Usha Chandradas
Singapore
“A study could also directly engage arts workers, ensuring that any proposed guidelines, if they are issued, will reflect real market conditions and concerns. Ultimately, Madam, salary transparency is not about Government interference or market distortion.”
“This is promising and I have four questions on the Ministry’s future plans. Firstly, has the Ministry performed any assessments on how music festivals can have an impact on tourism and the economy and, if so, what have the results of those studies been?”
“Sir, I would like to seek an update from the Ministry on Singapore's position with regard to three international conventions, namely the Hague Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (Hague Judgments Convention), the Convention providing a Uniform Law on the Form of…”
“If it succeeds, it can provide arts workers with stability, opportunities and a strong foundation for long-term careers, one that is driven by genuine consumer interest and demand. Sir, I hope the Government can consider taking these suggestions on board and, with that, I support the Budget.”
“I thank the Prime Minister for his assurance that he will consider my suggestions for the visual arts sector. I also raised a number of questions about how the Culture Pass is going to be administered. Could I ask if the Prime Minister has a response to those questions?”
“I think, if the Minister will recall, I referred to the example of an artist. The example that I talked about was the artist, Lee Wen, in his performance and his works, "The Journey of the Yellow Man". So, with this work, he is basically addressing racial stereotypes and it is with a view to prompting audiences to think about the issues.”
The complete record
Every one of 167 lines we hold for Usha Chandradas, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 4.
“In this regard, I would like to urge the Government to ensure that our new UAS as well as its member institutions are able to enjoy the same fundraising benefits as our other young universities in the country. Next, Mr Speaker, I would like to address how we can do more to align the development of our arts sector with Singapore's larger economic goals and, in particular, with respect to our tax policies. The first area I would like to highlight is in connection with the Goods and Services Tax (GST). Earlier this month, the hon Member Mr Sitoh Yih Pin talked about the GST "cow" being milked as a political tool, and I can assure this House that I have no intention of doing that today. All I would like to do is highlight that, in Singapore, we do not include the supply of artworks under the Fourth Schedule of the GST Act, which exempts certain transactions for the purposes of GST. Hong Kong, by comparison, which is major art market in the region, does not have a regime of goods and services or value-added taxes. The result then is that it is often more cost-effective for art dealers to transact higher-value sales through Hong Kong than in Singapore. In Singapore, local sales attract an additional GST charge. I have been told, anecdotally, that this has been a long-standing issue for art gallerists in the visual arts space, as it makes large art deals hard to conclude in Singapore. A case can be made for the removal of GST in these instances; and it would not be the first time that this House and this Government would have granted such a thing. The provision of financial services, sales of residential properties and, more recently, supplies of digital payment tokens, are just some examples of transactions that are presently exempt from GST.”
“Despite being an Institution of Public Character, NAFA does not benefit from the typical matched funding support provided by the Ministry of Education (MOE) to Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs), and these include Institutes of Technical Education (ITE), polytechnics and autonomous universities. Young autonomous universities, like the Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT) and Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD), are able to receive Government matching on public donations in ratios that can go well beyond simple dollar-for-dollar amounts. NAFA, being a private institution under UAS, does not enjoy the same privileges. Instead, NAFA seeks dollar-for-dollar matching assistance for donations through the Cultural Matching Fund (CMF) and this is something that is overseen by the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY). Since 2022, CMF rules have become much more restrictive. Amongst other conditions, CMF matching grants above the first S$300,000 per application window are now assessed on a project-by-project basis. What this means is that, in the last few years, NAFA has not been able to benefit fully from direct donation matching under CMF. I also understand that this situation creates a disincentive for private donors to donate to the institution. And we can see why. It is because their donations are likely to have a bigger overall impact, if applied to, say, autonomous universities instead, where private donations will be matched in higher ratios by the Government. The issue here is a simple one: without good and well-funded arts schools, we will not be able to produce good artists and cultural producers who are the very backbone of our creative economy.”
