Josephine Teo
Singapore
“The Government's risk-calibrated approach to data security in artificial intelligence (AI) systems was explained in a written reply, given on 9 January 2024, to related questions asked by Dr Tan Wu Meng and Mr Gerald Giam.”
“Access to frontier models is helpful for specific use cases, such as advanced research and cybersecurity. However, these form a small proportion of artificial intelligence (AI) demand. For most industry, Government and research uses, capable models are already available.”
“The Government tracks the development of technical standards for identifying artificial intelligence (AI)-generated content, including watermarking and digital provenance approaches, as part of broader efforts to manage AI-related risks.”
“Upon receiving a valid report of intimate image abuse, the Commissioner of Online Safety is empowered by law to direct Online Service Providers (OSPs) to disable access by Singapore users to the specified harmful online material. This direction may be extended to cover identical copies found on the platform.”
“The Government is committed to keeping children safe online. We have announced plans to extend age assurance requirements to designated social media services, including requiring platforms to keep users under 13 off their services.”
“Under the Online Safety (Relief and Accountability) Act 2025, the Commissioner of Online Safety is empowered to issue directions to platforms to remove specified harmful content, including intimate image abuse.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,900 lines we hold for Josephine Teo, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 53 of 58.
“Mdm Speaker, I thank both Mr Dhinakaran and Mr Sitoh Yih Pin for their support of the Singapore Accountancy Commission (SAC) Bill and for expressing confidence in the Committee to Develop the Accountancy Sector (CDAS)'s vision. In particular, Mr Dhinakaran spoke passionately and it is not often in a Bill that a Member's speech is actually longer than the Minister's. Before I respond to the specific concerns, I would like to reiterate two key points made earlier. First, to avoid duplication, the SAC will not be a membership body and, second, the SAC will act as an umbrella body pooling together the resources and coordinating the efforts of various stakeholders, including professional bodies like ICPAS. Page: 95 Madam, let me now respond specifically to Members' concerns. Mr Dhinakaran voiced concerns over ICPAS' role after the SAC is established. As I have explained earlier, ICPAS will have a critical role to play as a Designated Entity. ICPAS will be responsible for registering and renewing the registration of Chartered Accountants and will be the professional body holding membership of the Chartered Accountants. ICPAS is entrusted this important role in recognition of its good efforts to transform itself and to serve its members better. These roles involve frequent and close interactions with the accountants which the SAC had made a conscious decision to involve ICPAS in. As is the case, for accountancy professional bodies in other leading jurisdictions, ICPAS will also be responsible for the professional competence, standards and ethics of their chartered accountant members. This is a heavy responsibility as the success of the Singapore Qualification Programme (SQP) hinges on the international standing of our Chartered Accountants.”
“We are actively engaging key industry players and professional bodies, as well as faculty members and accountancy students of the local universities on their views. The establishment of the SAC, the introduction of the Singapore QP and Chartered Accountant designation herald a new chapter for the accountancy sector. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Pro-Tem SAC, chaired by Mr Michael Lim, which has been working tirelessly over the last two years to put in place the building blocks for the SAC and the Singapore QP. Professional bodies, in particular ICPAS, have also demonstrated strong commitment and support which are very much appreciated. When it is formally established, SAC will continue the work of the Pro-Tem SAC and strengthen collaboration with professional bodies. Its immediate priorities will be to ensure that the Singapore QP gets off to a good start and that adequate transitional arrangements are put in place. Madam, in conclusion, I should highlight that the setting up of the SAC is an important milestone in the transformation of our accountancy sector, but the road ahead is still quite long. We will need to work hard and stay focused to ensure the rigour of the Singapore QP and build up the professional standing of Chartered Accountants. Only then can we secure Mutual Recognition Agreements for our accountants with other international jurisdictions which is crucial to their international mobility. While ambitious, I believe that we can achieve this goal together if we have the support of all stakeholders. Mdm Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Page: 86 5.20 pm”
“As we take bold steps to transform the accountancy sector, particularly with the introduction of a new professional designation, we ought to recognise the concerns of stakeholders who will be impacted by the changes, and to manage the transition carefully. Let me share with Members our intentions for two particular groups of stakeholders. The first group comprises existing ICPAS members who are designated as Certified Public Accountants (CPA) of Singapore. We fully recognise that many of our CPAs are respected professionals with years of industry experience. Therefore, the transitional arrangements should continue to allow them to enjoy their current standing. The second group are students who are either registered to commence or are currently in the midst of taking accountancy degrees at our local universities. These students had chosen the accountancy course based on their knowledge of the current accountancy sector landscape and should not be disadvantaged by the forthcoming changes. Page: 85 A special committee to address transitional arrangements was formed by the Pro-Tem SAC in September last year and has been in intense discussion since then. The details of the transitional arrangements will be released when deliberations are complete. To allow sufficient time for the finalisation and smooth implementation of the transitional arrangements, the Bill provides that the Minister can within a period of two years, prescribe provisions such as the registration of existing CPA Singapore holders as Chartered Accountants. Our aim is to ensure clarity and provide sufficient time for affected persons to make the transition to the Chartered Accountant designation.”
“The introduction of the SQP and the Chartered Accountant designation provides an opportunity to build up the international stature of our accountancy professionals and will open up significant new opportunities for them. Page: 84 The use of the Chartered Accountant designation will be protected under the SAC Act to ensure that we uphold its quality and international standing. The relevant provisions are set out in Part VII of the Bill. In line with the partnership approach I outlined earlier, we will appoint the Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Singapore (ICPAS), as a Designated Entity to oversee the registration of a Chartered Accountant on behalf of the SAC. ICPAS has a long and established history in our accountancy sector. It is also the largest professional body in Singapore with about 25,000 members. In addition to completing the SQP, we will require a Chartered Accountant to also be a member of the Designated Entity and to satisfy the professional conduct expected of a Chartered Accountant before registering him. Therefore, as a Designated Entity, ICPAS has the important responsibility of ensuring that Chartered Accountants meet the highest standards of integrity, professional ethics and competence expected of them. ICPAS will thus be required to take necessary disciplinary actions against its member if he has contravened any code of conduct, standards or ethics. The success of the Singapore QP hinges on the international recognition and standing of the Chartered Accountant designation. ICPAS therefore has a very critical role to play, working with the SAC.”
