should gov give COE rebate to households with many children?

[Stratovarius]

17 minutes ago, yishunite said:

Why does anyone need transport? Can walk what. Why does anyone need to own a flat? Can rent what. All convenience is subjective by nature.

The question is the same as all economic questions: how should we allocate something that has limited supply?

Give to the ultra-wealthy for their 3rd/4th car? Give to families? Reserve all for PHV/business? Whatever your opinion you are privileging one grp over the other... is money the only fair way to decide? So by that example we should also use money to decide public housing and school places and how many children ppl can have?

You cant compare a house to a private car as one has a stronger social impact over the other. Not just in SG, everywhere around the world, home is always >car.

If you are not aware, there are still many ppl living in HBD rental flats as they cant afford one. But gahmen is doing a good in helping them to actually own one due to the reason above. But why no aid from gahmen for private transport? The reason is obvious.

Transport is important, it's one of the main pillars for economic growth. Roads and vehicles help to move goods and people around for businesses. but this does not apply for private vehicles. In SG, most of us definitely do not need a private vehicle. Sure, there will be some inconveniences if you want to move around in public or phvs. But it is something you can get by. 

 

[Volvobrick]

38 minutes ago, Wind30 said:

Exactly. Current allocation is 100% by money. Richest win. Should we have a skew? We have skew in a lot of stuff like public housing, income taxes, healthcare benefits, subsidies, etc, etc, etc… 

Should car ownership have a skew? Or should it be richest win?

Richest/Most powerful always win lah! Don't kid ourselves it can be otherwise.

 

Even in death.  They get a bigger tomb/fancier casket.

 

[Throttle2]

6 minutes ago, yishunite said:

Yalor and with HDB while price is the single biggest factor there are many other ways to include other national objectives so u get first timer grants, close to parent grants, age restriction for singles, etc etc

Not saying we need to have all of that in case of COE but its obvious we could allow for more considerations than money alone... I dont even agree with OP about giving COE rebate for 3+ kid families (obviously for older children need drops a lot while the question of where to draw the line is super subjective) but at least the idea is there, principle I agree with

Personally I feel simplest is really pile on tax on 2nd/3rd cars just like ABSD is done in housing. Then if still not enough can consider other measures

 

pile on taxes on 2nd car, how? Ownership name? By Household, address?  Cannot work lah bro.

Its always the HENRYs that kena hantam…. The Truly rich dont care, the truly poor cant care.  
muayhaha

 

Edited July 26, 2022 by Throttle2

[Wind30]

5 minutes ago, yishunite said:

Yalor and with HDB while price is the single biggest factor there are many other ways to include other national objectives so u get first timer grants, close to parent grants, age restriction for singles, etc etc

Not saying we need to have all of that in case of COE but its obvious we could allow for more considerations than money alone... I dont even agree with OP about giving COE rebate for 3+ kid families (obviously for older children need drops a lot while the question of where to draw the line is super subjective) but at least the idea is there, principle I agree with

Personally I feel simplest is really pile on tax on 2nd/3rd cars just like ABSD is done in housing. Then if still not enough can consider other measures

2nd car tax is by household or by individual? If by household, you are literally discouraging big families… I can’t see a practical implementation. 
 

I did spend some time thinking how to implement the skew. 

[Volvobrick]

4 minutes ago, yishunite said:

Yalor and with HDB while price is the single biggest factor there are many other ways to include other national objectives so u get first timer grants, close to parent grants, age restriction for singles, etc etc

Not saying we need to have all of that in case of COE but its obvious we could allow for more considerations than money alone... I dont even agree with OP about giving COE rebate for 3+ kid families (obviously for older children need drops a lot while the question of where to draw the line is super subjective) but at least the idea is there, principle I agree with

Personally I feel simplest is really pile on tax on 2nd/3rd cars just like ABSD is done in housing. Then if still not enough can consider other measures

You have to ask yourself what is the purpose of COE? To manage congestion or to raise gahmen income?  Surcharge on 2md/3rd cars have no impact on congestion as the fellow can only drive one.  Managing the number of PHV will have a much greater impact on congestion.

 

And if (we know that's the real reason) it is to raise revenue, than no way gahmen is going to discount COE/ARF for anyone.  Cars spread to more households means more cars on the road and more congestions too.

[Wind30]

28 minutes ago, Throttle2 said:

I think many of us have made suggestions here. And your latest one isnt bad either.

The real problem to tackle is not a singular one, its multi faceted.

COE, ERP, Road tax, Loans, Motor insurance, EVs all rolled into one. 

i dont profess to have a solution, but my better way is the way which many people may hate. 🫢😎🤣

 

 

 

So what is your better way? I ,unlike most people, don’t feel my way is necessarily the best way. I am curious if you feel current system is not the best, what should we change? 

