《联合早报》Nov 24, 2007
一名老翁与四姨太所生的女儿签下买卖契约，将一栋价值205万元的半独立洋房转到对方的名下，直至去世时却只收了女儿1万元付款。如今，老翁的其他三个妻子决定起诉这名女儿，追讨其余的204万元。
这起家族争遗产的案件，预料在后天开审，审理5天。逝世老翁佘伟端是当警员，于1969年退休，他前年5月30日因病过世，终年80岁。他生前和四姨太以及女儿（答辩人）女婿住在位于索美维路的一栋半独立洋房。
三名起诉人分别是他的大老婆、二姨太和三姨太，年龄都在80岁左右。
答辩人佘敏慧（47岁）是老翁四姨太的女儿，她还有一个妹妹。据悉，佘敏慧曾是一名律师，执业近20年，并拥有自己的律师事务所。她将在审讯中自行答辩。
该栋洋房建在老翁的母亲留给他的一块地皮上。据悉，该处还有另一栋半独立洋房，是他的侄子所拥有。
1995年，佘伟端和佘敏慧签署买卖契约，以205万元售价把洋房转到后者名下。然而，佘敏慧由始至终只付了1万元给父亲。
三名起诉人在诉状中称，丈夫当时将洋房转到答辩人名下，是为了帮她拓展律师事务所和购买公寓。
诉状指，由于答辩人当时的经济能力有限，于是只还了1万元，其余的204万元，当作她代父亲托管的遗产，直到他过世后必须根据遗嘱分给他的四个妻子和其他受益人。
佘敏慧在95年底购买了一个位于马里士他路的公寓单位。诉状指答辩人是利用从洋房所套取的款项购买公寓，但答辩书中却称公寓是答辩人向银行贷款所购得。起诉人称，佘伟端生前承诺，她们在他过世之后会得到妥善照顾，因为他将把出售洋房的钱按遗嘱分给她们。
于是，当三人的孩子在1998年得知洋房转名的事，便通过书信提醒父亲，洋房是所有妻子都有份的，询问父亲为何把它转名给答辩人。
根据诉状，佘伟端书面回复孩子说，他是把洋房卖给了答辩人，但他后来又告诉长女，洋房其实算是他给答辩人的贷款。
但答辩人反驳，洋房是父亲基于她的孝心转送给她的，并非借贷，剩余的204万元欠款父亲10年来未曾要求她偿还。
她也指出，起诉人早已知道房子转名的事，并有孩子担任执法人员，应该对法律非常熟悉，若他们认为交易有何不妥，早该在父亲在世时就追究。
她也说，父亲是听取了律师的建议，才选择以买卖形式，而不以馈赠（Deed of Gift）方式把洋房转到她的名下。
她声称，该栋半独立洋房，是父亲和母亲的婚姻住所，而父亲的另三个妻子也拥有各自的住所。
她在答辩书中提到，父亲因已有三个老婆和12个孩子，早年无法供养她们母女三人。她们从小就没有得到父亲提供住所，父亲也没有供她读书，直到后来才建了这栋洋房，和她们居住。
答辩人也称，她原本打算在婚后搬离洋房，但父亲担心老来无依，苦劝她婚后继续留在那里照顾他和母亲。
她也说，父亲纵使有众多儿女，但年老后主要是她一人奉养和照顾。父亲基于她的孝心和为了做出补偿，才把洋房转到她的名下，并豁免她偿还204万元欠款。（人名译音）
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Neptune Court's En Bloc Dilemma - Want To Go Private? Pay Up $190,000 First
Source : The Electric New Paper, November 24, 2007
WANT to privatise?
Sure, pay us $144 million first, said the Ministry of Finance (MOF).
That's how much it has valued the piece of land at Neptune Court, which it owns.
Neptune Court residents had been harbouring high hopes of an enbloc sale. -- Picture: DESMOND NG
This means each household there will have to fork out about $191,000 to privatise their 99-year-leasehold estate before they can even think about selling it en bloc.
