speak of.

 

Nevertheless I still believe that GST is a fairer form of tax.

[Tom_kkh]

It is because the toilet lady does not buy anything expensive enough to make it worth doing so, isn't it?

 

That's precisely my point! the old lady cannot or do not have the mean$ to run around the system.

 

so GST is fair to her?

 

thats how the poor r getting poorer..

 

good for u

Edited December 7, 2010 by Tom_kkh

[TandemAssassin]

thats y the poor is getting poorer, as they have no means to run around the system.

 

good for u

 

this i beg to differ. the poor are getting poorer because they don't understand how the system works.

 

working with the system in Singapore will not bring you success, but you most definitely won't starve. you can be lower middle class like me.

 

 

[Tom_kkh]

this i beg to differ. the poor are getting poorer because they don't understand how the system works.

 

working with the system in Singapore will not bring you success, but you most definitely won't starve. you can be lower middle class like me.

 

again good for u

 

i never been in the lower middle class before or will ever

 

as poor as a church mouse compared to my friends[laugh]

 

[Ben5266]

I guess I may be flamed. But I vote for GST increase even if there are no GST credits. Provided it is revenue neutral. This means any increase in GST revenue is used to reduce Personal and Corp Income Tax.

 

Simple reason. To me it is a fairer form of tax. Income tax hits you regardless of how much you spend. So long as you earn more. But GST only hits you when you spend. So if you are very capable and thrifty, you get taxed less. You don't tax someone just because he is good at making money or more capable. Rather, you only tax him more if he wants to spend more. Personally, I think it is good to incentivise ability and frugality.

 

And high earners no longer have any incentive to resort to hiring tax accountants to help them reduce their taxes. Which is even more wasteful if you ask me.

Maybe you should think again after considering this.

Bolui lang, spend 80% of their income here. 20% saving. Govt tax 7% of the 80%.

Wului lang, spend 20% of their income here, 50% overseas and 30% saving. Govt could only tax 20% of their income, instead of the potential 70%. Loss opportunity for the govt.

That's why income tax is still needed.

[TandemAssassin]

Maybe you should think again after considering this.

Bolui lang, spend 80% of their income here. 20% saving. Govt tax 7% of the 80%.

Wului lang, spend 20% of their income here, 50% overseas and 30% saving. Govt could only tax 20% of their income, instead of the potential 70%. Loss opportunity for the govt.

That's why income tax is still needed.

 

Yes. But your underlying assumption (as is that of many others) is that the rich should be taxed more. That is why all the arguments are talking about how the rich are better off while the poor will get worse off.

 

Many people think of taxes as a redistributive tool to redistribute wealth in society. That is something I disagree with. Taxes are to fund necessities that the private sector finds unprofitable to undertake. Like road building, street lighting and police/armed forces etc. They should also be used to correct market inefficiencies.

 

But using it as a redistributive tool? It is like using a sledgehammer to perform surgery. It lacks the precision to get the job done. And I realise that my posting comes across as being harsh to the poor. I would like to clarify that I believe in helping the poor. But not by the use of taxes.

 

What should be done instead to help the poor is not by stopping GST increments. Rather we should have targeted measures to help them cope with the effects of GST increment beyond the GST credits given. Some ideas that I have: Exempt GST from necessities like power, public transport and basic foods like rice. Give a wage supplement for lower income workers (earning below $1k for e.g.) in the form of e-vouchers or e-credit that can only be used to pay utilities bills, education fees, public transport and medical bills.

[Maroon5]

this i beg to differ. the poor are getting poorer because they don't understand how the system works.

 

working with the system in Singapore will not bring you success, but you most definitely won't starve. you can be lower middle class like me.

 

so how does the system work - for benefit of poor pple like me?

how does reducing personal income tax rate which did not affect me at all in the first place and increasing GST help me?

[Maroon5]

Yes. But your underlying assumption (as is that of many others) is that the rich should be taxed more. That is why all the arguments are talking about how the rich are better off while the poor will get worse off.

 

Many people think of taxes as a redistributive tool to redistribute wealth in society. That is something I disagree with. Taxes are to fund necessities that the private sector finds unprofitable to undertake. Like road building, street lighting and police/armed forces etc. They should also be used to correct market inefficiencies.

 

But using it as a redistributive tool? It is like using a sledgehammer to perform surgery. It lacks the precision to get the job done. And I realise that my posting comes across as being harsh to the poor. I would like to clarify that I believe in helping the poor. But not by the use of taxes.

 

What should be done instead to help the poor is not by stopping GST increments. Rather we should have targeted measures to help them cope with the effects of GST increment beyond the GST credits given. Some ideas that I have: Exempt GST from necessities like power, public transport and basic foods like rice. Give a wage supplement for lower income workers (earning below $1k for e.g.) in the form of e-vouchers or e-credit that can only be used to pay utilities bills, education fees, public transport and medical bills.

in the developed countries adopting a welfare state system, isnt it the case the redistribution through state coffers? income tax taxes one based on the ability of to earn, not save. and its a zero sum game, the gahmen needs a budget to operate, wat is taken out needs to be put back fr somewhere. ya maybe u prefer 20% GST on non necessities. u got to know everyt here has GST in it, even the hawker stall selling fruits as long as the fruits is imported.

 

[Saycheese78]

I guess I may be flamed. But I vote for GST increase even if there are no GST credits. Provided it is revenue neutral. This means any increase in GST revenue is used to reduce Personal and Corp Income Tax.

 

Simple reason. To me it is a fairer form of tax. Income tax hits you regardless of how much you spend. So long as you earn more. But GST only hits you when you spend. So if you are very capable and thrifty, you get taxed less. You don't tax someone just because he is good at making money or more capable. Rather, you only tax him more if he wants to spend more. Personally, I think it is good to incentivise ability and frugality.

 

And high earners no longer have any incentive to resort to hiring tax accountants to help them reduce their taxes. Which is even more wasteful if you ask me.

 

1) U are def high income earner

2) U forgot that save here, save there, still got such thing called inheritance tax

3) Tax like GST always end up taxing larger % of poor pple compared to rich pple as poor pple can afford smaller % of their income as savings.

 

But some things u say is worth a thought

- $ / productive hr/ resources wasted on hiring of tax accountant

 

And to add to the GST debate, sometimes is good to tax the rich a bit less as u want to encourage rich pple to migrate to Singapore vs other countries. U hope they come s'pore, spend, open companies, hire more pple, bring their children here to spend more, hire tuition teacher and blah blah.