[Sosaria]

1 hour ago, Stratovarius said:

I think the most important question for this proposal is "why a car is needed for families with 3 children?"

If one can't answer that question properly, i think we should just stop there. 

Me thinks people who can't answer that question properly, actually do not have 3 children

 

[Wind30]

9 minutes ago, yishunite said:

By household... obviously by individual such tax doesnt do enough to make a diff, and 7-seater not enough meh? But frankly mostly these super large families all are quite hard to buy a car in the first place never mind a second car... If really such large family have needs beyond a 7-seater god bless their nationbuilding lor... 

It is not just one purpose. There are many uses of cars, so many factors to take in consideration. Congestion management is really a non-existent factor or they would have done something about PHV usage long time ago. Fuel tax is more of congestion tax than a COE by far

Assuming the parents don't drive, is it reasonable that a single child can drive a car by himself without tax while siblings in another family have to pay tax to buy another car?  basically it is a penalty on bigger families which is contrary to what the gov is trying to achieve. that is why it is not reasonable.

 

Edited July 26, 2022 by Wind30

[Mkl22]

maybe some will say that GST rebates and vouchers etc are already distributed according to income level and housing AV. and people KPKB cause some get and some dont. who arbitrarily decides the cut off anyway.

whats wrong will allocating rebates for cars in a  similar way.

🤣

Edited July 26, 2022 by Mkl22

[Throttle2]

1 minute ago, Wind30 said:

So what is your better way? I ,unlike most people, don’t feel my way is necessarily the best way. I am curious if you feel current system is not the best, what should we change? 

firstly, i dont agree that buying a car should be like trading in the stock market. 
so a bidding system already doesnt sit well for me.

it can cost a lot but we shouldnt have to be afraid of huge volatilities.

imagine, you want to buy a washing machine and you dont know if it will sell for $1000 or $2000 next week. 

COE should be a base number + or - the economic result of the country. So COE price is adjusted perhaps annually. That eliminates the element of volatility and moves in line with general performance of the country. 

next, COE must be paid in cash by buyer. Not be part of car loan.  This helps ensure that people get their priorities straight.  If you cannot or are not willing to lock your cash in, then you are not ready for a car.  Sorry no instant gratification.  Those found guilty ( eg overtrade bulls**t), kena heavy penalty.

On top of this, ERP should simply be eliminated permanently becos it doesnt work for most locations.  Just a tax.
Road tax should be base on physical size of car as well and not simply capacity.  
 

lets start with these
 

 

 

[Watwheels]

2 hours ago, Freeder said:

Actually U should ask the ministars.

They are paid handsomely to crank up ideas to stimulate the economy and well being of the citizens..

 

They will tell everyone they gibe already. The moment you get married they gibe liao.

https://www.madeforfamilies.gov.sg/support-measures/raising-your-child/financial-support/tax-relief-and-rebates

Parenthood Tax Rebate

Qualifying Child Relief

Working Mother’s Child Relief

Grandparent Caregiver Relief

Foreign Domestic Worker Levy Relief

COE rebate to households with many children <-- This wan wait for gahment to collect the +2% GST then we gibe you one time $100 rebate. OK? Dont say dont have wor.

[Volvobrick]

5 minutes ago, Mkl22 said:

maybe some will say that GST rebates and vouchers etc are already distributed according to income level and housing AV. and people KPKB cause some get and some dont. who arbitrarily decides the cut off anyway.

whats wrong will allocating rebates for cars in a  similar way.

🤣

No end one lah - First COE rebates. then will ask for ARF rebates, then petrol rebates (got to drive the 3 kids around right?), then car park rebates.

And what about those with aged parents? Shouldn't they also be given rebates to drive their old folks to see doctors, go therapy etc?  Those with handicapped family members? What about those too obese with mobility problem(already seeing some on motorised wheelchairs)?

 

 

[Stratovarius]

1 hour ago, Wind30 said:

I don’t think I need to prove car is needed for families with 3 children to implement this proposal. All I need to show is that the policy will or likely to lead to a better outcome for Singapore. 
I feel a slight skew in coe allocation will lead to

1) cars having more average passengers per trip

2) an easier life for big families with young children as in cheaper COEs

3) more expensive coes for rest of us

4) no change in coe revenue.

is that considered a better outcome?

1) cars having more average passengers per trip

if you take away 3 kids from the bus and put them in a car, you will have a bus and a car on the road instead of just one bus. A small school bus sitting capacity is 12. that is 4 additional cars to replace one bus. 

2) an easier life for big families with young children as in cheaper COEs

taking public transport does not equate to a tougher life. i can probably zoom into your perspective if you think that taking the bus is a tough life.