“With my own personal experience serving as a volunteer with the Pro Bono SG office, I can share that Pro Bono SG has achieved some success with its low-bono initiatives under its Family Justice Support Scheme. Here, legal representation at discounted rates is available for needy family law litigants who are not eligible for assistance from the Legal Aid Bureau. The benefits of this scheme are clear – subsidised legal assistance is given based on need. This creates greater access to justice but, at the same time, there is an element of sustainability, in that service providers are not left out-of-pocket either. I would like to ask the Government to consider building a similar pool or repository of "low-bono" service providers for creatives who are in the early stages of setting up their freelance activities, charities or small businesses. A scheme like this could help arts and cultural workers and arts businesses to be "match-made" with key service providers, such as lawyers, accountants, technology experts, human resources (HR) professionals, marketers and more. Anyone who is willing and able to support the arts through the rendering of discounted services should be assisted with being given access to the entities that actually need this help. Finally, we should not forget about financial aid for our tertiary institutions which educate artists and cultural producers. These need to be supported as well, so that our arts institutions are well-equipped with high-quality staff and programmes. One example I would like to highlight today is the challenge that is presently being faced by the Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts (NAFA). NAFA is one of the founding members of the newly launched University of the Arts Singapore (UAS).”
“Considering the creative economy within this framework, which takes into account both the broader social impact of the arts as well its bread-and-butter concerns, I would like to highlight four areas in which more support can be rendered to assist artists and art entities. First, more direct support can be put in place to assist creative workers, businesses and universities. This is a topic of pressing importance in the arts community. Just this past weekend, I attended a standing-room only panel discussion at 7879 Gallery & Clayworks. This is a space where many arts workers came together to discuss how to build sustainable art careers. The Government, undoubtedly, has a very important role to play as a facilitator of assistance and networking space for creative businesses in the arts. Our Arts Resource Hub and grant framework under NAC are excellent initiatives, but much more can be done. The Government may wish to consider the case study of Creative UK. This is an independent network for the United Kingdom's (UK) Creative Industries, which is partly funded by The National Lottery. It has set up a Creative Growth Finance fund, which provides scale-up financing for promising for-profit creative businesses in the country. It also works to connect potential investors with creative businesses, while educating arts entities to provide them with the necessary knowledge for securing various forms of investment – and these range from equity to debt and grants. It would be very helpful to have a similar centralised networking portal in Singapore for arts entities in order to help such entities gain access to potential investors. Our local context also offers signposts on how affordable professional services may be rendered to suitable arts businesses and charities.”
“" The term "creative economy" then goes on to appear more than 20 times in the body of the Arts Plan. While there is no single definition of the "creative economy", the Arts Plan refers to the United Nations Committee on Trade and Development, which defines the creative economy as the intersection of human creativity and technology or products that have economic value. The Plan then elaborates that, "This includes a wide variety of sectors, such as architecture, design, fashion, film, music, performing arts and television." In Singapore, a tremendous amount of Government funding has been poured into the arts community. From 2013 to 2021, a total of approximately $3.16 billion had been provided to the sector as a whole. Under Singapore's law, charitable purposes, in respect of which charities may be constituted, include the advancement of the arts and heritage. So, while there are many for-profit arts businesses in the space, our legislative framework for charities and the practices of the Government lend support to the view that arts offerings are also public goods, which fulfill an important social aim. And this is an important point. Our creative economy relies both on private enterprise and public support. As Minister Edwin Tong has said in his foreword to the Arts Plan, the arts have an important role in forging a connected society. He said, in particular, "Our social fabric is changing…[and] the arts have the power to unite our communities and anchor us to our core Singaporean identity." This very important role of the arts identified by the Minister is something I absolutely agree with and cannot emphasise more.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for the opportunity to address the House today on Singapore's creative economy. Before I start, I would like to declare my interest as both an art historian and the owner of a digital art magazine. I would like to start my speech with a trip back in time, specifically, let us travel back to the year 1995. In that year, a man boldly walked up to the then-President of Singapore, Mr Ong Teng Cheong, at a major art event. That man spoke to the President briefly, the President nodded and the man proceeded to put on a jacket. That jacket had bright gold lettering on the back of it and that man was none other than Mr Tang Da Wu, one of Singapore's most celebrated artists, and the gold lettering on his jacket read, "Don’t Give Money to the Arts." Once the jacket was on, Tang passed the President a handwritten note which also said, "I am an artist. I am important." This performance has entered into the annals of Singapore's art history. As with many pieces of performance art, it is dripping with irony and wit. The pointed message on the jacket about funding, contrasts with the genuine plea in the note that the artist is, in fact, important. It is a concern that was relevant in 1995 and continues to be relevant now. This jacket now hangs in the National Gallery across the road and is part of Singapore's national art collection. This artwork is perhaps one that immediately comes to mind – at least amongst Singapore art historians – when one thinks about the creative economy. The creative economy was one of the key pillars in the latest National Arts Council (NAC) Arts Plan, which was issued in September this year. In it, Minister Edwin Tong referred to a desire to "unlock Singapore's creative economy and to create good jobs.”