“Significantly, the establishment of the SAC will put the accountancy profession on a similar footing as the legal, medical, architectural and engineering professions in Singapore which are championed by their respective statutory bodies. One important consideration in the set-up of the SAC is how it would interact with the professional bodies. In advanced jurisdictions such as the UK and Australia, the professional bodies actively seek to uplift the standing of the sector and quality of their members, which is also the case in Singapore. Given the merits of a private-public partnership approach, the SAC will not be set up as a membership body to avoid duplication with existing professional bodies. Instead, it will act as an umbrella body pulling together the resources and coordinating the efforts of relevant stakeholders such as the regulators, professional bodies and audit firms. The establishment of the SAC is set out in Parts I to VI of the SAC Bill. Let me say something about Chartered Accountants in Singapore. As part of its review, CDAS also noted that many leading markets such as Australia, Hong Kong, the United Kingdom and the United States have their own distinct accountancy professional qualifications which are recognised for their rigour and international portability. Although we already have high-quality accountancy training in our universities, CDAS recommended that it was critical for Singapore to develop our own high-quality and rigorous post-university Singapore Qualification Programme (SQP) if we aspired to be a leading accountancy hub. A candidate who successfully completes the SQP will be eligible to register himself as a Chartered Accountant of Singapore.”
“Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Madam, let me first set out the context for the proposed Bill to establish the Singapore Accountancy Commission (SAC). Singapore's reputation as a trusted business hub is underpinned by our emphasis on strong corporate governance and a robust regulatory framework. In part, this has been due to the quality of our accountancy professionals in preparing and upholding financial reporting standards and best practices. The accountancy sector is also experiencing strong growth. In the 10 years between 2000 and 2010, operating receipts grew at a compounded annual growth rate of about 6% while export of services increased twelve-fold . Accountancy related firms alone employed more than 11,000 workers, with the majority being professional staff. This is comparable to the medical and legal sectors which have about 5,000 and 10,000 professionals respectively. Many accountancy trained professionals also serve in key roles like chief financial officers and finance executives within companies. In short, the accountancy sector is an important contributor to Singapore's vibrant business landscape. Page: 83 In 2008, recognising its potential for future growth, MOF convened the Committee to Develop the Accountancy Sector (CDAS), to undertake a holistic review of the sector. Members of the business community, audit firms and professional accountancy bodies were extensively consulted as part of this review. In its final report submitted in 2010, CDAS unveiled an exciting vision of Singapore as a leading global accountancy hub. One of the key recommendations in the CDAS report was to set up the SAC, to lead the transformation.”
“For example, the entire HDB market is completely out-of-bounds to foreigners and when you think about it also, earlier, when Minister for National Development talked about the Executive Condominiums. For the first 10 years of an Executive Condominium's existence, it cannot be sold to foreigners as well. So there are restrictions of our own in Singapore. As he has pointed out, the Government announced only last Friday the comprehensive package of measures to ensure a stable and sustainable market and as Deputy Prime Minister Tharman had indicated, these are temporary measures designed to cool the property market which will be reviewed and at an appropriate time. During that time, references to practices in other countries are certainly useful but ultimately Singapore has to evolve in such policies that are relevant to our needs and meet our requirements. So I am sure the points that the Member has raised will be considered and at the right time given a response. On that note, Madam, I thank both Members again. [(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. – [Mrs Josephine Teo]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee. (proc text)] Page: 82 [Mdm Speaker in the Chair]”
“The owner of the property should take into account all the SSD implications before making any decisions to sell the property. On the Budget 2012 enhancements to stamp duty reliefs for qualifying M&As, Assoc Prof Fatimah has asked if the relief is managed differently when the acquiring companies and acquiring subsidiaries are local companies, compared to if they were foreign companies. The M&A incentives seek to help Singapore-based companies which carry on substantive business operations in Singapore to grow by acquisition. As such, there are conditions to ensure that the acquisition originates from a Singapore-based company which carries on substantive business operations in Page: 81 Singapore. Hence, the acquiring company has to be incorporated and tax resident in Singapore. Also, where the acquiring company belongs to a corporate group, its ultimate holding company must also be incorporated and tax resident in Singapore, but the acquiring subsidiaries can be foreign or non-local companies. I hope that addresses Assoc Prof Fatimah's questions. Let me now turn to Mr de Souza's point. Firstly, I would like to thank him for sharing his perspectives on the property market, which all of us pay close attention to. Although this specific set of amendments do not relate to the property market, I think his views are still very relevant. He has raised the example of Australia and the restrictions on foreign property purchases in that country. I thought I would just also share with Members of the House that in Singapore, there are also restrictions placed on property purchases by foreigners.”
“Mdm Speaker, first let me thank Mr Christopher de Souza and Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef for supporting the Bill. Let me address the questions that have been raised by Assoc Prof Fatimah and then I will turn to Mr de Souza's points. Assoc Prof Fatimah has asked what happens in the event when a residential premise or part of it is being used as a place of worship, which is strictly not a "prescribed use" and whether the SSD can be reduced under such circumstances. Madam, in general, public religious worship is not a permitted use on residential premises. However, if the authorities were to grant permanent permission for public religious worship to be a permitted use in a premise within a residential development, SSD will not be imposed on the sale of that part of the premise for which religious use has been permitted. I hope I did not confuse anyone. Assoc Prof Fatimah has also mentioned that under section 22 (A) of the Stamp Duties Act, when the zoning under the Master Plan is altered, the Stamp Duty can also be affected. She asked how soon such changes will be affected and whether owners or purchasers of properties will be given sufficient time to react to the change in zoning. Let me give an example to address this question. If the zoning of the land on which a property is situated is re-zoned from commercial to residential use, and the whole property is subsequently disposed of, the effective date of purchase for purposes of computing the holding period for the SSD will be the effective date of the new zoning. URA would publish a notice of the pending change in zoning in the local newspapers as well as exhibit the Masterplan Amendment plan at the URA at the URA centre for four weeks as the SSD is only triggered on the sale of the property.”
