Chee Hong Tat
Singapore
“The National Parks Board (NParks) resumed crow shooting operations in March 2026 across nine districts, including Yishun. These sites were prioritised based on several factors, including the volume and severity of public feedback on crow-related issues, as well as the technical feasibility of conducting shooting operations safely at each…”
“To drive sustainable construction and reduce reliance on conventional diesel generators, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) has required the use of battery energy storage systems (BESS) or synchronised generator set systems at Build-to-Order construction worksites for all building tenders called since February 2025.”
“The Housing and Development Board (HDB) tracks resident feedback on maintenance-related issues, including spalling concrete and structural cracks within HDB flats. Such issues are much less common in younger flats, compared to older flats above 30 years old.”
“The Building and Construction Authority (BCA) provides resources on its website to guide building owners and Management Corporations Strata Title (MCSTs) on lift modernisation.”
“Private retail developments sold through the Government Land Sales Programme are intended to complement the commercial offerings in public developments undertaken by agencies, such as the Housing and Development Board.”
“The National Parks Board (NParks) is reviewing both the Animals and Birds Act and the Code of Animal Welfare (COAW). The former will include pet sector businesses and the latter will include and start with pet groomers.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,840 lines we hold for Chee Hong Tat, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 28 of 37.
“Mr Speaker, the Companies Act does not limit the number of directorships that an individual may hold for Singapore-incorporated companies. All directors, regardless of the number of directorships held, are required to discharge their duties responsibly, and with honesty and reasonable diligence. Those who fail to do so can face enforcement action, including disqualification and debarment. Singapore-listed companies are subject to additional requirements relating to board appointments, given the public interest involved. Under the Singapore Exchange's Listing Rules, they are required to disclose the directorships and principal commitments of individuals seeking to be appointed or re-elected to their boards. In addition, under the Code of Corporate Governance, where a director holds a significant number of directorships, the company's Nominating Committee and Board are to provide a reasoned assessment of the ability of the director to diligently discharge his or her duties. Sir, on the whole, the practice of individuals holding more board directorships than they can reasonably handle is not prevalent in Singapore. About 95% of directors of Singapore-listed companies hold no more than two directorships, and over 80% of directors hold only one directorship.”
“Mr Speaker, we have explained this both in the House and also on other occasions, that for Temasek, for example, they do have a process to assess the risks of the various companies that they invest in, and they will also, as part of this process, engage the board and the management of these companies regularly. For the process to work well, it is important, and I hope Mr Leong agrees with me on this point, that we have to pay attention to what is the performance of the overall portfolio and not just on specific investments because on specific investments, there will be some that will make money and there will be some that will not make money.”
“Mr Speaker, EDBI is the corporate investment arm of Economic Development Board (EDB) and its mandate is to invest in globally competitive startups and high-growth enterprises with the potential to operate and grow from Singapore. Temasek's mandate is focused on delivering sustainable returns over the long term and it invests across all stages of the business life cycle, from early stage to mature, as well as unlisted and listed companies. EDBI and Temasek invested in Zilingo from 2018 to 2020. These investment decisions were made independently by the two entities to fulfil their respective mandates. EDBI and Temasek typically do not comment on their investments in specific companies, or the performance of these individual investments. The Government's approach is to review the overall performance of EDBI's and Temasek's portfolios, rather than the performance of specific investments, to ensure that they are meeting their respective investment mandates. As established investors, EDBI and Temasek recognise the inherent risks of investing in startups and take steps to mitigate these risks. Both entities follow industry practice to assess financial and corporate governance risks, such as having a structured due diligence process and engaging the management of investee companies to monitor their business strategy and performance.”
“LTA will also work closely with industry players and with SkillsFuture Singapore to update the existing skills framework to ensure relevance for the bus workforce. For the point-to-point (P2P) sector, from March 2022, the training curriculum for the Taxi Driver's Vocational Licence (TDVL) and Private Hire Car Driver’s Vocational Licence (PDVL) have been updated to help taxi and private hire car drivers adapt to technological advancements, such as the emergence of AVs and the likelihood of jobs that will evolve arising from this trend.”
“Mr Speaker, the deployment of AVs in Singapore would depend on a few factors. First, of course, is the progress of the AV technology and, importantly, to be able to meet safety standards and operational requirements. There is also the commercial viability perspective. And then, finally, there is public acceptance, which is also very important in order for larger-scale deployment. Our assessment is that it will take some time to achieve this larger-scale deployment in Singapore for the reasons that I have mentioned in my main reply, and I think Mr Melvin Yong also mentioned some of these. The impact of AV deployment, therefore, would be gradual. We have time to continue to work closely with the commercial operators, the researchers and also, with our unions and our workers. So, I would not want to characterise this as a deliberate slowing down, but neither are we trying to intentionally speed it up. We will let the technology and the commercial viability, and also, the awareness and public acceptance, make progress steadily. But if we are able to have some breakthroughs, I think that will be beneficial. With regard to the collaborations on preparing our workers for this transition, I think that is an extremely important area. Allow me, Mr Speaker, just to share briefly. For the bus sector, for example, we have been working closely with the National Transport Workers' Union (NTWU) and also, our public transport operators to develop a skills and training roadmap. The roadmap will identify emerging skills and what are some of the new job roles arising from the deployment of autonomous technologies, and what are the courses and on-the-job training that we can provide to our workers.”
“Mr Speaker, as of 27 January 2023, 43 autonomous vehicles, or AVs, have passed the Land Transport Authority (LTA)'s Milestone 1 test, and one AV has passed LTA's Milestone 2 test. The AV trials in Singapore which we had facilitated since 2014 have yielded important capability development in testing and certification, and an understanding of the operational requirements for the safe deployment of AVs alongside conventional motor vehicles. These trials have also informed us that the capabilities would need to be further developed for local operating conditions, particularly in public transport, before larger-scale deployment on our roads can be achieved. These include the perception and sensing capabilities of AVs under complex scenarios in our urban environment and during inclement weather conditions. AV companies would, therefore, have to undertake further research and development and trials. LTA will continue to facilitate these efforts.”