There are about 752 households in Neptune Court at Marine Parade and they have been leasing the land from the MOF for the past 32 years.
It looks like their proposed $1 billion enbloc dream will be scuttled for now.
As a rough comparison, residents in HUDC estate Eunosville will have to pay about $30,000 for the privatisation of their estate.
There are 330 apartments in Eunosville, located opposite Eunos MRT station.
At Neptune Court yesterday, there was an air of disbelief as groups of residents gathered to discuss the high price they have to pay.
A letter from the Neptune Court Owners' Association was pasted on the notice boards by each lift landing, saying that the estimated cost of privatisation was about $144m.
This is probably one of the highest privatisation fees here.
The letter was put up on Wednesday.
Retiree Alex Lee shook his head while trying to calculate how much he has to fork out.
He paid about $500,000 for his 1,700 sq ft unit about 10 years ago.
Another resident, who has lived there for over 30 years, was also shocked at the amount.
This resident, who declined to be named, paid about $50,000 for his 1,600 sq ft unit.
He said: 'I nearly fell out of my chair when I saw the amount. I don't understand how they (MOF) arrived at this amount.
WHO WILL PAY?
'Who's going to cough up this money? It's very high. And even if the privatisation is successful, will the en bloc process be successful too?
'I don't think many residents here in their right mind will pay this amount. But I'm sure those en bloc die-hards will find a solution.'
The land area there is about 780,000 sq ft - about the size of 15 football fields.
All the residents we spoke to baulked at the amount MOF is asking for.
The Neptune Court Owners' Association didn't want to comment.
The MOF said that $144m for the common properties is a preliminary estimate provided to the residents so that they may decide whether or not to pursue privatisation.
This estimate was derived by comparing the capitalised value of the annual net rents at Neptune Court with those of a comparable private condo.
Said a MOF spokesman: 'Should the residents decide to privatise the estate, the valuation will be updated based on the prevailing market conditions.'
In privatisation, the residents essentially pay HDB (or the MOF in this case) to take over the ownership of common property, such as carparks and landscaped areas.
Owners pay about $25,000 to $30,000 each for privatisation, which covers the cost of common property that has been transferred to owners, legal costs, survey and other processing fees.
Credo Real Estate's managing director Karamjit Singh was surprised by the huge sum.
He said: 'Normally, privatisation fees per household ranges from $12,000 to $30,000. This is a huge amount. It will be difficult to get residents to fork out $190,000.
'Selling en bloc is slim but not impossible. It will be possible if the Government is willing to do a tripartite deal where it gets paid out of the sales proceeds paid by the developer.'
The estate started its en bloc efforts in May last year.
The committee hired law firm Phang & Co and property consultant Chesterton International to kickstart the privatisation and en bloc sale, according to a report in The Straits Times in May.
It offered owners a sale agreement that promised a reserve price of $1.37m or $1.67m, depending on the unit size.
WANT to privatise?
Sure, pay us $144 million first, said the Ministry of Finance (MOF).
That's how much it has valued the piece of land at Neptune Court, which it owns.
Neptune Court residents had been harbouring high hopes of an enbloc sale. -- Picture: DESMOND NG
This means each household there will have to fork out about $191,000 to privatise their 99-year-leasehold estate before they can even think about selling it en bloc.
There are about 752 households in Neptune Court at Marine Parade and they have been leasing the land from the MOF for the past 32 years.
It looks like their proposed $1 billion enbloc dream will be scuttled for now.
As a rough comparison, residents in HUDC estate Eunosville will have to pay about $30,000 for the privatisation of their estate.
There are 330 apartments in Eunosville, located opposite Eunos MRT station.
At Neptune Court yesterday, there was an air of disbelief as groups of residents gathered to discuss the high price they have to pay.