“Clauses 4 and 5 of the Bill provide for this change. Thirdly, clauses 6, 8, 9 and 10 of the Bill make technical amendments to various provisions of the Act as a result of the decommissioning of franking machines and adhesive and impressed stamps, after the implementation of electronic-stamping. Fourthly, clause 7 of the Bill amends section 40 of the Act to extend the period for filing an appeal to the High Court against a decision of the Commissioner of Stamp Duties on a notice of objection from 21 days to 30 days. This is to align the appeal deadline with those of other tax types such as Income Tax and Goods and Services Tax. Madam, the final two legislative changes are technical amendments. Clause 13 will enable the Minister to make subsidiary legislation to modify the application of specific sections of the Act when amendments are made to the First or Third Schedule. Clause 11 will allow "Rules" to be made to amend past remission instruments which were termed as "Orders". Mdm Speaker, I beg to Page: 77 move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 4.53 pm”
“Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Stamp Duties (Amendment) Bill 2013 comprises seven amendments. One amendment gives legislative effect to a Budget 2012 initiative, while the remaining six amendments arose from the periodic review of the stamp duties Page: 76 regime to improve stamp duty administration and legal clarity. In the Budget 2012 Statement, the Minister for Finance announced enhancements to the income tax and stamp duty concessions under the Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) Scheme. These tax concessions will apply for M&As completed between 17 February 2012 and 31 March 2015 to facilitate corporate restructuring, especially amongst small and medium enterprises. In line with these enhancements, clause 2 of the Bill provides for stamp duty relief to be extended to acquisitions carried out through multiple tiers of entities, and not just through one tier of wholly-owned subsidiaries. I will now explain the remaining six amendments in the Bill. First, clause 3 of the Bill will update the Act to clarify that stamp duty is not chargeable on the conveyance of any type of property other than immovable properties such as land, stocks or shares and interest thereof. Secondly, we will amend the Act to clarify that property that may be the subject of Seller's Stamp Duty (SSD) is to be described by its zoning or its permitted purpose under the Planning Act. The amendment will also provide that the consideration used for computing Seller's Stamp Duty is to be reduced by an amount attributable to the part of the property that may be used for a non-prescribed purpose. This is so that the SSD is levied only on the sale of the part of property used for a prescribed purpose which is liable for the SSD.”
“In my humble opinion, her election as Singapore's ninth Speaker of Parliament is nothing less than an inspired choice of the highest order. Not only does she have the personal qualities to discharge the duties of Speaker with competence and dignity, she embodies the courage and conviction of Singaporeans who rise above their circumstances. In doing so, she bears true testimony to the system of meritocracy that has served us so well. She is a reminder to all of us in the House of our shared purpose, and, that is, to keep improving the lives of our fellow Singaporeans so that each citizen has the opportunity to fulfil his or her highest potential. Please join me in congratulating our new Speaker, Mdm Halimah Yacob.[Applause]”
“Colleagues, in the international labour movement, Mdm Halimah is well-known and well-respected as an advocate of workers' interests. Singapore's unique brand of tripartism has drawn its share of criticisms over the years. However, through the active representation of our union leaders like Mdm Halimah, we have won over our detractors. There is no one at the International Labour Organization (ILO) who does not know her. In recognition of her steadfast commitment to the cause of the ILO, she was elected as the Workers' Vice-Chairperson of the Standards Committee of the International Labour Conference (ILC) and she was elected on four separate occasions, not just once. Significantly, she was elected as the Workers' Spokesperson for two important ILC Committees – on Human Resources Development and Training in 2003 and 2004, and on Domestic Workers, when it was first formed in 2010. Even after Mdm Halimah was appointed Minister of State, she offered to return to the ILC to finish the challenging task she had started in 2010 to have the ILO adopt a new Convention and Recommendation aimed at improving the working conditions of domestic workers worldwide. She was a key contributor to the successful adoption of this new landmark standard in 2011, a standard that was first raised at the ILC in 1948 but never materialised. Given her high standing, I am certain she will be very valuable to the NTUC should it decide to Page: 23 appoint her in an advisory role. My esteemed colleagues, Mdm Halimah deserves all the accolades you have heard or read about her. There can be no doubt in anyone's mind that she is here on her own merit, and not because of her gender, race or connections.”
“When I joined the NTUC in 2005, I learnt of the tireless efforts of many outstanding union leaders and their sterling contributions to tripartism in Singapore. They were the shining stars whom younger unionists like me look up to, and you, Mdm Speaker, were among those who shone the brightest. One of your biggest contributions to the Labour Movement was your expertise in labour legislation, which you built up through your intense focus on championing the rights of workers ever since you joined the NTUC in 1978. Over the years, Mdm Halimah became the "go-to" person for NTUC's affiliated unions on matters of the law. You represented them at the Industrial Arbitration Page: 22 Court on a wide range of cases, including disputes on working hours, annual increments, bonuses and retrenchment benefits. For your legal opponents, it must have been quite daunting to be up against your formidable knowledge of labour law, never mind your reputation for dogged persistence. In a landmark 2009 case, your arguments helped to confirm the important principle that a union's right to engage in collective bargaining is enshrined in the law and cannot be ignored by employers. It was, and still is, no exaggeration to refer to you as "a walking dictionary of labour law". Kakak, you are also widely respected as a champion for women. You started the iconic Back-to-Work Women programme, and spoke out passionately for more support to help women who had taken time out to care for young families to re-enter the workforce. You stood up for single mothers and started the "We Care for U" programme to provide emotional and practical support to them, placing strong emphasis on their children's education. Needless to say, you helped to nurture many women union leaders by guiding and mentoring them.”
“Mr Speaker, may I make my last response. I thank Mr Ang for his suggestion and it is a very good one. [(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. – [Mrs Josephine Teo]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)] Page: 1504”
“Mr Speaker, on the first question, yes, we agree with him. On the second question, the answer is yes as well.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his questions. Firstly, if we look at the rebates that we are offering, and compare them to some other countries that have similar "fee-bate" type of structure, in dollar terms, our rebates are generally more generous towards the motorists. As to the thresholds, because we are introducing the CEVs for the very first time, one consideration that we must always bear in mind is that for the motorists, they must have a reasonable selection of vehicles to choose from that are already imported into our market. And if we look at the range of vehicles that are made available in the market, that also takes time to adjust. So, whilst we are keen to try and reduce the emissions, we have to be realistic. We have to look at the existing buying patterns and that, if we go too far, we could also at the same time be introducing a big barrier for individuals. So, we will take it one step at a time. As the scheme is implemented and we have more information, at the appropriate juncture, we can make adjustments. Page: 1504”
“May I ask the Member if he is referring to the CCTV scheme that we have started on a pilot basis? Yes. Well, it is a pilot and the purpose of a pilot project is to assess how effective it is. If you look at some of the drivers who have received summonses because of this CCTV monitoring, I have received quite a lot of appeals myself. So, I think it is taking some effect, but I also hesitate to promise that in a short time, we will have CCTV cameras all over the island. Speaking as a motorist myself, I think it is quite frightening that the only way we can enforce against poor driving habits and illegal parking is by having CCTVs islandwide. We will have to be quite circumspect in how to make use of this tool. It is a very good and useful productivity device, but let us take a look at the results of this pilot and then decide what to do henceforth. Page: 1503”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Member for his clarifications. On finding appropriate locations to put those private bus bays or drop-off and pick-up points, one of the considerations is how close these are going to be located to various blocks of flats. I can imagine that the difficulty in finding the appropriate sites include some residents who are living closer to those drop-off and pick-up points being quite unwilling to see those drop-off and pick-up points. To them, it may seem as an intrusion into their privacy, and they do not want the vehicles to be stopping so close to where their windows are, for example. The site constraints are actually quite real, and I think, as Members on the ground, we all know it is always good to have a facility or amenity built up, as long as it is not outside my door! That is one challenge that we will have to overcome. The third clarification: I am not sure I heard correctly. Could I ask the Member to repeat it?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, MOT and LTA are always looking at a range of suggestions – and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah has just raised two more. We will certainly consider all of them together. Thank you.”