“Mr Speaker, in light of elevated global oil and gas prices over the past year, some countries have introduced windfall taxes on the profits of energy companies. Such taxes can yield short-term revenues. But they will damage the economy in the longer-term. In particular, it is typical for energy markets to experience up and down cycles. Higher profits in good years help the energy companies smooth out past losses and prepare for future downcycles. Windfall taxes arbitrarily applied to companies just because of their recent “record profits” will lead to considerable business uncertainty and disincentivise long-term private investments. Energy companies will hold back on investing in greener fuels and decarbonisation measures, which will make it harder for us to achieve our net-zero targets. Sir, more generally, Singapore’s value proposition as a trusted business hub has been based on our long-term stability, anchored on strong rule of law and a predictable regulatory environment. Arbitrary measures like windfall taxes will send the wrong signal to businesses and discourage them from investing in Singapore. This will erode investor confidence and, in turn, affect Singapore’s competitiveness and the livelihoods of our workers, who could either lose their jobs or have fewer career advancement opportunities when businesses divert their investments elsewhere. We must not let the temptation of short-term revenue gains come at the expense of our long-term economic competitiveness. We must be careful not to resort to populist ideas to raise revenue that will ultimately hurt businesses, hurt our economy and hurt Singaporeans. 1.30 pm”
“Sir, I would support Mr Melvin Yong's proposal that we need to regularly review the deterrents that we have against such behaviours. As I have said, our policy position – and this is not just that of the Government but also that of the PTOs and the unions – the tripartite position is clear. We have zero tolerance for such abusive behaviours towards our public transport workers and if the existing measures are not adequate, we are prepared to look at reviewing them. But as it stands now, as Mr Melvin Yong pointed out, the trend is in the right direction. So, we will continue this approach of working closely together with our tripartite partners and also to promote a more gracious, considerate commuting culture. That, I think, is going to be key. 12.30 pm”
“Thank you, Sir. We have shared previously in this House that the Government, our public transport operators, or PTOs, and the National Transport Workers’ Union, or NTWU, take a united and firm position against physical and verbal abuse of bus captains by a small minority of errant commuters. Let me be clear that there is zero tolerance for such behaviours and commuters who abuse our bus captains will face serious consequences, including jail time. There were 26 bus captain abuse cases by passengers reported by our PTOs in 2018, 52 in 2019, 50 in 2020, 35 in 2021, and 27 in 2022 thus far. Perpetrators may be prosecuted for offences under the Protection from Harassment Act and be liable on conviction for an imprisonment term of up to 12 months, a fine of up to $5,000, or both. They could also be charged for voluntarily causing hurt under the Penal Code, which carries an imprisonment term of up to three years, a fine of up to $5,000, or both. Members may have read from recent media reports on offenders who were jailed and fined for abusing our bus captains. The installation of protective barriers in buses was trialled in 2018 and again in 2020. However, these were discontinued as bus captains had provided feedback that the glare from the barriers posed a safety risk when driving. Sir, the large majority of commuters are law abiding and some go the extra mile to show their appreciation to our bus captains and public transport workers. I thank these commuters for their kind words and encouragement. These acts of kindness are very much appreciated by our public transport workers and they form part of the efforts to build a more gracious and considerate commuting culture.”
“Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 23 and 24 together?”
“In fact, part of those packages included the middle-income. And there were some parts of the support package that were not means-tested. All were designed such that people who stay in private properties or who earn higher incomes – those who I believe would belong to the middle class and upper-middle class that Assoc Prof Jamus Lim spoke about – they would also be included. For example, the special payment that would be given out in December this year, 2.5 million Singaporeans will benefit. Sir, for the second question that Assoc Prof Jamus Lim asked, the figures that I shared earlier, including the percentages, were not based on theoretical analysis but are based on actual data. So, what I shared with Assoc Prof Jamus Lim earlier were based on what we had actually collected in 2018 and 2019.”
“Mr Speaker, the first question from Assoc Prof Jamus Lim – if I understood him correctly – because I shared earlier that 50% of the net GST is borne by foreigners and tourists, he asked whether that GST collection is worth it – if I understood him correctly. Sir, we have explained that if you look at the package that we have designed, due to the support package and due to permanent features like the GST Voucher, the bulk of the net GST that the Government collects is borne by two groups of people. If you look at the total amount, 50% comes from tourists and foreigners residing in Singapore and about 20% comes from the top 20% of households. What this means is that the remaining 30% is spread over the rest of the 80% of households and individuals. So, yes, there will certainly be some part of the net GST that is paid for by different groups of society, different income quintiles, including the middle-income and the upper middle-income. So, if you look at the middle 40th to 60th, and also the 60th to the 80th, certainly, I think they do bear some of the GST. But the impact of the GST that they bear is not the full amount. The bulk of the net GST that is collected is borne by foreigners and the top 20% of households, and the remaining 30% of the net GST is spread over this remaining 80% of households and individuals. In addition to that, Sir, we have also shared earlier that we provide support, to include the middle-income households. So, the support that goes to lower-income households is a lot more because they are more vulnerable and they are more affected by price increases. But in designing the support packages, what was announced in Budget this year and the two packages of $1.5 billion each, we did not leave out the middle-income.”
“Thank you, Sir. The Ministry of Finance (MOF) has estimated that households and individuals paid around $6.8 billion of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) annually in 2018 and 2019, after netting off refunds under the Tourist Refund Scheme. After further netting off GST Vouchers (GSTV) of over $1 billion provided annually to Singaporean households, the net annual GST from households and individuals was estimated to be around $5.7 billion. Tourists and foreigners residing in Singapore accounted for around 50% of this net GST, while the top 20% of resident households accounted for close to 20%. We have not used data for 2020 and 2021, as they are not representative of general consumption patterns due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. On the Tourist Refund Scheme, from 2010 to 2019, an average of around $200 million per year was refunded to tourists. This works out to just around 2% of total GST collections. The refunds in 2020 and 2021 were much lower, averaging at around $22 million per year, due to travel restrictions associated with COVID-19.”
“Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to answer Parliamentary Question Nos 11, 12 and 13 together?”
“She is not so healthy. Healthcare costs have increased, and Ah Ma needs someone to take care of her. I feel that Ah Gong and Ah Ma have worked so hard to take care of Ah Seng and bring him up, now that Ah Gong and Ah Ma have aged, it is time that Ah Seng takes care of them. This is the right way as filial piety is a virtue in Asian societies. For Ah Gong, he has been very understanding of the difficulties that Ah Seng is facing. He does not ask Ah Seng to pay for these extra expenses immediately. Instead, he gave Ah Seng a buffer of five years or even 10 years to help him tide through the challenges. Mr Speaker, I mentioned that Ah Gong and Ah Ma have worked so hard for many years, and whom are they working for? Not for themselves, but for Ah Seng and his children and their future generations. So, if Ah Seng asks Ah Gong, why are you saving so much money? I think Ah Gong may tell him, it is like what the Hokkien song says, "this is all for you".”
“Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing me to speak. I would like to respond to the speech that Mr Leong Mun Wai gave earlier. In Mandarin, please. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, just now, Mr Leong quoted a story that was told by former Member of Parliament Lee Bee Wah, and wrote his own version of the story. Firstly, I suggest for Mr Leong not to take words out of context. And I want to offer some constructive suggestions to Mr Leong so that the next time he tells this story, it can be more accurate and more complete. Mr Speaker, Mr Leong mentioned the story of Ah Gong and Ah Seng. We know that in Singapore society, it is more accurate to say that the money Ah Seng gives to Ah Gong is less than the money Ah Gong gives to Ah Seng. As my Parliament colleague Mr Shawn Huang mentioned just now, if Ah Seng is from the lower-income group, for every one dollar of tax that he pays to Ah Gong, he will receive $4 in benefits. If Ah Seng is middle-income, every dollar that he pays to Ah Gong, he will receive $2 in benefits. So, Ah Gong actually gives more to Ah Seng compared to what Ah Seng gives to Ah Gong. Secondly, Ah Gong and Ah Ma have worked very hard for many years to save some money, not for them to spend frivolously, but for Ah Seng and Ah Seng's children and their future generations. In fact, part of Ah Seng’s expenditure every year comes from the returns of the invested savings that Ah Gong and Ah Ma have accumulated. 50% of the returns are spent on Ah Seng and his family, while the other half is put back into the savings, so that the savings can grow and achieve more returns in future. For every $5 Ah Seng needs every year, $1 comes from the 50% of the returns of Ah Gong's investment. Thirdly, Mr Leong mentioned that Ah Ma is already old.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank Prof Hoon Hian Teck for supporting the Bill. Sir, Singapore has been contributing to IDA for the past 20 years in support of the World Bank's efforts to improve the lives of people in the poorest countries. As Prof Hoon shared in his speech, when Singapore was a Third World country in the early years of our Independence, we had benefited from loans provided by the World Bank to finance our nation-building and key infrastructure, such as our port. Today, we have the world's largest container transhipment hub-port. There is a Chinese saying 饮水思源 – when we drink water, we must remember where it came from. And when we are able to do so, we shall pay it forward to help others. As a responsible member of the international community, Singapore will continue to do our part to support the World Bank in assisting disadvantaged economies finance their long-term development needs, including initiatives to mitigate the effects of climate change, and to build stronger resilience against future pandemics and natural disasters. Within our region, IDA will also help some of our neighbours like Laos and Cambodia. As Prof Hoon Hian Teck said, a stable and economically vibrant ASEAN will benefit all countries in the region, including Singapore. Mr Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)] [(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Chee Hong Tat]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“This is why we served as a catch-up port during the pandemic because people who got delayed elsewhere come to Singapore to rearrange their cargoes and use us as a catch-up port to make up for lost time.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank Mr Saktiandi Supaat for his questions. The maritime and shipping industry is one that goes through up cycles and down cycles. So, shipping lines and port operators are used to dealing with ups and downs. Importantly, one of the key drivers of port container volume is global trade and supply chains. There are some signs of certain sectors like manufacturing, for example, slowing down because of what is happening in different parts of the world. So, while some of the factors may point towards increases in trade volumes, there are also other factors that point in the opposite direction. Regardless of whether it is up cycle or down cycle or an increase in volume or a decrease in volume, what is most critical is this. We maintain very strong tripartite partnerships among employers, unions and Government agencies to always look at how we can maintain our port competitiveness. This is, of course, partly driven by our capabilities like the skills of our workers and the technology we deploy. At Tuas Port, for example, we are not only going to make it a more sustainable and more efficient port, we are also deploying technology that will reduce the need for manpower, for example, drivers. We use autonomous vehicles to help us to transport the cargo within the port. We use productivity improvements so that one crane operator is able to operate multiple quay cranes at the same time. So, these are all different ways to amplify the impact of our workforce to improve productivity and to improve our port competitiveness. The second very important factor when it comes to competitiveness for port operations is connectivity. Because the more ships call at Singapore, the more shipping lines hub at Singapore, there is a network effect.”
“Mr Speaker, the Port of Singapore remained open throughout the pandemic and served as a “catch-up” port for many ships that faced delays in other parts of the world. MPA worked closely with PSA and the unions to open additional berths and yards, and deployed more port workers and equipment to handle surges in container volumes. Our port handled a record high container throughput of 37.5 million 20-foot equivalent units (TEUs) in 2021. Our container port is currently operating at about 85% of its maximum handling capacity of 44 million TEUs per annum. There is enough buffer to meet short-term increases in demand from shipping lines. As more berths at Tuas Port are completed, our handling capacity will increase further and provide sufficient capacity to handle future growth in volumes.”
