NO CPF for properties and investment.[Good or Bad?]

General comments and chit-chat, or tell us how we can improve

NO CPF for properties and investment.[Good or Bad?]

Postby raysusan » Sun Jan 01, 2012 11:39 am

CPF changes, tax cuts figure in PwC's Budget 2012 wish list

It offers ideas to tackle issues of ageing and falling birth rate, and to avert downturn


THE Central Provident Fund (CPF) needs to be strengthened as a retirement savings mechanism, says PricewaterhouseCoopers Singapore (PwC), which hopes the government will raise employers' contribution back to its former 20 per cent rate and halt the use of CPF savings for non-retirement purposes.

More can be done to 'convince an aging population that it needs to take a serious look at retirement needs', said PwC as it unveiled yesterday its wish list for Budget 2012 - a combination of ideas to tackle long-term issues such as Singapore's ageing population and falling birth rate, as well as ones to avert an economic downturn.

To strengthen the CPF, PwC is in favour of raising the mandatory employers' contribution rate back to 20 per cent, while introducing a range of tax-deductible statutory contribution rates for companies who wish to give more. Retirement planning can be simplified, if tax-deductible employee contributions into section 5 pension schemes are allowed too, as is the case with the Supplementary Retirement Scheme, says PwC, which is of the view that compulsory CPF for non-permanent residents can be re-introduced to help anchor foreign talent.

Meanwhile, PwC hopes that the government will 'stop allowing individuals to use CPF savings to finance property, investments and children's education' as this 'results in an asset-rich, cash-poor retirement and contributes to an artificially inflated market for HDB property'.

Also making its wish list for February's Budget are the perennially hoped for cuts in corporate and individual income tax.

PwC argues that 2012 is 'a good time' to cut the already competitive corporate tax rate from 17 per cent to 15 per cent, as the headlines this would make internationally may draw potential foreign investors here at a time when businesses are looking to invest in the Asia-Pacific region.

The 20 per cent top personal tax rate should also be cut (and tax rates for lower-income brackets' tax reduced accordingly) to 'make Singapore even more attractive for executives to relocate here', says PwC.

Singapore's appeal as a location for regional holding companies can also do with one less potential roadblock. 'It is becoming increasingly difficult to obtain certificates of residence for special purpose companies or investment holding companies as IRAS expects companies to be carrying on a business in Singapore in order to be resident,' PwC says, suggesting that all companies incorporated in Singapore be treated as tax resident.

Lack of certainty over whether investors' gains from disposing of investments in shares or real property are subject to tax may also affect Singapore's attractiveness as an investment holding hub, the firm adds.

In the current economic environment, 'measures to improve productivity and innovation will double up as measures to reduce unemployment' and PwC hopes for more clarity as to how R&D projects qualify for tax deduction purposes, which would help companies determine what qualifies for the Productivity and Innovation Credit Scheme too.

let discuss .... :xedfingers:

Posts: 1417
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:13 pm
Total Likes: 6

Re: NO CPF for properties and investment.[Good or Bad?]

Postby cherrygal » Sun Jan 01, 2012 1:51 pm

PwC is just trying to say something controversial to get famous.

Posts: 2882
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 1:01 am
Total Likes: 13

Re: NO CPF for properties and investment.[Good or Bad?]

Postby daisyt » Sun Jan 01, 2012 2:12 pm

Are they trying to go towards the direction of renting HDB and not buying? Cash rich also must have the health and life to enjoy your own cash mah... Dont end up 没命花 or pass to your children or finish up everything on medical bills .. Very not worth ...

Posts: 2430
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:54 am
Total Likes: 0

Re: NO CPF for properties and investment.[Good or Bad?]

Postby violin_lover » Sun Jan 01, 2012 2:48 pm

"The 20 per cent top personal tax rate should also be cut". I think this must be suggested by the big bosses there. Why do they need so much money? Tax rate should increase on these rich people (base on statistics, Singapore sold 35 BMW and merc in a week, on average) so that they can give more back to the society.

Posts: 184
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:46 am
Total Likes: 0

Return to Recess Time