“These types of inconsiderate behaviour – I am sure Members will agree with me – is not something that we can completely overcome by enforcement alone. We certainly need enforcement, and, where appropriate, we should certainly tighten the penalties or make them stiffer. However, I think it would not nearly be enough. It does call for a change of mindset. It does call for us to be more gracious in the way that we drive and we get about on the roads. I think if we can do that, then the enforcement will be more meaningful. On that note, Sir, I thank all Members for their support for the Bill. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Mr Speaker, Sir, I have two clarifications. I would like to thank the Minister of State for agreeing to take the workshops to task if they do illegal modifications. Can MOT consider empowering LTA to require owners of illegally modified cars to disclose the workshop where they obtained the illegal modifications, so that they can be stopped at source? That is, getting information from the motorists. The second clarification is about the problem along Yishun Avenue 1. I would like to urge the Ministry to look into a permanent solution so that my young residents do not have to cry at midnight and old residents do not have to stare at the ceiling. Page: 1502”
“For instance, bus drivers can play a key role in stopping passengers who are carrying suspicious goods or articles from boarding, but this is not feasible for our driverless trains, for example. And even for driver-operated trains, the driver would not be able to intervene in the same way as a bus driver. So, we will look closer at it. Mr Ang also talked about measures to facilitate movement of buses. Today, we have about 180 km of bus lanes islandwide, of which 25 km are full-day bus lanes. There are also 203 mandatory "give way to buses" locations and we are adding another 150. So, all in all, in good time, about 353 locations will have the mandatory "give way to buses" rule. Enforcement is carried out regularly to ensure compliance by motorists. I assure Mr Ang that the vast majority of the 6,000 photographs that he had sent so far are acted upon by LTA. After all, the LTA helped fund the purchases of these cameras and so it is in its interest to use it for proper enforcement. As for the suggestion to provide private bus pick-up points, I thank Mr Ang for highlighting the bus hubs with high usage by private buses. We will certainly explore the feasibility of providing private bus pick-up points in the vicinity of these bus hubs, as well as step up enforcement in these areas. Sir, before I close, I would just like to point out a common theme that Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Mr Ang Wei Neng brought up. Quite a bit of the difficulties that we face – whether it is illegal modifications, noise pollution, or driver behaviour near to bus hubs – have to do with a lack of consideration for the well-being of other people, other road users, and other public transport users.”
“Existing buying pattern is certainly a reference point. The hope and the expectation are that, certainly, at the margins, vehicle buyers will consider moving from the band which just causes them to be levied a surcharge, into the neutral band, and, for those who are contemplating a purchase of the car that currently falls into the neutral band, to be incentivised by the existence of a rebate and modify their buying behaviour accordingly. We have until the end of 2014 to observe the impact, which is when the scheme will be applicable up to. We plan to monitor, particularly, motorists' purchasing decisions, before deciding whether to go further and, if so, by how much. For the emissions thresholds that qualify for rebates and taxes, we note Dr Janil's comparison with other jurisdictions. Indeed, we are playing catch-up. But when we think about the thresholds in the future, we will also look at advances in technology, as well as the progress in Singapore's overall mitigation efforts on climate change. I should add that we are introducing the CEV scheme for the first time. We believe there will be some impact but are also mindful to give motorists time to adjust before drawing conclusions. Page: 1501 Sir, let me now turn to some points made by Mr Ang Wei Neng. Mr Ang had highlighted the differences in the regulation of commuter behaviour on buses and trains. He shared a very useful observation, in my opinion, which I deeply appreciate. I shall ask the LTA to look into how we can be more consistent in a practical way. This is because there are some differences that will be necessitated by the different operating contexts of buses and rail.”
“I should say that not all types of modifications are illegal, and so workshops that undertake modification works are not necessarily breaking the law. For example, if the vehicle is going to be used off the road at specialised race tracks, it could be legal. Currently, our enforcement regime targets owners of these illegally modified vehicles. One reason is, as Er Dr Lee earlier pointed out, they did not necessarily do the modifications in a workshop in Singapore. They could go elsewhere to get the modification done, in which case, enforcement against the workshop will not be terribly effective. It is better to enforce against the vehicle owners themselves. That is one reason we have targeted the owners rather than the workshops. Nonetheless, we do agree that it is important to get the workshops on board, and so LTA is in the midst of reviewing the enforcement and legislation against workshops. I thank her for her suggestion. For example, closure of workshops may turn out to be an effective deterrent for them. I also take her feedback very positively that it is not just setting up a deterrent. It is useful to work with the association to promote awareness and also to educate the owners on illegal modifications. So, thank you very much for that. I would like to turn now to the CEV scheme. Let me first thank Dr Janil for his support. As he has pointed out, the CEV scheme is a step forward in promoting the use of low emission cars. However, as he has also noted, this involves behavioural change. And so, it is not possible to know in advance the exact scale of the impact of the scheme. The scheme is designed such that the maximum price between a high and low emissions car can be up to $40,000, which is more than the open market value of a typical mid-sized car.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, first, let me thank all the Members who have spoken on this Bill. In particular, I thank Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Mr Gan Thiam Poh for supporting the stiffer penalty regime for illegal modifications. I am glad they agree that the detention of vehicles is needed as a strong deterrent against illegal modifications, given that we have seen increased incidences of violations. Er Dr Lee would like the penalty to be harsher, whereas Mr Gan received feedback that it is too harsh. I think we are taking a calibrated approach. It is not the intention to go after motorists for the sake of it, but we do need to send a message that illegal modifications are not acceptable. With regard to Mr Gan's concern, I should clarify that the intent is not to detain each and every illegally modified vehicle. LTA intends to apply this penalty in cases of blatant violation or where the offender repeatedly infringes the law. I would like to urge vehicle owners who need to make modifications for whatever reasons to check out information on LTA's website as well as the ONE.MOTORING portal which Mr Gan has noted. It contains relevant information on what kinds of modifications are legal and, if the owners are in doubt, they should check directly with the LTA. There is no particular hotline but, through the feedback channels, LTA will be willing to provide guidance. I think the owners should do this before going ahead instead of assuming whatever modifications that they are going to make are going to be alright. That is probably the best way to do it. Page: 1500 Er Dr Lee talked about the importance of looking at enforcement against workshops.”