“Mr Speaker, I would, first, like to clarify that the number of PG seniors who benefited from the PG package is 450,000 and the number of MG seniors who benefited was 500,000 since the inception of these packages. Mr Saktiandi Supaat's question about Silver Support, I think this is a different objective from the PG and MG packages which are geared more towards providing for the healthcare and peace of mind of our PG and MG seniors. For Silver Support, instead of being cohort-based, as in we look at the PG and MG, Silver Support is actually a structural scheme that seniors who are younger than PG and MG, when they reach the eligible age, they also can receive Silver Support, if they meet the conditions. And the conditions, as Members are aware, we will look at the housing type, the per capita household income and also the CPF balances at age 55. So, all these are designed to provide some additional help for seniors who, when they were younger, did not earn enough, did not accumulate enough CPF balances and when they grow old, when they retire, we give them some additional help through Silver Support. So, the objective is different from PG and MG, but we will look at both very carefully. For MG and PG, as I mentioned in my main reply, if it is necessary to top up these funds, the PG Fund and the MG Fund, we will do so to honour our commitments to our PG and MG seniors. For Silver Support, we have been regularly reviewing the amount and also the criteria to see how we can help our seniors who need this assistance when they retire.”
“The Government will monitor the situation and, if necessary, we will top up these funds to honour the commitments to our PG and MG seniors. Sir, this is part of our efforts to prepare Singapore for an ageing society and why the Government needs to ensure we have sufficient fiscal resources to support and care for our seniors.”
“Thank you. Sir, we introduced the Pioneer Generation (PG) Package and the Merdeka Generation (MG) Package in 2014 and 2019 respectively, to honour PG and MG seniors for their contributions in the early years of Singapore's nation-building. About 450,000 PG seniors and 500,000 MG seniors have benefited since the inception of the respective PG and MG packages. As of 30 September 2022, there are about 340,000 PG seniors and 480,000 MG seniors. We established the PG Fund and MG Fund to set aside monies upfront for these packages. This ensured the Government honours our commitment to PG and MG seniors, regardless of future economic or fiscal circumstances. Eight billion dollars and $6.1 billion were set aside at the inception of the PG Fund and MG Fund respectively. We sized the funds based on the projected lifetime cost, the benefits in the PG and MG packages, after accounting for inflation and interest accrued. In recent years, we have enhanced the PG and MG benefits, such as the introduction of the Additional Participation Incentives for PG and MG seniors who join CareShield Life by 31 December 2023 and higher annual MediSave top-ups for PG seniors from 2021 onwards. The Government will continue to review holistically our schemes and subsidy framework, and update the key parameters where needed, to ensure the affordability of healthcare for Singaporeans, including our PG and MG seniors. As at 31 March 2022, $3.04 billion from the PG Fund and $0.72 billion from the MG Fund have been disbursed. MOF and MOH review the sufficiency of the PG Fund and MG Fund every year. As at 31 March 2022, there is a balance of $6.16 billion in the PG Fund and $5.72 billion in the MG Fund.”
“Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 11 and 12 together?”
“— to give them additional help on top of the assistance from Government. I know many Grassroots Advisers are doing the same, including Mr Saktiandi Supaat. As we say at the Chinese Development Assistance Council (CDAC), 一人一点心，社会更温馨 . When each of us contributes a little to help others, it makes our society more caring and warmer. Mr Speaker, these experiences give me much confidence that Singapore and Singaporeans have what it takes to weather the challenges ahead. We are able to face stormy seas with greater confidence and resilience than many other countries, because of our mutual trust and our social cohesion. And we hope that every crisis will further strengthen our social compact and bring us even closer together as one united people.”
“We must likewise do the responsible thing by safeguarding our reserves and growing it further, so that we leave behind a strategic asset and lay the foundations for a better future that will benefit our children and grandchildren. Sir, I have spoken about how the Government will look after individuals, households and businesses. Another important area is how all of us can play a role in helping one another in a caring and inclusive society. A key enabler is the high degree of trust in our society. Trust has allowed us to weather many uncertainties together, including our fight against COVID-19, and it will be a critical success factor as we face new challenges going ahead, such as rising inflation and higher interest rates. Like other Members of this House, I have come across many heartwarming examples of institutions, community organisations and also individual Singaporeans pitching in to help others who are facing difficulties. They generously provide extra assistance to complement what the Government is giving. Mr Saktiandi Supaat and I are both serving in Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC. And we are grateful to our corporate and community partners who work with us to provide additional local-level assistance to our residents, especially the vulnerable and lower-income families. For example, my volunteers and I have been distributing monthly WeCare Packs containing food items and daily necessities to our lower-income families. They are sponsored by our donors. And I have also raised additional amounts through our community welfare fund to provide National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) vouchers and angbaos to our vulnerable residents —”
“There are many schemes available, including the Productivity Solutions Grant, the Energy Efficiency Grant, SkillsFuture subsidies and the newly introduced $70 million NTUC Company Training Committee Grant to help improve firm and worker productivity, and to build new enterprise and workforce capabilities. The Government will also continue to provide Workfare Income Supplement and other support measures to boost the earnings of our lower-wage workers. Let me now turn to the Government's financial position. In the near term, significant market uncertainties have resulted in a weaker investment environment. The investment entities, such as the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) and Temasek, are closely monitoring macroeconomic and geopolitical developments, including changes to the interest rate environment, and they will continue to maintain diverse portfolios to manage investment risks. The impact of short-term market volatility on the Net Investment Returns Contribution, or NIRC, is mitigated as our Net Investment Returns (NIR) framework is designed to provide stability in an uncertain investment environment. It does so by smoothening out relevant asset bases over the long-term and calculating NIRC based on the expected long-term real rate of return of the investment entities. As such, the NIRC serves as a steady stream of returns to fund our annual expenditure even in periods of market uncertainty. And we are able to benefit from this source of revenue today, and also during the COVID-19 pandemic, because previous generations of Singaporeans worked hard and built up our reserves.”