A letter from the Neptune Court Owners' Association was pasted on the notice boards by each lift landing, saying that the estimated cost of privatisation was about $144m.
This is probably one of the highest privatisation fees here.
The letter was put up on Wednesday.
Retiree Alex Lee shook his head while trying to calculate how much he has to fork out.
He paid about $500,000 for his 1,700 sq ft unit about 10 years ago.
Another resident, who has lived there for over 30 years, was also shocked at the amount.
This resident, who declined to be named, paid about $50,000 for his 1,600 sq ft unit.
He said: 'I nearly fell out of my chair when I saw the amount. I don't understand how they (MOF) arrived at this amount.
WHO WILL PAY?
'Who's going to cough up this money? It's very high. And even if the privatisation is successful, will the en bloc process be successful too?
'I don't think many residents here in their right mind will pay this amount. But I'm sure those en bloc die-hards will find a solution.'
The land area there is about 780,000 sq ft - about the size of 15 football fields.
All the residents we spoke to baulked at the amount MOF is asking for.
The Neptune Court Owners' Association didn't want to comment.
The MOF said that $144m for the common properties is a preliminary estimate provided to the residents so that they may decide whether or not to pursue privatisation.
This estimate was derived by comparing the capitalised value of the annual net rents at Neptune Court with those of a comparable private condo.
Said a MOF spokesman: 'Should the residents decide to privatise the estate, the valuation will be updated based on the prevailing market conditions.'
In privatisation, the residents essentially pay HDB (or the MOF in this case) to take over the ownership of common property, such as carparks and landscaped areas.
Owners pay about $25,000 to $30,000 each for privatisation, which covers the cost of common property that has been transferred to owners, legal costs, survey and other processing fees.
Credo Real Estate's managing director Karamjit Singh was surprised by the huge sum.
He said: 'Normally, privatisation fees per household ranges from $12,000 to $30,000. This is a huge amount. It will be difficult to get residents to fork out $190,000.
'Selling en bloc is slim but not impossible. It will be possible if the Government is willing to do a tripartite deal where it gets paid out of the sales proceeds paid by the developer.'
The estate started its en bloc efforts in May last year.
The committee hired law firm Phang & Co and property consultant Chesterton International to kickstart the privatisation and en bloc sale, according to a report in The Straits Times in May.
It offered owners a sale agreement that promised a reserve price of $1.37m or $1.67m, depending on the unit size.
Hotel Villa Purchase With Fixed Returns, Free Stays
Source : The Sunday Times, Nov 25, 2007
More resort operators like Banyan Tree are putting up such properties for sale and leaseback to raise cash.
PROPERTY investors who want to diversify their portfolios should check out some hotel villas, especially those in places they like visiting.
HOME-GROWN BANYAN TREE RECENTLY LAUNCHED its Banyan Tree Residences scheme, which offers properties in Phuket (above), Bintan, Bangkok, Seychelles and Lijiang in China for sale. Prices start from US$440,000 (S$638,480) for a villa in Bintan and from US$1.5 million for one in Phuket. More than half of the 46 villas at Karma Resorts in Kandara, perched on Bali's southernmost tip, have been sold, with prices starting from US$600,000. -- PHOTO: BANYAN TREE
More resort or hotel operators are putting up some of their properties for sale and leaseback to raise cash.
This means buyers can invest in a hotel room or a standalone villa for a possibly guaranteed return when they lease it back to the hotel owner.
They also have free use of the villa or room for a predetermined number of days a year.
‘It is an investment that gives you the added benefit of the resort lifestyle,’ said Mr Ku Swee Yong of Savills Singapore. ‘It’s still a relatively new concept and some investors will be waiting to see if it will take off in a big way before coming in.’
Home-grown resort operator Banyan Tree recently launched its Banyan Tree Residences scheme, which offers properties in Phuket, Bintan, Bangkok, Seychelles and Lijiang in China for sale. Prices start from $440US,000 ($638S,480) for a villa in Bintan and from $1US.5 million for one in Phuket or Seychelles.