“Lastly, clause 23 allows LTA to send correspondences by normal post, as well as to accept a mailing address other than the place of residence or place of business of vehicle owners. In summary, this Bill paves the way for the implementation of the CEV scheme and the licensing of bus depot operators. It will strengthen selected powers to ensure compliance with vehicle standards, increase security in the bus system and improve regulatory oversight over public transport operators. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Page: 1491 [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 4.27 pm”
“Currently, section 83 of the Act deems the registered owner of a vehicle liable for specific offences relating to illegal parking, as well as non-payment of ERP charges, unless the owner furnishes the particulars of the driver responsible for those offences to the LTA within a specified timeframe. This prevents vehicle owners from skirting the principal offence by refusing to furnish the particulars of the driver who had committed the offence. Clause 8 of the Bill amends section 83 to provide for more offences to be included, such as driving in bus lanes during operating hours, failing to give way to buses where it is mandatory to do so, and driving an off-peak car without a valid e-day licence. These offences will be listed in a new Third Schedule under clause 24. Finally, Sir, I will briefly state the other amendments in the Bill which are more administrative and operational in nature. Clause 2 will now empower the Minister to gazette non-public roads for application of the Road Traffic Act. Clause 4 allows the Registrar of Vehicles to grant exemptions on vehicle technical requirements in certain circumstances, for example, allowing dark-tinted glass for a vehicle used by a person with medical condition. Clause 6 empowers the Registrar to de-register vehicles that have been reported stolen or missing through commercial breach of trust. Clause 7 allows LTA to create an electronic user account for any person who needs to transact with LTA, without the need to make an application. Clause 10 is amended to make it an offence for the owner of a Public Service Vehicle to permit anyone without a Vocational Licence to drive it, regardless of whether the passenger is being conveyed.”
“To strengthen the overall licensing regime, clause 16 will empower LTA to include licensing conditions, such as maintenance of premises, management of crises, and provision of travel information. Clause 19 will create a new section to allow LTA to issue or approve codes of practice, such as for safety and security, which the licensee must comply with. To impose new security standards on the existing bus fleet, clause 9 allows LTA to modify the conditions of a Public Service Vehicle Licence. Clause 22 will allow authorised public transport officials to check bags and personal belongings on public buses and in bus interchanges, similar to the bag checks conducted in MRT stations today. Sir, the third group of amendments will strengthen the penalty framework for the illegal modification of vehicles. In recent years, the number of illegal modification offences has tripled from about 2,500 in 2009 to 7,300 in 2011. Out of these, offences relating to illegal modification of the exhaust system increased three-fold, from about 80 cases per month in 2010 to 250 cases per month in 2012. Such illegal modifications to a vehicle's exhaust system not only compromise vehicle safety and, therefore, the safety of other road users, but also result in excessive noise emissions and public nuisance. Having received significant feedback from the public, as well as from Members of this House, we have decided to raise the maximum penalty against such offenders. Clause 3 of the Bill will empower the court, upon application by the Public Prosecutor, to make an order for the Registrar of Vehicles to impound illegally modified vehicles for a period not exceeding three months. Page: 1490 Sir, the next amendment provides for LTA to hold vehicle owners liable for more driver-related offences.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." This Bill seeks to make a number of changes to the Road Traffic Act. Sir, let me first deal with the changes in this Bill to facilitate the new Carbon Emissions-Based Vehicle (CEV) scheme which was announced earlier this year. For cars and taxis, the CEV scheme will replace the current Green Vehicle Rebate (GVR) scheme with effect from 1 January 2013. For all new and imported used cars with low carbon emissions, vehicle buyers will receive a rebate of between $5,000 and $20,000 off the Additional Registration Fee. Buyers of high emission car models will have to pay a carbon emissions tax of between $5,000 and $20,000. Page: 1489 By widening the price differential between low and high carbon-emission models, the CEV scheme aims to influence buyers' decision to choose lower emission cars. Clause 5 of the Bill introduces a new section to implement the CEV scheme. The CEV scheme rebate will be implemented on 1 January 2013, whereas the surcharge will be implemented six months later. To give consumers and the industry more time to adjust, the carbon emissions tax will apply only from 1 July 2013. Sir, the second set of changes to the Road Traffic Act will include bus depots in the licensing regime that is currently only applicable to bus interchanges. We will strengthen the overall licensing regime for bus infrastructure and increase the level of security in our public bus system. We announced earlier this year that Government will bear the development and land costs for bus depots and lease these to the bus operators. Therefore, Part VB of the Road Traffic Act is amended to allow LTA to grant licences for the bus operators to operate the depots. This is a matter of proper procedure.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his question. It goes back to the question of water tables. And the water tables for a number of stations – Dhoby Ghaut, Bras Basah, Esplanade, Promenade, Bayfront and Nicoll Highway – are higher as compared to other stations. As a result of which, these stations may be more susceptible to water seepage. So, the water seepage is due to the high water tables. What we are doing is that we are installing water pumps to drain out the water which may accumulate in the cable pits in these stations. We have also required SMRT to regularly monitor the cable pits, to ensure that any accumulated water is removed expeditiously and that they remain relatively dry at most times. So, that is something that is on-going. Now, for the Downtown Line, we are already installing the cables in such a way as to place them in a cable trough to protect them from exposure to water, and to minimise the exposure to water. This is also actually quite useful for the installation works and also for cable inspection. These lessons are very useful and we will continue to draw from them as we implement other lines. Page: 1339”
“Stepping up the frequency of checks, therefore, will be important in helping to provide early indication of cable deterioration. And, so, the frequency of the checks has increased – it used to be once in six months. We have now increased it to once in three months, and we are looking at how we can increase it to once every month. So, that is another important lesson learnt. Now, as to what else we might do, for example, with the rest of the Downtown Line and the Thomson Line, LTA is reviewing whether higher grade cables should be used for future projects, as well as the installation methods, so as to minimise the defects that could be caused during installation. Page: 1339”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Member for his questions. The laboratory tests following the Dakota incident revealed certain manufacturing defects in some batches of the Circle Line (CCL) power cables, as well as damages in some cables sustained during the installation process. So, some of the defects were due to manufacturing defects, and some occurred during the installation process that created these damages. But I would like to assure him that not all the CCL cables are defective. Nevertheless, for greater assurance of service reliability, LTA and SMRT have already embarked on a cable replacement programme to replace all the CCL power cables that are on the tracks. So, that is the first item that we are going to follow up on. Mr Yee has asked about the lessons learnt and what we are going to do about it. I think one important lesson learnt is that during the manufacturing, the factory tests are conducted on cable samples based on quantity in accordance with international standards. So, there may well be cases where the cables with manufacturing defects go undetected and they still clear the factory tests. And, so, there is a possibility that cables may have component defects at the microscopic level which cannot be detected through factory tests or through the site tests even after installation. Such defects can be picked up through laboratory tests which are designed to determine the root cause of the cable failure. Manufacturing defects may, however, cause the cables to deteriorate at a faster rate than expected when coupled with damages to the cables caused during installation and exposure to water in the cable pits. And these may eventually lead to cable faults.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in response to the Member's question on the GST Voucher Fund, it is co-mingled with other funds and managed by the Government on a consolidated basis. What is committed to the Fund is that the Government will give it a fixed annual return. So, from the Fund's perspective, there is actually no risk that is being borne. Page: 1294 [(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. – [Mrs Josephine Teo]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)] Page: 1294”
“The Member's third and final point is that there should be little tolerance for those who seek to defraud public monies. He will be pleased to know that the penalties under the GST Voucher Fund have been benchmarked against those for similar offences, as laid out in the Medical and Elderly Care Endowment Schemes Fund Act and the Community Care Endowment Fund Act. Once again, I thank the Members for their thoughtful comments and their support of the Bill. Sir, I beg to move.”