“Mr Saktiandi highlighted the requirements MAS places on financial institutions to explain how a borrower's monthly mortgage instalments would vary if interest rates increased. Non-financial institutions, such as licensed moneylenders (LMLs) are required to explain to the borrower the terms of the loan contract and the breakdown of each repayment that goes into servicing the principal amount and other costs, all in a language that the borrower understands. In addition, LMLs are only permitted to impose fixed borrowing costs and fixed interest rates, ensuring that borrowers would not be caught off-guard by rising interest rates. Sir, for businesses, MAS assesses that most businesses in Singapore are currently able to manage debt-related risks with sufficient liquidity holdings, alongside the post-COVID-19 earnings recovery. The Government provides assistance to businesses through various credit schemes. Our economic agencies have assessed that there are available credit facilities for businesses. SME loan volumes, for example, have continued to be stable in recent months. With the expiry of the Temporary Bridging Loan Programme (TBLP), enterprises can still tap on the Enterprise Financing Scheme, which supports access to financing for a wide range of business activities. Our economic agencies will monitor the situation closely and review the need for further adjustments. Importantly, businesses would need to double down on efforts to improve productivity and upgrade the skills of their workers. This is the most effective way to improve our overall competitiveness and achieve a win-win outcome for both businesses and workers through economic growth.”
“The Tuition Fee Loan Scheme is available to all, while the Study Loan Scheme is available to students from lower- to middle-income households. Both loan schemes do not incur interest during study and require repayment only after graduation. These are important support measures to ensure tertiary education remains affordable, and no Singaporean child will be denied of the opportunity to receive a good education because of financial difficulties. On public housing, the Government will continue to sell new flats at prices below market value with significant housing subsidies. The end in mind is to encourage home ownership, and to enable as many families as possible to own their homes. Minister Desmond Lee spoke about this earlier today. On the whole, the household debt situation in Singapore remains healthy. This is because of our prudent policies on unsecured consumer lending and residential mortgages. Residential mortgages are subject to loan-to-value limits as well as debt servicing ratios, which cap the amount of debt and monthly mortgage payment individuals can take on when they purchase properties. MAS, MND and HDB recently announced measures to increase the medium-term interest rate floor used to compute the TDSR and Mortgage Servicing Ratio (MSR) for property loans by financial institutions and introduced an interest rate floor for computing eligible loan amounts for housing loans granted by HDB. These will help ensure that property buyers continue to borrow prudently. We will continue to monitor the property market and review our polices where necessary in a rising interest rate environment. We will also work with financial and non-financial institutions to better help borrowers understand their loan commitments.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank Mr Saktiandi Supaat for his Adjournment Motion. Our Government agencies will look into his points and his suggestions and I will respond to some of the key points that he raised. As Mr Saktiandi observed, many central banks have been raising interest rates to tackle inflation. Similarly, MAS has taken steps to tighten monetary policy and is closely monitoring developments on this front. It is also alert to systemic risks to our financial system arising from higher interest rates. The Government will provide assistance to cushion the impact on households and businesses. It is also important for all of us to take steps to adapt to this new environment. I share Mr Saktiandi's view that the higher interest rates we are experiencing may not be a passing phenomenon. Average interest rates over the next five years or more will likely be higher than what the world had experienced for the last 15-20 years. We need to prepare ourselves for this change. Sir, whether we are facing low interest rates or high interest rates, the Government will continue to ensure that essential areas, such as public housing, healthcare and education will remain affordable and accessible to all Singaporeans. For education, the Government currently subsidises over 90% of the costs of education from primary to pre-university level. The subsidy rate for Institute of Technical Education (ITE) is also more than 90%. For polytechnics and autonomous universities, Government subsidies amount to around 85% and 75% of total costs respectively. In addition, students can apply for bursaries and education loans to support their education-related expenses.”
“For such unlawful disclosure, the offender could also be subject to penalties under the Official Secrets Act, Personal Data Protection Act or other relevant Acts. So, it is not only through the tax legislation but also through other Acts. As Mr Saktiandi Supaat pointed out, there is a need to continually bolster our data security in the face of evolving threats. The Government has been actively strengthening our data security regime to protect sensitive data and this is an important area of work as we become more digitally connected. Mr Speaker, I beg to move.”
“So, these information in the prescribed list will be disclosed in less granular format, in ranges or as a yes-or-no field, rather than the exact value. Ms Hazel Poa observed that the prescribed list could potentially be expanded to allow sharing of information and I think she acknowledged the point that I made that it would only be for company-related information. I want to assure Ms Poa that this will continue to be the case – the prescribed list will only be for company-related information. Collectively, these proposed amendments are intended to facilitate efficient data-driven policy-making, operations and integrated service delivery for public sector agencies to serve the public more effectively. I agree with Members on the need for robust safeguards even as we do so. This is very important. Information on taxpayers will continue to be safeguarded under existing tax legislation, the Official Secrets Act and the Public Sector Governance Act, as well as the data governance and security policies set out in the Government's Instruction Manuals. Besides offences stated in the tax legislation, the Public Sector Governance Act further criminalises the acts of unauthorised disclosure of data, improper use of data and unauthorised re-identification of individuals from anonymised data. Ms Hazel Poa asked about the adequacy of penalties for unlawful disclosure of information by an authorised third party engaged to assist public officers with their official duties. For unlawful disclosure constituting an offence under section 6 of the Income Tax Act, penalties under section 94 would apply and this carries a maximum fine of $5,000 or in default of which imprisonment not exceeding six months.”
“Mr Louis Ng and Mr Saktiandi Supaat sought clarifications on the process of seeking consent from taxpayers to share their information. The agency seeking consent will provide sufficient information in any request for consent so that taxpayers can make an informed decision whether to give their consent or not. For example, the taxpayer will be told upfront of the information to be disclosed, the purpose of sharing such information and the persons whom the information may be disclosed to. Consent that had been provided by taxpayers for IRAS to disclose the information for a purpose under the ambit of "administering a written law or public scheme" will continue to be valid. Should public sector agencies require that information for another purpose beyond administering written law or a public scheme in the future, fresh consent will be required. This will need to be obtained under the new section 6(12) as amended by this Bill. Mr Louis Ng and Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked about the basis for the prescribed list in a proposed new section 6(12B), which can be shared by IRAS with public sector agencies without requiring taxpayers' consent for the disclosure. As I explained in my speech earlier, we have taken a calibrated approach to safeguard information confidentiality. The prescribed list of information under section 6(12B) is limited to company-related information that have been more frequently required by public sector agencies. This includes the range of revenue earned by the company and a yes-or-no indication on whether the company has claimed tax deductions such as for R&D expenditure in Singapore or expenditure on overseas business development.”