Investors can choose to receive a fixed gross return of 6 per cent of the price for six years or one-third of the net room revenue for six years. They also have an option to renew it.
Local interest seems high. Banyan Tree said about 600 people visited its Banyan Tree Residences exhibition last weekend and 40 units - mostly villas in Bintan and Phuket - had been reserved for sale.
Potential buyers are given time to check out the actual properties before committing to a purchase.
Mr Richard Skene, assistant vice-president (property) of Banyan Tree Residences, said the number of units reserved in Singapore exceeded the combined reservations gathered from previous exhibitions in Hong Kong, Shanghai, London and Moscow.
Banyan Tree Residences has six Singaporean owners who have a total of 10 residences in Phuket, Lijiang and Seychelles.
A 46-year-old Singaporean lawyer said he bought his Phuket villa for the lifestyle benefits. It is more ‘worthwhile’ to invest in a villa with regular returns than to pay for a hotel room and not get any money back, he said.
Mr Skene said: ‘It’s a growing trend that started in the United States with condotels. It’s the same principle, and we are the pioneers in Asia.’ Condotels are residential apartments leased out on a short-term basis,
Banyan Tree started selling its resort properties about 10 years ago, but it launched the Banyan Tree branded properties only this year.
More of such resort or hotel properties with units for sale are now on the market, including St Regis Resort & Residences in Bali, and Karma Resorts, which has outlets in places such as Margaret River in Western Australia, Kandara in Bali and Koh Samui in Thailand.
On Friday, Puravarna Group launched another phase of its villas at Puravarna Phuket, which will open next November.
It started selling the villas last year, and more than 30 buyers from Singapore have paid at least $1.9 million each for a property. They will get an average return of 8 per cent for 12 years and free use of the property for 30 days a year.
‘Most buyers are bankers or property investors,’ said Puravarna’s regional director, Ms Christina Liang, adding that the firm offers financing of up to 90 per cent.
At Banyan Tree, owners are entitled to use their residence for up to 60 days a year, and there is no management charge during the rental programme.
But forget about personalising your villa and it may not be that easy to sell unless values soar. Also, financing is not a given.
In addition, there may be black-out periods. If you opt for the 6 per cent guaranteed returns at Banyan Tree, for example, you cannot stay at your villa during the Christmas and New Year periods.
More resort operators like Banyan Tree are putting up such properties for sale and leaseback to raise cash.
PROPERTY investors who want to diversify their portfolios should check out some hotel villas, especially those in places they like visiting.
HOME-GROWN BANYAN TREE RECENTLY LAUNCHED its Banyan Tree Residences scheme, which offers properties in Phuket (above), Bintan, Bangkok, Seychelles and Lijiang in China for sale. Prices start from US$440,000 (S$638,480) for a villa in Bintan and from US$1.5 million for one in Phuket. More than half of the 46 villas at Karma Resorts in Kandara, perched on Bali's southernmost tip, have been sold, with prices starting from US$600,000. -- PHOTO: BANYAN TREE
More resort or hotel operators are putting up some of their properties for sale and leaseback to raise cash.
This means buyers can invest in a hotel room or a standalone villa for a possibly guaranteed return when they lease it back to the hotel owner.
They also have free use of the villa or room for a predetermined number of days a year.
‘It is an investment that gives you the added benefit of the resort lifestyle,’ said Mr Ku Swee Yong of Savills Singapore. ‘It’s still a relatively new concept and some investors will be waiting to see if it will take off in a big way before coming in.’
Home-grown resort operator Banyan Tree recently launched its Banyan Tree Residences scheme, which offers properties in Phuket, Bintan, Bangkok, Seychelles and Lijiang in China for sale. Prices start from $440US,000 ($638S,480) for a villa in Bintan and from $1US.5 million for one in Phuket or Seychelles.