3) more expensive coes for rest of us

Gahmen doesn't care.

4) no change in coe revenue.

Gahmen doesn't care.

You have to define  what you mean by "better outcome for Singapore". is it something economically or socially quantifiable? Or just some feel-good factor?

 

[Throttle2]

12 minutes ago, yishunite said:

Yes, money can buy your way out of it but gahmen huat. So working as intended, it isnt to completely stop people, just make them cough up more for the "privilege"... since no one needs a car right? It's a luxury item so can tax like one.

And by NRIC+residential address and dont allow registering a car to a non-residential address so quite easy... you arent allowed to have more than one residential address on your IC right? You want your wife register at different residential address ok lor, if you have so much money you are probably paying other taxes like ABSD so I also think thats fine

In the same way, i dont agree with absd, such methods creates hidden long term social ills. 

my wife can use her parents address.  Or her sister may argue that she should use it.  

if i have a “spare” address i can rent it out for someone to use, perhaps?  

we simply need to move away from such policies.
 

[Wind30]

7 minutes ago, Throttle2 said:

firstly, i dont agree that buying a car should be like trading in the stock market. 
so a bidding system already doesnt sit well for me.

it can cost a lot but we shouldnt have to be afraid of huge volatilities.

imagine, you want to buy a washing machine and you dont know if it will sell for $1000 or $2000 next week. 

COE should be a base number + or - the economic result of the country. So COE price is adjusted perhaps annually. That eliminates the element of volatility and moves in line with general performance of the country. 

next, COE must be paid in cash by buyer. Not be part of car loan.  This helps ensure that people get their priorities straight.  If you cannot or are not willing to lock your cash in, then you are not ready for a car.  Sorry no instant gratification.  Those found guilty ( eg overtrade bulls**t), kena heavy penalty.

On top of this, ERP should simply be eliminated permanently becos it doesnt work for most locations.  Just a tax.
Road tax should be base on physical size of car as well and not simply capacity.  
 

lets start with these
 

 

 

Then how you limit the number of COEs? If there are more buyers than coe quota, how is the allocation done? 

[Volvobrick]

16 minutes ago, Throttle2 said:

firstly, i dont agree that buying a car should be like trading in the stock market. 
so a bidding system already doesnt sit well for me.

it can cost a lot but we shouldnt have to be afraid of huge volatilities.

imagine, you want to buy a washing machine and you dont know if it will sell for $1000 or $2000 next week. 

COE should be a base number + or - the economic result of the country. So COE price is adjusted perhaps annually. That eliminates the element of volatility and moves in line with general performance of the country. 

next, COE must be paid in cash by buyer. Not be part of car loan.  This helps ensure that people get their priorities straight.  If you cannot or are not willing to lock your cash in, then you are not ready for a car.  Sorry no instant gratification.  Those found guilty ( eg overtrade bulls**t), kena heavy penalty.

On top of this, ERP should simply be eliminated permanently becos it doesnt work for most locations.  Just a tax.
Road tax should be base on physical size of car as well and not simply capacity.  
 

lets start with these
 

No loans for COE - many workaround like overtrade, accessories rebates etc. Even when no 100% loan allowed things have been going on without the gahmen doing anything.

And ERP really incentivises LTA to have bad road planning. The worse they plan and build the roads, the greater the revenues! So agree on this point.

 

[Throttle2]

3 minutes ago, Wind30 said:

Then how you limit the number of COEs? If there are more buyers than coe quota, how is the allocation done? 

The number of COEs are limited already, perhaps just spread it out over the year monthly.

Whether there will be more buyers is a question of what price the COE is with a no loan clause. 

on top of that Dealers are not allowed to buy and keep COEs for whatever reason.

only a buyer who is ready to buy, buys.

how many people you know, currently looking to buy a car is willing to / able to fork out pure cash for the COE? 

if there are truly more buyers, then adjust the COE number +-10% to cater.   I think unlikely.  
of course they can do some studies beforehand.  Its not gonna be easy, but nobody said it was.

 

 

[Throttle2]

6 minutes ago, Volvobrick said:

No loans for COE - many workaround like overtrade, accessories rebates etc. Even when no 100% loan allowed things have been going on without the gahmen doing anything.

And ERP really incentivises LTA to have bad road planning. The worse they plan and build the roads, the greater the revenues! So agree on this point.

 

Yes . As mentioned, dont play play with govt instrument like COE. If found to play games to workaround the financing, huge penalty.  Dealers can play now becos they hv the coe and they have the certainty required to package the deal.

coe issued to buyer non transferable to others.  May only be returned back to govt for a 10% penalty.

100% loan as you said becos the govt didnt go hard enough when they should.  
 

Edited July 26, 2022 by Throttle2