“If any party objects, the matter will have to be reheard either by a new hearing committee or the newly appointed single-member committee to ensure fairness to the parties. Next, I will address the clarifications raised by Members on the proposed amendment to facilitate the disclosure of information by IRAS for official duties. Mr Liang Eng Hwa sought clarifications on the evaluation process and governance for data sharing. IRAS evaluates each request for information against existing tax legislation as well as a standardised set of criteria set out in the Government's instruction manual. This includes ensuring that the purpose of disclosure is aligned with what is allowed in legislation and that the information requested is proportionate and relevant to the purpose. Mr Louis Ng asked under what situations IRAS would share information with public sector agencies and authorised third parties with the consent of taxpayers under the amended section 6(12). Currently, with taxpayer's consent, IRAS is already allowed to disclose information to public sector agencies and authorised persons engaged by the Government or Statutory Board if the disclosure is for the sole purpose of administering a written law or public scheme. The proposed amendment to section 6(12) in this Bill allows IRAS to disclose such information for purposes beyond that of administering a written law or public scheme as long as it is for official duties. Mr Louis Ng also asked if it would constitute a contempt of authority for refusing to provide consent to the disclosure of information under this section. I would like to assure Mr Louis Ng that this will not be the case. The taxpayer is allowed to withhold consent.”
“In relation to Mr Saktiandi Supaat's query, we will not hardwire the factors guiding the exercise of the chairperson's discretion in regulations. Different cases may bring up different factors and considerations. The chairperson would be best placed to make a judgement call, taking into account the pertinent facts and circumstances in individual cases. Mr Louis Ng asked a related question on whether the chairperson will consider parties' preferences in deciding whether to appoint a single-member quorum. The parties may indicate their preferences in their submissions and these inputs will be considered by the chairperson in making the decision. On the appearance by an appellant company before the Board of Review, the proposed new section 80(2) is intended to make clear that there is no need for physical hearings to be held. It does not alter the existing position on who may appear before the board as an appellant company representative. Mr Louis Ng also asked if the substitutions of certain terms are intended to be significant, such as replacing "do not consent" with "object to" and replacing "in the absence of member of board" to "by committee where member becomes unavailable" in section 80A. Sir, these changes are meant to streamline the language of the provisions for better clarity. They do not effect a change in the substantive meanings of the terms they replace. Mr Louis Ng also sought clarification on whether any difference is intended between sections 80A and 80B, as to whether the objection of a single party is sufficient or if such objections will have to be made by both parties. The intention is the same for both sections.”
“There will be some schemes, as Assoc Prof Jamus Lim also acknowledged, that will be broad-based and would be helping every family like the CDC Vouchers and the Household Utilities Credit, but there will be some that are more targeted towards lower- and middle-income households. This is important. Also, as we look ahead, how we can help our companies to transform, improve productivity, become more innovative, more competitive, help our workers, through our tripartite partnership with employers and with unions, to upskill and become more productive. This is still the most fundamental and most effective way of helping our workers to cope with rising inflation. It is to help them to increase their wages in a sustainable way through a combination of policies but also through skills upgrading, productivity improvements, making sure that Singapore's economy remains competitive. If we can do that, then, as Assoc Prof Jamus Lim mentioned, we can then have real wage growth, real income growth. Sir, I also want to thank Assoc Prof Jamus Lim for his suggestions earlier. He gave some ideas of what could be done. These are actually very much in line with what the Government has already done. Some of the existing measures – he mentioned GST Vouchers, he mentioned some of the support packages that we have, some of the rebates that we can give – these are things that we have done. As Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong said, we will continue to monitor the situation and if it is necessary to do so, we are prepared to provide more help, to help Singaporeans to cope with rising prices. Sir, let me now address questions raised on the amendments related to the Board of Review (BOR).”
“There were some one-off upsides that we got this year – I think he acknowledged those points as well – from property, for example. But the overall fiscal space for Singapore remains tight, especially because, looking ahead, we also have some structural changes in our society, such as an ageing population which will require us to spend more on healthcare. This has been explained previously by Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong and also, I believe, Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat when he was the Minister for Finance. Secondly, on the impact of GST, we have already provided for a comprehensive offset package and Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong has also given the assurance that we will update the package to ensure that we take into account higher prices. So, yes, inflation is higher than when we first started but our assurance and our commitment remain that we will make sure that lower-income Singaporeans will not feel the impact of the increase in GST for at least 10 years. That commitment remains. Thirdly, on the impact of higher prices, the Deputy Prime Minister has also said in this House and also at other forums that the Government is monitoring closely what the impact of higher prices is on households and families, especially on lower- and middle-income households. Because as I mentioned in my reply to Mr Ang Wei Neng earlier during Question Time, lower- and middle-income households face a bigger impact from rising prices. Therefore, we want to make sure that we provide more help to these families.”
“Third, such a system could result in greater compliance cost for taxpayers and higher administration costs for IRAS compared to the current arrangement where individuals pay their taxes this year based on actual income earned in the previous year. To help taxpayers with their cashflow, which I think is the intent of what Mr Saktiandi's suggestion is about, IRAS allows interest-free GIRO instalments up to 12 months for individuals and 10 months for companies. For those who have difficulties paying, sometimes due to unforeseen personal and family circumstances, they can approach IRAS for assistance. During the economic downturn such as in 2020, we automatically deferred GIRO deductions for corporate tax and income tax for self-employed persons to help them manage their cashflows. Mr Saktiandi also asked if we could extend the approach taken to ease insurance companies' tax filing compliance by harmonising the accounting basis, to other general taxpayers. I wish to clarify that insurance companies, like any other company, are not required to prepare a separate set of financial statements for tax purposes. Companies use the information in their financial statements primarily to prepare their tax computations. Due to changes in the financial reporting standard for insurance contracts, the financial statements of insurance companies will no longer include some information needed to prepare their tax computations. We will allow insurance companies to use the relevant information in the regulatory returns filed with MAS for tax computation purposes. Sir, I would now like to address the comments from Assoc Prof Jamus Lim. Sir, I think firstly, to clarify, we do not have – if I heard Assoc Prof Jamus Lim correctly – excess revenues.”