Investors can choose to receive a fixed gross return of 6 per cent of the price for six years or one-third of the net room revenue for six years. They also have an option to renew it.
Local interest seems high. Banyan Tree said about 600 people visited its Banyan Tree Residences exhibition last weekend and 40 units - mostly villas in Bintan and Phuket - had been reserved for sale.
Potential buyers are given time to check out the actual properties before committing to a purchase.
Mr Richard Skene, assistant vice-president (property) of Banyan Tree Residences, said the number of units reserved in Singapore exceeded the combined reservations gathered from previous exhibitions in Hong Kong, Shanghai, London and Moscow.
Banyan Tree Residences has six Singaporean owners who have a total of 10 residences in Phuket, Lijiang and Seychelles.
A 46-year-old Singaporean lawyer said he bought his Phuket villa for the lifestyle benefits. It is more ‘worthwhile’ to invest in a villa with regular returns than to pay for a hotel room and not get any money back, he said.
Mr Skene said: ‘It’s a growing trend that started in the United States with condotels. It’s the same principle, and we are the pioneers in Asia.’ Condotels are residential apartments leased out on a short-term basis,
Banyan Tree started selling its resort properties about 10 years ago, but it launched the Banyan Tree branded properties only this year.
More of such resort or hotel properties with units for sale are now on the market, including St Regis Resort & Residences in Bali, and Karma Resorts, which has outlets in places such as Margaret River in Western Australia, Kandara in Bali and Koh Samui in Thailand.
On Friday, Puravarna Group launched another phase of its villas at Puravarna Phuket, which will open next November.
It started selling the villas last year, and more than 30 buyers from Singapore have paid at least $1.9 million each for a property. They will get an average return of 8 per cent for 12 years and free use of the property for 30 days a year.
‘Most buyers are bankers or property investors,’ said Puravarna’s regional director, Ms Christina Liang, adding that the firm offers financing of up to 90 per cent.
At Banyan Tree, owners are entitled to use their residence for up to 60 days a year, and there is no management charge during the rental programme.
But forget about personalising your villa and it may not be that easy to sell unless values soar. Also, financing is not a given.
In addition, there may be black-out periods. If you opt for the 6 per cent guaranteed returns at Banyan Tree, for example, you cannot stay at your villa during the Christmas and New Year periods.
Taming Inflation
Source : The Sunday Times, Nov 25, 2007
With inflation hitting a 16-year high of 3.6 per cent and likely to go up to 5 per cent next year, Erica Tay looks at what can be done to rein in rising prices
IF IT seems that eating out and getting around town has become more expensive these days, the latest hard data from official number-crunchers confirms that indeed it has.
Prices in October, as measured by the consumer price index (CPI), are 3.6 per cent higher than a year ago - the fastest rise in 16 years.
The rate of increase in the CPI - known as the headline inflation rate - has literally been making headlines as Singaporeans gripe about higher food prices and bigger petrol bills.
Hawker centre meals cost 2.8 per cent more compared to a year ago, statistics show.
Restaurant food costs 5.1 per cent more, and transport expenses have also gone up by the same percentage.
Staying at home and eating in? That is not getting cheaper either.
Prices of non-cooked food have crept up 5.6 per cent over the past year, with prices of dairy products and eggs up 9.9 per cent.
Is there any respite for workers who find that they are buying less with the same pay cheques?
What can policymakers do to tame rising inflation?
To understand how to tackle inflation, it is important to understand what is causing rising costs in the first place.
The drivers include July’s goods and services tax hike, higher oil and food prices worldwide, and wage and rental increases fuelled by Singapore’s red-hot economy.
These factors all play a part in explaining why a plate of chicken rice now costs $3 instead of $2.
But while they all result in higher prices, dealing with each factor requires a different prescription, say economists.
Good and bad news
THE good news is that inflation is set to come down by the end of next year.
