Source: Boycott Straits Times & Zaobao
PAP sycophant and lapdog Albert Ng calls for tax hike to be expedited
---------------------------
Note:
Albert Ng is from the same barrel as PAP supporters like Patrick Liew: rich with interests in the corporate world. He has routinely written in to the Straits Times to support the PAP. His last letter called for the PAP to ignore S'poreans' unhappiness against the Population White Paper and go ahead with the plan to increase the population.
Albert Ng used to be a Senior Manager at SPH which explains why his letters get preferential treatment.
---------------------------
Source: Shit Times's Forum Letter
LAST Saturday's commentary ("Is a tax hike in sight?") opined that a tax hike would not be imminent in the coming Budget, and that we should be mindful to keep our tax rates competitive vis-a-vis Hong Kong.
Maintaining tax competitiveness is important, but our priority in improving lives and social cohesion may differ from Hong Kong's.
We could enhance overall competitiveness in other ways, such as by raising productivity, assisting firms in innovation and expansion, and enhancing economic infrastructure, which we have been doing.
From FY2008 to FY2013, total expenditure for social development (which also included education and health expenditure) increased by 54.4 per cent - much faster than the 31.5 per cent increase in tax revenue.
This trend is likely to continue as the population ages, hence the need for tax hikes over time. Other options include reducing other outlays, resorting to borrowing, or increasing the use of investment returns from our reserves.
In the 2012 and 2013 Budgets, $7.65 billion and $7.7 billion of investment returns from reserves were used respectively. In FY2013, 14.4 per cent of total budgeted expenditure relied on this fund.
If and when there is a need, imposing a tax hike would give an accurate picture of the situation we are in; delaying it may give the wrong impression that there is enough money in our coffers and that this sum can be tapped repeatedly.
Countries that have been delaying tax hikes are just letting their problems pile up, resulting in more abrupt tax increases later to rectify the situation.
A tax hike, whether imposed now or later, would reinforce the message that tackling our population and social woes is pressing. Delaying it simply passes the burden to future generations of Singaporeans.
Ng Ya Ken
PAP sycophant and lapdog Albert Ng calls for tax hike to be expedited
---------------------------
Note:
Albert Ng is from the same barrel as PAP supporters like Patrick Liew: rich with interests in the corporate world. He has routinely written in to the Straits Times to support the PAP. His last letter called for the PAP to ignore S'poreans' unhappiness against the Population White Paper and go ahead with the plan to increase the population.
Albert Ng used to be a Senior Manager at SPH which explains why his letters get preferential treatment.
---------------------------
Source: Shit Times's Forum Letter
LAST Saturday's commentary ("Is a tax hike in sight?") opined that a tax hike would not be imminent in the coming Budget, and that we should be mindful to keep our tax rates competitive vis-a-vis Hong Kong.
Maintaining tax competitiveness is important, but our priority in improving lives and social cohesion may differ from Hong Kong's.
We could enhance overall competitiveness in other ways, such as by raising productivity, assisting firms in innovation and expansion, and enhancing economic infrastructure, which we have been doing.
From FY2008 to FY2013, total expenditure for social development (which also included education and health expenditure) increased by 54.4 per cent - much faster than the 31.5 per cent increase in tax revenue.
This trend is likely to continue as the population ages, hence the need for tax hikes over time. Other options include reducing other outlays, resorting to borrowing, or increasing the use of investment returns from our reserves.
In the 2012 and 2013 Budgets, $7.65 billion and $7.7 billion of investment returns from reserves were used respectively. In FY2013, 14.4 per cent of total budgeted expenditure relied on this fund.
If and when there is a need, imposing a tax hike would give an accurate picture of the situation we are in; delaying it may give the wrong impression that there is enough money in our coffers and that this sum can be tapped repeatedly.
Countries that have been delaying tax hikes are just letting their problems pile up, resulting in more abrupt tax increases later to rectify the situation.
A tax hike, whether imposed now or later, would reinforce the message that tackling our population and social woes is pressing. Delaying it simply passes the burden to future generations of Singaporeans.
Ng Ya Ken