“In the meantime, I encourage Members to look out for needy individuals and households who may not qualify for the GST Voucher and refer them to other channels of assistance, for example, the Community Development Councils. Schemes, such as ComCare, have some degree of flexibility which can offer help to such families. Page: 1293 Mr Dhinakaran has raised three points which I would like to respond to. The first is that the criteria for defining the intended beneficiaries of this Bill should be spelt out, so that the number of beneficiaries can be estimated more accurately. The second related point is that the Fund size will need to be adjusted in the event of a GST rate increase. I believe the Member's concern is whether the funds set aside will, indeed, be sufficient. This was a point also echoed by Mr Liang. The Members are right to counsel prudence in the way we estimate our financial commitments in the GST Voucher Scheme. Let me assure the Members that the Government takes this commitment seriously. It is the reason we have set aside a very significant $3.6 billion for a start, which is expected to provide for five years of the Scheme. Additional injections to the Fund will be made as and when the Budget allows. And this must, of course, be predicated upon the continued health of our public finances. Mr Dhinakaran suggests that the size of the Fund in relation to the GST rate be enshrined in the law. This is a very interesting suggestion which merits further consideration. To Mr Dhinakaran's question, monies in the GST Voucher Fund will be invested with the Government which will pay a fixed return to the Fund annually. This is the same for other funds, such as the National Research Fund.”
“Today, we have used a combination of income and property Annual Value as the best available proxies of financial strength. The Annual Value of $20,000 means that 80% of homes in Singapore are covered, including some private property. Our existing criteria already benefit one in two adult citizens and eight in 10 citizen-households. About 85% of all elderly Singaporeans can also expect to receive the GST Voucher – Medisave each year. Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked if Singaporeans aged 62 to 65 have been successful in securing re-employment, and if they earn enough to cope with the cost of living. This is a valid and important question which would be more appropriately addressed by the Minister for Manpower. Mr Liang asked if the time period between the GST Voucher payment and the income assessment period can be shortened. I would like to explain that the eligibility criteria aim to be practical. Using this year as an example, for Singaporeans to receive their GST Voucher by August, we must determine the payout based on the latest available Assessable Income, which is for Year of Assessment 2011 based on income earned in 2010. If we were to use income earned in 2011, it would mean delaying payouts until December, after all the tax assessments have been completed. Nonetheless, Singaporeans facing extenuating circumstances can write in to the Ministry of Finance. We will take into account their more recent income situations and consider their applications on a case-by-case basis. We will also continue to explore avenues to refine the eligibility criteria to target those who will benefit most from the GST Voucher, and we will take into account changes in property Annual Values and incomes in our reviews.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Members Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Mr R Dhinakaran for their support of the GST Voucher Fund Bill. Mr Dhinakaran highlighted how the GST Voucher Scheme can help lower-income Singaporeans. Indeed, the GST Voucher − Cash and Medisave – has benefited close to 1.4 million Singaporeans while the GST Voucher − U-Save has benefited about 800,000 HDB households. One such family is that of Mdm Noorashikin, a homemaker living with her husband and two school-going children in a 4-room HDB flat. The family estimates that they spend about $1,300 each month on daily necessities which means that they pay about $85 in GST. In August this year, Mdm Noorashikin's family received a total of $500 in GST Voucher – Cash. This in addition to the $220 in GST Voucher U-Save that they will receive annually. Their total GST Voucher of $720 means that about 70 cents of every dollar they paid in GST will be covered. With more resources in hand, the family was able to celebrate Hari Raya Puasa comfortably and put aside a little something for the children's education. Page: 1292 The GST Voucher is also designed to help retiree households with more modest assets. For example, a retiree household living in a 3-room flat is likely to pay less GST than the amount of GST Voucher they receive this year. Mr Liang Eng Hwa has raised certain scenarios under which retirees may not be able to benefit from the GST Voucher. This is because some of them live in homes with Annual Values above $20,000, or live in homes which have appreciated over time to above $20,000. However, that does not translate into income for the retirees. The eligibility criteria for the GST Voucher are set to target those who need it most.”