“In cases of tax avoidance, IRAS also has powers under the Income Tax Act to impose a surcharge of 50% on the amount of tax imposed by IRAS. Members are aware that we have been raising our taxes for higher-income individuals in recent years such that those who earn more contribute more. As Mr Saktiandi Supaat alluded to in his question, many high net worth individuals are globally mobile and some of them may shift away from Singapore to alternative jurisdictions with more competitive tax rates if our tax rates are too high. If this happens, our tax base and our tax collections will be eroded. We therefore need to weigh the trade-offs carefully. Mr Saktiandi Supaat suggested that PIT could be assessed on a current year, pay-as-you-earn basis so that taxpayers can better manage their cashflow by matching tax payments with current year income. Sir, I understand the intent behind Mr Saktiandi Supaat's suggestion. It is an alternative that we considered before and there are pros and cons to adopting such an approach. First, a current year, pay-as-you-earn basis for PIT assessment means that the tax payable will be withheld every month by employers and then paid to IRAS. While it matches tax payments more closely with the taxpayer's income, it also reduces their take home pay every month instead of giving them the option of paying the tax using their annual bonus or other sources of income. Second, some individuals, especially self-employed persons and those with higher variable salary components, may have difficulties estimating their current year income for tax reporting purposes.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank hon Members, Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, Ms Hazel Poa, Mr Louis Ng and Mr Saktiandi Supaat, for their comments and suggestions on the Bill. Please allow me to now respond to the points they have raised. Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked how many taxpayers will be affected by the increase in the top marginal personal income tax, or PIT, rate, the proportion of the total PIT contributed by them and our projections of additional revenue which can be collected. The increase in PIT rates will affect the top 1.2% of PIT taxpayers, who account for about 35% of our total PIT revenue. We estimate that this change would raise around $170 million of additional tax revenue per year based on the actual taxpayer base in Singapore in the Year of Assessment 2020 (YA2020). Mr Saktiandi Supaat also asked whether the Government or IRAS has detected any attempts by high income individuals to "offshore" their earnings, such as restructuring or moving their assets overseas to avoid tax in Singapore. Sir, under our PIT regime, income tax is levied on income sourced in Singapore or received through partnerships in Singapore from abroad. This includes instances where individuals derive income from providing services in Singapore to overseas-based employers. They are subject to income tax in Singapore. We do not tax individuals on foreign-sourced income. For example, a person who acquires income generating assets overseas such as by investing in overseas property will pay the applicable taxes and other costs in that jurisdiction. IRAS has a robust compliance and audit programme to identify high risk cases for review. This is a risk-based assessment.”
“Second, we will amend the provisions relating to the Board of Review, also known as the BOR, which is a tribunal set up under the Income Tax Act to hear and adjudicate tax disputes between the Comptroller and taxpayers. The BOR provisions will be updated and streamlined by: (a) removing outdated references such as the requirement for lodgement of the notice of appeal in “duplicate” and the petition of appeal in "quadruplicate", which are no longer relevant where documents are sent digitally, (b) clarifying the Minister's regulation-making powers regarding tax appeals, as well as the case management powers of the BOR and chairperson, and (c) moving BOR provisions on procedures to subsidiary legislation. In addition, we propose to allow the chairperson to have the option to convene a one-member coram where appropriate. Currently, each hearing committee comprises at least three BOR members. In deciding whether or not to convene a one-member coram, the chairperson will consider the parties’ submissions, as well as the facts and circumstances of the case. Taken together, these changes will allow greater flexibility and ensure that BOR cases are resolved in a more timely and efficient manner. Related amendments will also be made to the BOR provisions in the Goods and Services Tax Act. Clauses 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 and 46 of the Bill provide for these amendments. Mr Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 2.10 pm”
“The information on taxpayers will continue to be safeguarded under existing tax legislation, the Official Secrets Act and the Public Sector (Governance) Act, as well as data governance policies set out in the Government’s Instruction Manuals. Collectively, these data protections set out when data can be shared across agencies, limit the access to data to only authorised persons and ensure accountability for access and use of data through penalties for unauthorised disclosure and improper use of data. All persons with access to such information on taxpayers are bounded by secrecy provisions under the applicable tax legislation – Income Tax Act or Goods and Services Tax Act – and the Official Secrets Act, where any unauthorised disclosure of such data is an offence. Where personal data is involved, non-Government Entities acting on behalf of the Government will also be subject to the Personal Data Protection Act. Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Finance (MOF) regularly reviews our income tax regime. Let me now elaborate on two of the proposed amendments arising from the review. First, we will update the definition of local employee for the Mergers and Acquisitions Scheme, to recognise individuals hired under central hiring and secondment arrangements as employees of the acquiring company. Currently, only individuals that are directly hired by the acquiring company are taken into account for assessing whether the three local employee condition is met. As businesses may have different hiring practices, the change allows us greater flexibility to recognize an equivalent material outcome of local workers being hired, be it through direct hiring, central hiring, or secondment arrangements. Clause 21 of the Bill provides for this amendment.”
“To enable public sector agencies to carry out their official duties more effectively, the proposed amendment enables IRAS to disclose a prescribed list of identifiable company-related information to other public sector agencies, for the performance of official duties, without requiring the taxpayer’s consent. This list of company-related information will be prescribed in the Income Tax Act and Goods and Services Tax Act. Let me provide an example of how this approach benefits our companies. With access to the data on specific companies, a public sector agency will be able to identify which are the companies that could benefit from certain enterprise development schemes and proactively share with them information on the relevant schemes. Without the data sharing, we are faced with a chicken-and-egg problem. These companies may miss out on the benefits as they do not know that they are eligible and they may not apply for the schemes. We recognise that this approach can be sensitive and we need to strike a balance between improving service efficiency and convenience, versus protecting data confidentiality. There will be two safeguards. First, information in the prescribed list will be provided in a less granular form. For instance, the company’s sales revenue will be shared in ranges, rather than the exact value. Such information will also not be disclosed to any person outside the public sector, even if the person is engaged by the Government or a Statutory Board. It will only be disclosed to public officers. Clauses 3, 41, 43, 46 and 49 of the Bill provide for these amendments.”