The bad news? It is likely to climb higher before coming down.
Trade and Industry Minister Lim Hng Kiang recently told Parliament that inflation could go as high as 5 per cent in the first quarter of 2008 before moderating for the rest of the year.
On Monday, the Monetary Authority of Singapore predicted inflation for all of next year to range between 3.5 and 4.5 per cent.
‘We think inflation will surge past 5 per cent early next year, and average 4 per cent for the whole of 2008,’ predicted United Overseas Bank economist Suan Teck Kin.
An inflation rate of 5 per cent will be Singapore’s highest in more than two decades, surpassing the 4 per cent peak seen in July 1991, noted Standard Chartered Bank economist Alvin Liew.
A perfect storm
A CONFLUENCE of factors is fanning inflationary pressures on several fronts, said Mr Suan.
Since July this year, one factor has been the 2-percentage- point hike in the GST.
That has the effect of lifting inflation for 12 months, until June next year, after which the effect will wear off, he said.
Another reason for escalating prices has been the sizzling economy.
Rapid expansion has been using up spare capacity in the economy and putting a squeeze on the supply of labour and other resources. Higher wages and rents then get passed on as higher consumer prices.
‘The economy is not just getting hotter. It has gotten too hot,’ said Citigroup economist Chua Hak Bin.
Singapore is running at full employment and this is driving up wages, he noted.
A shortage of commercial space is pushing up business rents, and new buildings, although under construction, take time to be completed.
Housing costs, too, are on the rise.
A hike next January in the annual assessed values of HDB flats by the tax authorities will push the CPI up by 1.5 to 2 percentage points, estimated Dr Chua.
Besides these domestic factors, along came other unexpected pressures.
The price of crude oil - a raw material for petrol and plastics - has shot up to a whisker shy of $100US a barrel.
Also, the cost of food and commodities has been surging globally.
As HSBC economist Robert Prior-Wandesforde puts it: ‘Prices are being pulled higher by an almost perfect storm of rising energy and food commodity prices, higher rents and the impact of July’s GST rise.’
The impact
WHAT are the implications of accelerating prices?
For one, real wages and real interest rates will be hit, explained DBS Bank economist Irvin Seah.
If salaries go up by 5 per cent a year, but consumer prices rise by 5 per cent too, it brings workers back to square one, as their purchasing power stays the same.
Second, if inflation outstrips interest rates earned on deposits, the purchasing power of savings will be eroded, giving rise to ‘negative real interest rates’, he explained.
A pick-up in inflation would leave low-income workers more vulnerable, said Dr Chua.
Mr Seah said: ‘The lowest income group will be hardest hit. The inflation faced by this group has typically been higher, and the recent spate of increase in food prices and hike in bus fares will certainly hurt their pockets a lot more than the rest.’
Mr Liew added: ‘Although wages have generally been rising, lower-income workers typically don’t get as much wage growth as the top earners, so their real income may go down quite a bit.’
What can be done?
ONE way to combat rising prices is for the central bank, which manages the Singapore dollar’s exchange rate against a
‘External sources of inflation are something we can do little about, except by appreciating our currency,’ said Fortis Bank strategist Joseph Tan.
‘A faster rising Singdollar makes imports cheaper, and more drastic tightening might be called for at the next policy review in April,’ he added.
But Citigroup’s Dr Chua said monetary policy is unable to directly tackle domestic price pressures, particularly coming from a tight property market.
Initiatives have been taken to increase the supply of commercial and residential property, he noted.
Recent government moves to alleviate the squeeze on resources by postponing public projects were useful, said Mr Suan.
Mr Prior-Wandesforde pointed out: ‘While denying that the economy is overheating, the government has clearly shown its concerns for the future via the various measures designed to cool the housing market as well as the delays in several construction projects, an increase in immigration and a contraction in real government spending as reported in the national accounts.’
On the demand side, policies to further cool the property market may be needed, said Mr Tan.