“Part II of the Bill sets out the purposes for which monies in the GST Voucher Fund may be used. Part III of the Bill places the general responsibility for the management and administration of the Fund on the Minister for Finance and provides for the presentation of annual financial statements and Auditor's report to Parliament. Parts IV and V of the Bill contain general provisions, including regulation-making, for carrying out the purposes and provisions of the GST Voucher Fund Bill, and the proper conduct of officers exercising functions under the Bill. Page: 1288 Sir, the GST Voucher Scheme is an important feature of our system of taxes and benefits. This system ensures overall progressivity, allowing lower-income Singaporeans to pay considerably lower taxes while receiving significantly more benefits than higher-income citizens. The Government is also committed to making the GST Voucher a permanent feature of our fiscal system. By setting up the GST Voucher Fund, we provide greater certainty of payments which will otherwise be subject to budget availability, depending on economic conditions and other competing priorities in any year. The Government intends to make appropriate injections into the Fund to carry on financing this permanent GST Voucher Scheme. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 6.04 pm”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." In his Budget Statement 2012, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance Tharman Shanmugaratnam announced the permanent GST Voucher Scheme. The Scheme helps lower-income Singaporeans offset the GST they pay on their daily expenses. Since the GST was introduced in 1994, the Government has cushioned its impact by providing various rebates to households. Over the last five years, for instance, households in the bottom 20% would have received an average of about $340 per household member, or about $1,300 for a family of four, in temporary GST offsets per year. For a family that spent about $1,500 each month on daily necessities, this would have offset all of their GST expenses. Among median income households, the average amount is smaller, at about $230 per household member, which would have helped to partially offset their annual GST bills as well. In this year's Budget, we introduced the GST Voucher to give certainty to lower-income Singaporeans that they will get continued help to cope with their GST expenses. The Government will also establish a Goods and Services Tax Voucher Fund from which payouts will be made in the coming years. We are setting aside $3.6 billion as part of Budget 2012 and expect this amount to be sufficient to finance the first five years of the GST Voucher Scheme. About $680 million will be drawn down for the GST Voucher payments made in Fiscal Year 2012. The Government will inject the remaining monies, currently estimated at $2.95 billion, into the Fund upon its establishment. This Bill provides for the establishment of the Fund and its administration. Sir, I shall now highlight the main features of the Bill.”
“Does the Member mean the allowance that they received during their reservist training? Well, in fact, all allowances paid to NSmen form part of their income. Whilst they are doing their National Service, very often, these young men will not meet the income threshold for income tax liability. If the Member is talking about men who are doing their reservist training, I think their allowances are not a very large amount but I should qualify that, and I would check and get back to the Member separately. [(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. − [Mrs Josephine Teo]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)] Page: 1287”
“Let me assure Ms Low that we will monitor the expenditure trends very closely and adjust the PIC parameters to meet the needs of SMEs. Page: 1286 Mr Speaker, I turn briefly to Mrs Lina Chiam's comments. I think she has raised the question of why the working mother child relief is differentiated according to the birth order of the child even after the child passes away. I should clarify with her that this amendment that we are making in the Income Tax (Amendment) Bill this time round is to equalise the treatment for women whose children have unfortunately passed away in the basis year. So, the treatment in terms of the working mother child relief will no longer depend on whether the child passed away or is still around, and that was the purpose of the change. The Member has also asked whether this relief could be made available to divorced men and fathers. Thank you very much for raising this as a suggestion. It is right now the working mother child relief, so as it stands right now, I think men cannot be mothers. So, we will take a look at the intent of the Member's proposal and when there is an opportunity to review, we will take a look at it. On the Member's point about National Service, I did not catch it in full but I think the Member meant to say whether tax reliefs can be provided to NSmen. That is precisely what we were trying to do. For the National Service recognition award, which is quite significant, we have made it such that it would be exempted from tax, and that is what this amendment seeks to do. Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Members again for their comments and suggestions.”
“However, while the PIC has a cap of $100,000 expenses for cash conversion, there is no cap in Australia. So, I understand Ms Low's concern about whether this cap constrains our SMEs in their R&D efforts. I would like to assure her that, in fact, based on the latest claims that have been submitted, most SMEs have not exceeded the $100,000 expenditure cap on all types of activities and not just R&D. In other words, the cap is not a constraint in most cases. Every country decides on its tax policy to meet its own objectives and, therefore, we can see that the Australian R&D cash refund is targeted at smaller businesses, specifically those with R&D spending. Singapore's PIC cash conversion, on the other hand, aims to help all SMEs that invest in productivity and innovation, of which R&D is just one avenue. Ms Low further suggested that we consider raising the $10,000 ceiling on in-house training so as to spur more training by the SMEs. She cited that due to their size and operations, SMEs face many constraints in releasing their staff for training. We agree that this is something that is very important and we have to encourage as many SMEs as possible to take training seriously and as a means for uplifting the quality of their workforce. But I should clarify that the expense ceiling of $10,000 is for in-house training that is not certified by WDA or ITE. Training expenditure in excess of the $10,000 cap can still qualify for PIC if the in-house training courses are certified by WDA or ITE, and there are quite a large number of such courses available. Based on the Year of Assessment 2011, PIC claims for training, SMEs incurred an average of $9,000 for in-house training. Therefore, for the time being, a $10,000 threshold is adequate.”
“This includes the Baby Bonus, infant care and childcare subsidies. The Baby Bonus, for example, is the same amount, regardless of the work status of the mother. The childcare subsidies are differentiated, but for stay-at-home mothers they amount to $1,800 a year if they send their children to childcare centres. So, on a total package basis, such help extended to families with stay-at-home mothers is much larger than the tax benefit of spouse relief. Nonetheless, we will bear in mind Ms Low's point on spouse relief in future reviews. Page: 1285 Ms Low has brought up the example of how the Australians support research and development (R&D). For the benefit of the Members of the House who are perhaps less familiar with how the Australian system works, companies with turnover of less than $20 million can enjoy a 150% tax deduction on an unlimited amount of R&D spending. They can also get a 45% refundable tax credit, which is simply a cash conversion, because the corporate tax rate in Australia is 30%. For companies with more than $20 million in turnover, they can enjoy a 133% tax deduction on R&D spending, but there is no cash conversion option for this group. In comparison, the tax deduction for Singapore companies can be up to 400% for the first $400,000 expenditure, regardless of the company's size. And R&D spending above $400,000 also qualifies for a 150% tax deduction. In other words, overall, Singapore's tax deduction for R&D spending is actually more generous, especially for smaller businesses. In terms of cash conversion, the PIC offers a higher conversion rate of 60 cents for every dollar of R&D expenses, whereas Australia offers 45 cents for companies with less than $20 million in turnover.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, first, let me thank both Ms Low and Mrs Chiam for supporting the Bill. I should first highlight that in response to Ms Low's questions on spouse relief, the subject actually is not under review in this round of amendment but, nevertheless, I will respond briefly to her. I fully agree with her that stay-at-home mothers – actually stay-at-home spouses in general – make very important contributions to the family, enabling the working spouse to continue doing so with peace of mind. With regard to the slide which Ms Low has shown, I thought it would be useful just to make a small point on the example that she raised. She has talked about a couple, one of whom stops working and then the person who remains working is able to earn the same income that the two of them used to earn together. And as a result, because the household income is unchanged – the combined income is unchanged – more taxes are being paid. I think they are actually not quite comparable simply because it is more likely that there is going to be a loss of total income in any case which even a reduced tax bill does not make up for. This reduced tax bill, especially even if we were to make the reliefs much higher, would not make up for the loss of income. I think we should recognise that. Of the group of lower to middle-income families which Ms Low, in fact, said was trying to benefit through any increase of such reliefs, they would benefit less compared to higher-income families. And that is why the Government does not look at tax reliefs alone but takes a holistic approach to supporting families, and there are several substantive forms of assistance to families that are given, whether the mothers are in the workforce or at home.”
