A flat 5% RPGT is more likely to be passed to buyer i.e. buyer will be forced to pay 105%, and this will generally contribute to driving up house prices.
Since whether you sell now or later you're still taxed 5%, it doesn't help to curb speculators. A progressive tax rate that discourage selling within the first 3 years will do much better at that.

for subsale perhaps... for new units at developers prices means less speculators/investors/flippers will want to buy and sell so soon. so more chances for 1st time owner to buy at developers price etc.

the 105% is a likely scenario. just as the same 100% price is also a likely scenario and the seller will bear the 5%. its market forces and it can go either way

Its only 5% flat! Hardly a dent to the hot area! If you go and look at Bandar Kinrara where virtually all launches sold out in 1 day or less, and appreciate by 40-50%!... that 5% is peanut when you make 150k in 24months... and dont forget they seller allow to minus the acquisition cost. So the 5% impact is even lesser...

But if the govt do progressive 30% reduction, yes you will see plenty of speculation curbing....

I just hope that the government will impose higher tax on RPGT. 30-50% to reduce the speculation. MOre & more ppl are finding it hard to purchase a house to live in.

should also stop those zero down payment and interest free during construction promotions. banks should also max their margin of financing to 70-80% to ensure buyers are genuine and can afford, not mere speculators.

Econ is not so simple of implementing this to curb speculation. Do you what will happen to the entire economic mechanism when people stop spending? You wouldn't want to be in that situation either. Why people speculate on property? Its not because the seller... its the demand of the subsale buyer that created it.

Why the subsale buyer willing to buy it despite the price already increase 30-50% over the dev price? Because its that is the only purchase that does not depreciate over time and property on free hold land is getting scarce and the FD rate is pathetic, you might as well not save hence the expenditure.

Such consumption has been a very good rev to the govt in the form of stamping fees and also continue to drive the development industry which is still very much a back bone of our country.

It would have been a bleak situation if the property sales has been halted in the last 2-3 yrs and I think that suspension of RPGT in 2007 help us to tie over while the US and Europe impacted by the financial scandal that cost billions of losses!

What I'm saying is that there should be some control from the government to stop the housing prices from increasing exponentially. Spending & creating more debt is not the answer to have more growth or to stimulate the economic. Look at what happen with the substantial in housing speculation in the US. housing prices rises until the bubble burst.

My point is house is a need, shelter is a basic human need. Imagine our basic staple food is subjected to speculation - rice, sugar, flour........ Government need to put more measure to stop the speculation. Government is not to facilitate the profit of companies or individuals, it is to protect & make sure the citizens needs are taken care of.

If govt begin to regulate down to such level, it wont be a pretty sight and certainly not encouraging investor and trade and banking liberalisation. Like it or not, local property is still among cheapest in the region per income basis for landed property.

Lowering the margin loan to 70% or 80% is counter productive and will only hurt the general man on the street. Say you want to buy a house worth 500k, now you need to have 100-150k down payment instead of 50k.

Have you consider this or just simply tembak?

guys need advise ....

im planning to buy a cheap flat (bank auction) @ rawang cost 10-30k
do i have to pay any of this new taxes if buy within this year ?
should i buy it this year or next year ?

thx in advance...

As much as I like to dwell on negativity, what happen in US subprime mortgage is unlikely to happen. Bank Negara would have never allow such hedging and transfer of risk for higher interest. I think we need to give more credit to Zeti.

If you want govt to take care of your needs in such way, then all you need to do is cross the border for govt housing or go for the DBKL flats. No govt want to regulate to such level especially when they need to grow and flip flopping on such policy do no goods to the investment atmosphere.

Any how we digressing away from this RPGT into welfare discussion.

Then don buy the 500k house, buy only the lower price house. I'm all against the easier credit available. It has it precedence over at other country. It may not encourage the investor, but it will make alot of houses more affordable. I'm not against investing in property, but it should not speculate on houses. It is a simple concept of supply & demand. If we make it less profitable to speculate then we will cut down on the demand & subsequently cut down on the cost as demand is less then supply.

Growth & trade should not be artificially stimulated. It should be on the basis of pure products & services being created, not just profiting by just speculating without any real end product. The house remains the house from start to end, but the "price" has been artificially prop up without any real value being added.

---

Added on October 26, 2009, 2:08 pmI'm trying to say tax more on those guys just making profit on speculating.

The poorer gets poorer, any the rich speculate more & more. A genuine government should include morally in its policy, but alas, most of the policy have interest of certain sections of ppl.

---

Added on October 26, 2009, 2:15 pmThink is that you only have to pay tax when you are selling property at a gain.

This post has been edited by zzzz52: Oct 26 2009, 02:15 PM

The Rich get Richer.... this is the world we live in unless u choose to live in communise country...

If one buying 250k house, you still have to fork out 50k-75k vs 25k or lesser...Its still more painful for one that struggle on the first 10% imagine now at 30% downpayment!

You want growth and trade to be on pure basis level...... I think that is a bit too ignoramus simply because no country economic and market are shielded for its own interaction. Only country I can think of is North Korea.

Yes and its true house remain as a house in 10-20 yrs with no real value added and yet continue to increase in price.

But can you imagine if the house you staying now is depreciating in value so much that FH means nothing and you can't even leave it to your next generation because its have a lifetime?

Do you know in Japan, all property is a depreciating asset? All houses including freehold will drop in price until it reaches a book value of the land because the building is depreciating value structure. And at time the value drop so much that its worth nothing to the next generation because its attract inheritance tax as well.

Somehow your idea come across being a tad too socialism to me.

"Affordability" IMO goes hand in hand with credit availability. Tougher credit policy will not make houses more affordable, in fact its the opposite as ppl need to wait a lot longer before they could be able to afford a home.

Jakarta houses is a great example whereby house are more expensive (both rental and selling price)than KL but credit availability is much2 tighter.

Affordability == easeness of getting credit

I agree will the notion of prices that will appreciate over time because our monetary system makes them so. We live in a world of free trade & interest bearing credit. We cannot change this individually unless we are at the top of the system but maybe we will not change it when we are at that position.

To protect our asset value, we try to keep our yearly gains/returns from our investment above inflation.

What i'm saying is that governments are there for a purpose. While not inhibit trade & growth, it should be control & regulated. There is no where in this world where there exist total capitalism.

I'm trying to say is that this situation of perpetual growth to sustain the whole economy is bound to collapse inevitably. We do not want to come to a stage where there will be wide spread poverty because of the prices hit a critical turning point where is will bust. Then jobs will be lost & foreclosure will be rampant, ppl lose there home which they are not able to afford because they bought the houses at expensive prices initially cause all there is are expensive houses.

---

Added on October 26, 2009, 3:19 pmThat is the false assumption that we are made to believe. Affordability is not only dependable on credit, there are many factors involved.


This post has been edited by zzzz52: Oct 26 2009, 03:19 PM

Fully agree with the above and the rich does not get richer out of nothing. They earn it with their capability.

It is the exploitation of the system if the rich gets richer through morally questionable means. I'm all for the accumulation of wealth, he who hasvest what he sow.

I'm against the fact that money is make from all the loans that are interest bearing. Profits derived from interest without the actual productive work are illegal, and we say that we are a country with Islamic values. This makes speculation also illegal.

But all said, everyone is entitled to their own views, he who live live through it only will know the pains.

yes you're right. 80% margin should be fine.

Ya, that is your view but sorry that I could not agree with you.

for everyone...


Attached thumbnail(s)