‘There are different ways you can skin the cat, and the cat, in this instance, is the property market,’ he said.
Aside from big-picture policies, economists also advocated that more be done in the Budget early next year to help low-wage earners cope with rising costs.
‘There can be rebates targeted at low-wage families,’ Mr Liew said.
Mr Tan pointed out: ‘In the next Budget, we will need to look after those in the lower-income bracket. They are the ones typically caught out by higher inflation.’
As they see it ‘The economy is not just getting hotter. It as gotten too hot.’ CITIGROUP ECONOMIST CHUA HAK BIN
‘Prices are being pulled higher by an almost perfect storm of rising energy and food commodity prices, higher rents and the impact of July’s GST rise.’ HSBC ECONOMIST ROBERT PRIOR-WANDESFORDE
‘There are different ways you can skin the cat, and the cat, in this instance, is the property market.’ FORTIS BANK STRATEGIST JOSEPH TAN
‘The lowest income group will be hardest hit. The inflation faced by this group has typically been higher, and the recent spate of increase in food prices and hike in bus fares will certainly hurt their pockets a lot more than the rest.’ DBS BANK ECONOMIST IRVIN SEAH
With inflation hitting a 16-year high of 3.6 per cent and likely to go up to 5 per cent next year, Erica Tay looks at what can be done to rein in rising prices
IF IT seems that eating out and getting around town has become more expensive these days, the latest hard data from official number-crunchers confirms that indeed it has.
Prices in October, as measured by the consumer price index (CPI), are 3.6 per cent higher than a year ago - the fastest rise in 16 years.
The rate of increase in the CPI - known as the headline inflation rate - has literally been making headlines as Singaporeans gripe about higher food prices and bigger petrol bills.
Hawker centre meals cost 2.8 per cent more compared to a year ago, statistics show.
Restaurant food costs 5.1 per cent more, and transport expenses have also gone up by the same percentage.
Staying at home and eating in? That is not getting cheaper either.
Prices of non-cooked food have crept up 5.6 per cent over the past year, with prices of dairy products and eggs up 9.9 per cent.
Is there any respite for workers who find that they are buying less with the same pay cheques?
What can policymakers do to tame rising inflation?
To understand how to tackle inflation, it is important to understand what is causing rising costs in the first place.
The drivers include July’s goods and services tax hike, higher oil and food prices worldwide, and wage and rental increases fuelled by Singapore’s red-hot economy.
These factors all play a part in explaining why a plate of chicken rice now costs $3 instead of $2.
But while they all result in higher prices, dealing with each factor requires a different prescription, say economists.
Good and bad news
THE good news is that inflation is set to come down by the end of next year.
The bad news? It is likely to climb higher before coming down.
Trade and Industry Minister Lim Hng Kiang recently told Parliament that inflation could go as high as 5 per cent in the first quarter of 2008 before moderating for the rest of the year.
On Monday, the Monetary Authority of Singapore predicted inflation for all of next year to range between 3.5 and 4.5 per cent.
‘We think inflation will surge past 5 per cent early next year, and average 4 per cent for the whole of 2008,’ predicted United Overseas Bank economist Suan Teck Kin.
An inflation rate of 5 per cent will be Singapore’s highest in more than two decades, surpassing the 4 per cent peak seen in July 1991, noted Standard Chartered Bank economist Alvin Liew.
A perfect storm
A CONFLUENCE of factors is fanning inflationary pressures on several fronts, said Mr Suan.
Since July this year, one factor has been the 2-percentage- point hike in the GST.
That has the effect of lifting inflation for 12 months, until June next year, after which the effect will wear off, he said.
Another reason for escalating prices has been the sizzling economy.
Rapid expansion has been using up spare capacity in the economy and putting a squeeze on the supply of labour and other resources. Higher wages and rents then get passed on as higher consumer prices.