“Today, IRAS can disclose such information to public sector agencies or an authorised person who is engaged by the Government or a Statutory Board, if the disclosure is for the sole purpose of administering a written law or public scheme. For example, to determine what level of subsidy a patient can receive, healthcare personnel in hospitals designated to administer public healthcare schemes may obtain such information with consent, to provide the appropriate subsidies to patients efficiently and conveniently. However, the current approach has some limitations where the official duties of public officers go beyond administering written law or a public scheme – such as for policy-making or providing public services in an integrated manner. For example, Enterprise Singapore needs to regularly review its internationalisation schemes that support local companies expanding into overseas markets. Even if the companies have given consent for their information to be shared with Enterprise Singapore, IRAS is currently unable to do so, because such a review does not fall under “administration of a written law or public scheme”. Where taxpayers have provided consent for IRAS to disclose their information to a public officer, or an authorised person outside the public sector who is engaged by the Government or a Statutory Board, the proposed amendment in the Bill will enable such disclosure by IRAS for the performance of official duties. Sir, the second change relates to the scenario where taxpayers have not explicitly provided consent for the data disclosure. This will apply only to company-related information and does not include data of individuals.”
“Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a second time." We sought views from the public on the draft Bill earlier this year and have taken into account the feedback received. We thank the respondents for their inputs. Let me start with the amendments that give effect to tax measures from Budget 2022. First, the top marginal personal income tax (PIT), rate of tax-resident individuals will be increased from the Year of Assessment 2024. The portion of chargeable income in excess of $500,000 up to $1 million will be taxed at 23%, while that in excess of $1 million will be taxed at 24% – both up from 22% today. This move would further enhance the progressivity of our PIT system, where individuals who earn more will contribute more. We estimate that this could raise around $170 million of additional tax revenue per year. The PIT rates for certain income by non-tax-resident individuals that are pegged to the top marginal tax rate of tax-resident individuals will also be revised to 24%. Clauses 22, 42 and 44 of the Bill provide for these amendments. Second, to support data-driven policy-making, operations and integrated service delivery, we propose two amendments to the Income Tax Act and Goods and Services Tax Act to facilitate the disclosure of information by the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) for official duties. The first change relates to the scenario where taxpayers such as individuals and companies have provided consent for their information to be shared.”
“But at the same time, we do have broad-based schemes, like CDC Vouchers and Household Utilities Credits, which we will give to all households to provide some help, to help them to cushion the impact of high inflation.”
“Mr Speaker, the Government has been rolling out different measures to help Singaporean families and individuals, and these include measures that were previously announced during Budget 2022 and during the June announcement where we launched a $1.5 billion package to support Singaporeans. So, some of these measures are still being implemented, are still being rolled out. But as I mentioned in my reply, we are closely monitoring the situation and if it is necessary for us to provide more support, we are prepared to do so. Mr Speaker, CDC Vouchers are a very useful part of the support package but they form part of the overall assistance package from the Government. Besides CDC Vouchers, there are also many other schemes to help Singaporeans to cushion the impact of rising prices, such as additional U-Save rebates and Household Utilities Credit. We give Edusave and Child Development Account top-ups, and also public transport vouchers, just to name a few examples. We also provide additional GST-Voucher cash payments of up to $300 to eligible Singaporeans, aged 21 and above. So, this is not household, this is to individuals, to eligible Singaporeans, aged 21 and above. These are targeted to provide more assistance to lower-income Singaporeans, which, I think, is a better and more effective way compared to giving everybody $100 of CDC Vouchers, regardless of their wealth and income levels. Because we know, given limited resources, it is correct to channel more funding to help our lower-income and vulnerable Singaporeans because they are more affected by rising prices.”
“Mr Speaker, to help Singaporean households with their daily expenses, the Government has disbursed two sets of CDC Vouchers worth $100 each in December 2021 and May 2022. These vouchers can be used at over 18,000 participating heartland merchants and hawkers until the end of this year. The vouchers have been well utilised. As of September 2022, about 97% and 87% of Singaporean households have claimed their December 2021 and May 2022 CDC Vouchers respectively. These households have utilised $180 million, which is about 80% of the total vouchers available to them. Besides the CDC Vouchers, we have a mix of support measures given at the household and individual levels to help Singaporeans cope with inflation and cost of living concerns, with more help given to the lower-income and vulnerable groups. This financial year, a low-income couple with two young children living in a 3-room HDB flat can expect to receive about $3,700 in various forms of support, such as cash, education top-ups, utilities and Service & Conservancy Charges (S&CC) rebates, and CDC Vouchers. The Government understands Singaporeans’ concerns over rising prices. We are carefully monitoring the situation and will consider if there is a need to provide more assistance, or bring forward some of the support schemes, especially if the situation worsens further.”
“I am glad that all the Members who have spoken agree with the proposed changes. This will allow us to move forward to apply the new changes with effect from 10 May in the manner which I described earlier.”
“I am glad that all the Members who have spoken agree with the proposed changes. This will allow us to move forward to apply the new changes with effect from 9 May in the manner which I described earlier. [Please refer to “Stamp Duties (Amendment) Bill”, Official Report, 5 July 2022, Vol 95, Issue No 64, Second Reading Bill section.] [(proc text) Written statement by Mr Chee Hong Tat circulated with leave of the Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29(5): (proc text)] I wish to make the following factual correction to the reply given during the Second Reading of the Stamp Duties (Amendment) Bill at the Sitting of 5 July 2022. My reply should read as follows:”