“Particularly in the arts, the PTIS can potentially provide a new source of funding for local charities and, in my view, this can create some much-needed diversity in terms of funding sources. This diversity is important because an over-reliance on Government funding and subsidies in the arts is neither sustainable in the long term, nor is it desirable in terms of the substance and quality of artistic production. Secondly, foreign family offices setting up shop in Singapore bring with them not only sources of funding but also different ways of looking at the world. Particularly, in the context of arts charities, this could be useful in providing new perspectives on art making within our local creative community. While we certainly cannot force philanthropic organisations to donate their money locally if they do not wish to do so, it is my hope that the Government will help to ensure that local charities and IPCs are well poised to avail themselves of the new sources of philanthropic funding in Singapore which will benefit from this new scheme. I hope that when administering the PTIS, local charitable entities are brought to the attention of approved donors as well. The rising tide of foreign philanthropy in Singapore should result in all charitable boats being lifted to greater heights. Notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“From the National Arts Council's Arts Philanthropy Corporate Giving Research findings, which surveyed 470 respondents last year, companies agreed that corporate giving to the arts is important to build a vibrant community and a connected society. Regardless of this awareness, businesses were still not motivated to give to the arts sector, possibly because such benefits were not deemed to be as direct from a business perspective. The research report concludes that more can be done to better articulate how a vibrant community underpinned by the arts can be good for businesses. The statistics in Singapore seem to bear this out. In the 2021 report by the Commissioner of Charities, arts and heritage charities received only 5.8% of all annual receipts in the charities sector. In contrast, charities in the education and social welfare sector accounted for almost two-thirds of the total receipts received in FY2020. DECK is an arts centre for photography and registered IPC in Singapore. It is presently fundraising to build a permanent art centre for photography and amongst the visual art community, it is well known as being a big supporter of both emerging and established artistic talent. Gwen Lee, who is the co-founder and director of DECK, once told me that fundraising for her charity is like carrying the weight of the Himalayas on her shoulders all the time. There is little respite and there is constant worry about how staff will be paid and how they will meet their compliance obligations. DECK is just one example, of course, from the arts. This is a similar concern faced by many local charities which often operate with lean teams and on stretched budgets.”
“These fund managers may not be entities that the approved donors actually have any control over, and so, I would like to clarify if any steps are being taken to ensure that such donors are not unfairly prejudiced in the event that the authorities decide to unilaterally impose "conditions subsequent" on their fund managers. Secondly, I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State if steps are being taken to ensure that local charities and Institutions of Public Character (IPCs) are not excluded from the benefits of the PTIS. I acknowledge that the proposed amendments today extend the application of the 250% tax deduction on donations to local IPCs all the way to 2026, which is a very welcome move. According to the MAS website, the PTIS will also require that qualifying Single Family Offices (SFOs) should increase their headcounts, and this includes the hiring of philanthropy professionals. It has also been announced that donations should be made through certain local qualifying intermediaries. Looking at these measures in totality, it appears that there is a push towards helping local charities to develop their expertise in supporting overseas charitable giving and towards growing philanthropic capabilities in Singapore. That being said, it is also clear that the PTIS is primarily intended to allow family offices to obtain tax advantages in respect of their overseas giving. What then could result is a "race" for donations, whether perceived or real, with local charities feeling as though they have a new source of competition for funding. Charities in Singapore do not always have an easy time with fundraising. I would like to highlight the specific example of arts-based charities.”