“Second, with effect from 1 January 2011, eligible entities have been able to prepare their financial accounts using the Singapore Financial Reporting Standards (SFRS) for Small Entities. MOF and IRAS have assessed that the resultant change in accounting treatment does not require changes to existing tax rules except for financial instruments. We propose amending the Income Tax Act to allow small entities the option of aligning the tax treatment to the SFRS for Small Entities. This is provided for under Clause 25. Third, the CPF Minimum Sum Topping-Up Scheme has been enhanced to extend tax deductions on cash top-ups made to the CPF Special or Retirement account of parents-in-law and grandparents-in-law. These changes will take effect from 1 January 2013. Clause 35 provides for this. The remaining legislative changes arising from our periodic review of the income tax system are either technical in nature or relate to improvements in tax administration. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 5.36 pm”
“These enhancements are particularly helpful to small businesses in the retail and Food and Beverage sectors which number some 20,000. Further enhancements include the doubling of the existing cumulative expenditure cap to $300,000 over three years. Clauses 18 and 31 provide for these changes. Page: 1280 Fourth, the new tax provisions will give businesses certainty on the non-taxation of gains on disposal of qualifying equity investments. This will help facilitate corporate restructuring, minimise compliance costs and enhance Singapore's attractiveness as a place for business. This is provided for in clauses 11 and 51. Fifth, the earned income relief and handicapped earned income relief will be doubled for older workers aged 55 years and above, to support and encourage them to stay employed. This is provided for in clause 35. Sir, I shall now deal with the other tax changes covered in this Bill that arise from our ongoing review of the Income Tax Act. Let me highlight three of these changes. First, we will exempt Workfare payments from income tax. Workfare payments are currently taxable even though most recipients would not need to pay income tax, given that their wages fall below the threshold for liability for income tax. This change has been introduced to provide certainty of non-taxation. The exemption will apply retrospectively from Year of Assessment 2006 when Workfare was first introduced. This is consistent with Workfare's policy objectives, which are to supplement the wages of older low-wage workers, and encourage them to find work or continue working. Clause 3 provides for this.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Income Tax (Amendment) Bill 2012 covers both the income tax changes announced in the 2012 Budget Statement and other changes arising from the regular review of our income tax system. The draft of the Bill was released for public consultation from 24 July to 13 August this year. MOF has revised the Bill to incorporate the suggestions accepted for implementation. Sir, most of the tax changes in this Bill have already been debated in this House following their announcement in the 2012 Budget Statement. Let me highlight the key changes. First, the Productivity and Innovation Credit (PIC) Scheme has been enhanced with special consideration to the needs of small businesses. The cash reimbursement for up to $100,000 of PIC expenditure was doubled from 30% to 60%. We are allowing the cash payout to be paid in a more timely manner, on a quarterly rather than yearly basis. To help more SMEs qualify for training support, we are also removing the requirement for certification by the Workforce Development Agency and Institute of Technical Education for in-house training which cost up to $10,000 per Year of Assessment (YA). Clauses 14, 15, 19, 21, 22, 23, 32 and 51 of the Bill provide for these changes. Second, a one-off SME cash grant of up to $5,000 has been provided. This grant gives the SME-recipients a very high degree of flexibility to invest in areas that are most helpful to their coping with the changing business environment. This is provided for in clause 47. Third, the Renovation and Refurbishment Deduction Scheme has been made a permanent feature of our income tax code.”
“– [Mrs Josephine Teo]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)] Page: 620”
“So based on this industry feedback, we have decided to leverage on the LBMA accreditation for GST exemption for a start, but we will be very happy to discuss with the Singapore Bullion Market Association what else they see as potential for creating conditions for growth of these industries. The Member has called for the introduction of certain incentives which could uplift the entire local jewellery manufacturing and retail scene. The Government is committed to helping our local SMEs, including jewellery manufacturers and retailers, and has put in place many schemes primarily through SPRING Singapore. Firms, the local jewellery manufacturing and retail sector, are very welcome to take advantage of them as many have already done so. Mr Teo has referred to the vibrant jewellery scene in Hong Kong which does not have a GST scheme. In Singapore, we have a broad-based GST system with few exemptions. Nonetheless, our retail scene remains competitive and attractive to international retailers. As an example, according to Global Blue, a world leader in tax refund services, Singapore is now the top destination in the world for Chinese tourists to shop for luxury watches and jewellery, beating even Switzerland, a country known for its traditional stronghold in upmarket timepieces. Page: 620 I would like to assure Mr Teo that the Government will continue to work with the industry associations, such as the Singapore Retailers Association and the Singapore Bullion Market Association, to grow their respective industries. [(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 Speaker, Sir, I thank the hon Member Mr Teo Siong Seng for his support of the GST (Amendment) Bill. As Mr Teo has noted, the Bill will boost efforts to attract refiners and gold traders to set up factories and offices in Singapore. Mr Teo has suggested that an equivalent of the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) be set up. It turns out that there is already a Singapore Bullion Market Association which we understand has been inactive for some time. And, in fact, with the introduction of GST exemption for investment-grade gold, the major industry players have decided to come together as a body for the gold industry to revive the Association. According to the Association, informal consultations were held in March this year and an Executive Committee was formed in April. The Government welcomes the opportunity to work with the Association to promote growth of gold-related industries. As for the London Bullion Market Association, I would like to share with Members that it was formerly incorporated in 1987 in close consultation with the Bank of England. Accreditation, however, may have started as early as 1934, which was when the LBMA's predecessor, the London Gold Market, compiled its earliest list of approved refiners. This is perhaps the reason why the LBMA good delivery lists are widely recognised by the industry as the de facto assurance of bullion bar quality and determine whether the bullion bars can be capable of being traded on the international market, particularly to be readily accepted for delivery on many international commodities exchanges, such as the Singapore Mercantile Exchange and the New York Commodities Exchange. On the other hand, non-LBMA gold bars may be traded internationally but are not accepted for delivery on commodities exchanges.”