‘The economy is not just getting hotter. It has gotten too hot,’ said Citigroup economist Chua Hak Bin.
Singapore is running at full employment and this is driving up wages, he noted.
A shortage of commercial space is pushing up business rents, and new buildings, although under construction, take time to be completed.
Housing costs, too, are on the rise.
A hike next January in the annual assessed values of HDB flats by the tax authorities will push the CPI up by 1.5 to 2 percentage points, estimated Dr Chua.
Besides these domestic factors, along came other unexpected pressures.
The price of crude oil - a raw material for petrol and plastics - has shot up to a whisker shy of $100US a barrel.
Also, the cost of food and commodities has been surging globally.
As HSBC economist Robert Prior-Wandesforde puts it: ‘Prices are being pulled higher by an almost perfect storm of rising energy and food commodity prices, higher rents and the impact of July’s GST rise.’
The impact
WHAT are the implications of accelerating prices?
For one, real wages and real interest rates will be hit, explained DBS Bank economist Irvin Seah.
If salaries go up by 5 per cent a year, but consumer prices rise by 5 per cent too, it brings workers back to square one, as their purchasing power stays the same.
Second, if inflation outstrips interest rates earned on deposits, the purchasing power of savings will be eroded, giving rise to ‘negative real interest rates’, he explained.
A pick-up in inflation would leave low-income workers more vulnerable, said Dr Chua.
Mr Seah said: ‘The lowest income group will be hardest hit. The inflation faced by this group has typically been higher, and the recent spate of increase in food prices and hike in bus fares will certainly hurt their pockets a lot more than the rest.’
Mr Liew added: ‘Although wages have generally been rising, lower-income workers typically don’t get as much wage growth as the top earners, so their real income may go down quite a bit.’
What can be done?
ONE way to combat rising prices is for the central bank, which manages the Singapore dollar’s exchange rate against a
‘External sources of inflation are something we can do little about, except by appreciating our currency,’ said Fortis Bank strategist Joseph Tan.
‘A faster rising Singdollar makes imports cheaper, and more drastic tightening might be called for at the next policy review in April,’ he added.
But Citigroup’s Dr Chua said monetary policy is unable to directly tackle domestic price pressures, particularly coming from a tight property market.
Initiatives have been taken to increase the supply of commercial and residential property, he noted.
Recent government moves to alleviate the squeeze on resources by postponing public projects were useful, said Mr Suan.
Mr Prior-Wandesforde pointed out: ‘While denying that the economy is overheating, the government has clearly shown its concerns for the future via the various measures designed to cool the housing market as well as the delays in several construction projects, an increase in immigration and a contraction in real government spending as reported in the national accounts.’
On the demand side, policies to further cool the property market may be needed, said Mr Tan.
‘There are different ways you can skin the cat, and the cat, in this instance, is the property market,’ he said.
Aside from big-picture policies, economists also advocated that more be done in the Budget early next year to help low-wage earners cope with rising costs.
‘There can be rebates targeted at low-wage families,’ Mr Liew said.
Mr Tan pointed out: ‘In the next Budget, we will need to look after those in the lower-income bracket. They are the ones typically caught out by higher inflation.’
As they see it ‘The economy is not just getting hotter. It as gotten too hot.’ CITIGROUP ECONOMIST CHUA HAK BIN
‘Prices are being pulled higher by an almost perfect storm of rising energy and food commodity prices, higher rents and the impact of July’s GST rise.’ HSBC ECONOMIST ROBERT PRIOR-WANDESFORDE
‘There are different ways you can skin the cat, and the cat, in this instance, is the property market.’ FORTIS BANK STRATEGIST JOSEPH TAN
‘The lowest income group will be hardest hit. The inflation faced by this group has typically been higher, and the recent spate of increase in food prices and hike in bus fares will certainly hurt their pockets a lot more than the rest.’ DBS BANK ECONOMIST IRVIN SEAH
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