“I would therefore like to ask if the Senior Minister of State can clarify the extent to which more detailed guidance and examples will be provided in order to assist taxpayers in their interpretation of this new law. I understand that tax practitioners have written to the authorities to seek clarifications on these technical points and more, and I hope that more detailed guidance will follow. While I fully agree that we should indicate our strong commitment to evolving international tax norms, we should balance this commitment with the need to provide clarity to businesses that wish to engage in or with Singapore. The next provision I would like to address in the Income Tax Amendment Bill is the new section 37AA, which introduces the PTIS for family offices. The PTIS is being introduced in order to strengthen Singapore's position as a regional philanthropy hub. It is also put in place to encourage family offices to anchor their giving operations in Singapore. On this provision, I have two clarifications for the Senior Minister of State. Firstly, the enhanced deduction under the new section 37AA is subject to subsection (9) – to any "condition precedent or condition subsequent" that the Minister or an authorised body may impose on the fund manager managing the funds of the incentivised vehicles concerned. Would the Senior Minister of State be able to clarify what is intended by this provision and what kinds of conditions are envisioned? Subsection (10) provides for a clawback of the tax deduction granted if fund managers of incentivised funds fail to adhere to conditions which are imposed later in time.”
“Reference is made here to a pure equity-holding entity having "adequate human resources and premises in Singapore". However, it is not clear whether this assessment will be an objective test adopted by the authorities or a subjective one, which will be based on what the taxpayer fairly represents in the context of its operations. There are also doubts as to how the term "direct and effective control" will be interpreted. This was a requirement added only after the public consultation process. Some aspects of it can be explained further. For example, it is not clear how it will be applied in the context of a fund entity which has outsourced discretionary management to a fund manager in Singapore. Professional commentators have further noted that it would be useful to set up a system of expedited advance rulings on the determination of "economic substance" in order to assist taxpayers and it is not immediately apparent from the legislation if such a system will be made available. Additionally, it is also unclear as to how section 10L will interact with the present administrative concessions on the operation of section 10(25) and the deemed remittance of foreign-sourced income. One particular example is the present concessionary treatment for foreign businesses which are not operating in or from Singapore. They are able to remit their foreign income to Singapore without being taxed on such income. I am given to understand that this concession is in place to begin with to encourage the use of Singapore's banking systems and facilities. To summarise, there are some aspects of section 10L which remain unclear.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this Bill but I would like to seek some clarifications from Senior Minister of State Chee on two particular provisions. The present amendments introduce the new section 10L of the Income Tax Act, which brings to tax gains from the sale of foreign assets by entities that are part of a multinational group. These changes seek to align our tax rules with that set out in the EU Code of Conduct Group (COCG) guidance. While there are exceptions carved out in the new section 10L, the amendment has the broad effect of deeming as "income" in nature, gains which prior to this amendment may have been characterised as capital gains. It is quite a dramatic change in Singapore's income tax landscape and I would like to seek the following clarifications from the Senior Minister of State. First, what are the reasons for enacting section 10L at this time? It has been announced that more comprehensive international tax-related amendments concerning Pillar 2 of the BEPS initiative will only be implemented from 2025. Would the Minister be able to contexualise Singapore's wider roadmap towards compliance with these new international tax norms? My second clarification has to do with the interpretation of the new section 10L. I note that in the response to the public consultation on the Bill, the MOF has indicated that the IRAS will provide further guidance on the concept of "economic substance" through an e-tax guide to be issued. This is expected to provide more detailed examples for certain specific sectors. However, there are some aspects of section 10L which can be clarified further and, in particular, those relating to the definition of an "excluded entity" at section 10L(16).”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have two clarifications for the Minister of State Mr Alvin Tan. I thank him, first of all, for addressing my PQ relating to the tax-related financial sector incentives. The Minister of State has mentioned that one accused person involved in the money laundering incident has been linked to a tax-incentivised SFO, but upon application for that tax incentive, nothing suspicious had surfaced. So, I would like to clarify if the entity concerned is still enjoying the tax incentive that it has been granted, and if so, whether there are any plans underway to revoke the grant of that tax incentive? I would also like to clarify that my original PQ related to the general grant of incentives to funds under sections 13D, 13O and 13U of the Income Tax Act and so not just incentives granted to SFOs. So, can the Minister of State confirm that within this wider scope of the question, that it is still the case that only one accused person has been linked to a tax-incentivised entity?”
“These changes will render much-needed support to workers, in recognition of the many challenges of family life. It is my fervent hope the Government continues this push towards inclusiveness and the caregiving needs of our country as a whole and as societal norms continue to grow and evolve over time.”
“While flexible working arrangements go some way towards alleviating caregiver stress, they also fundamentally assume that eldercare duties are not serious or taxing enough to require dedicated days off from work. Flexible work arrangements also do not necessarily assist self-employed persons. Certain communities, for example, the arts community, have large percentages of its members in self-employed roles. In the arts, according to the latest Singapore Arts Plan, at least one-third of the workforce operates on a self-employed basis. Anecdotally, I have heard from members of the arts community that eldercare duties can be not only isolating but a source of extreme financial stress while juggling the demands of freelance jobs that do not offer leave provisions. I know that this is not the subject of the Bill today, but I do urge the Government to consider paid eldercare leave entitlements for all and especially for the self-employed, in a similar manner to what is presently being proposed for paternity leave. Finally, workplaces must also do their part to reassure staff that although greater amounts of paternity leave are now being contemplated, it is not the case that childless employees, who may well be facing other stresses, will simply be left to bear the brunt of work that has been left behind and with no ostensible reward. Feelings like these, if left to simmer and brew, will only result in greater workplace tension and resentment, and these may well reverse any positive steps taken towards the ending of maternity discrimination. Sir, notwithstanding my comments today, I stand in support of this Bill. The changes proposed today are very welcome ones towards "ungendering" workplaces.”
“Whether it is a question of perhaps, eventually equalising maternity and paternity leave entitlements, or perhaps giving recognition to the needs of different kinds of family units, it is my hope that the Government continues to keep pace with the times and that it will display the same fortitude in future policy reform that it has demonstrated today with these proposed amendments. With the present expansion of paternity leave, it is also important to bear in mind that pressing family needs may well go beyond the care of children and newborns. We are very concerned in Singapore about our falling fertility rates, but let us also not forget that we have a rapidly ageing population. By 2030, almost one in four Singaporeans will be over the age of 65. While there is much discourse about empowering our elders to continue learning, working and remaining productive for as long as possible, it remains critical that we acknowledge and find solutions towards supporting those who are no longer able to work. Frail elders are more likely to suffer from chronic health issues and are thus more likely to require full-time caregiving. As our population ages, more seniors will need care and there will accordingly be more caregivers who will need support. Based on the Ministry of Manpower (MOM)'s 2022 labour force survey, about 90,300 residents outside the labour force cited caregiving responsibilities as the main reason for not working, and 12,400 of these caregivers were looking after aged, ill or disabled parents. While we enhance leave entitlements for the care of newborns, better support for caregivers of the elderly remains just as important an area for policy-makers to look into.”
“Mr Speaker, I rise in support of this Bill. But I have some comments to make that I hope the Government will take into consideration. The proposed extension to paternity leave from two weeks to four weeks in the Child Development Co-Savings Act marks an important milestone in Singapore’s commitment to gender equality. It aims to reset traditional perceptions that child rearing should be the sole responsibility of mothers. In some ways, these legislative changes are in step with what is already happening in multinational enterprises, in recognition of how the world is changing. In fact, Minister of State Sun Xueling mentioned the example of Telstra as a business that has already started to adopt expansive family friendly policies. Standard Chartered Bank is another example that I would like to cite. Employees at Standard Chartered Bank will now get a minimum of 20 weeks of paid parental leave "irrespective of gender", or how a child comes to permanently join an employee’s family. HSBC also recently announced extended paternity and maternity leave for its employees. For HSBC, paternity leave will increase to eight weeks, up from the current two weeks; while maternity leave will increase to 26 weeks, up from 16 weeks. While the present legislative amendments that we are addressing today, do not go as far as what these private institutions have done, they signal to me the Government’s broad commitment towards adapting and making changes where necessary, when traditionally-held societal norms start to change.”