Low angle view of public housing HDB resident buildings/ flats complex with grass courtyard, trees and dense of apartments during sunset in Singapore. Urban concept. Panorama style from Shutterstock.com

The Housing Development Board (HDB) reported on Mon (22 Oct) that it had incurred an overall deficit of $1.7 billion in the last FY.

In 2013, then National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wan explained that HDB actually has to pay the government for land to build HDB flats. He said the price of land is tied to acquisition costs, reclamation and the building of infrastructure around it.

“You need to acquire a piece of land; you need to reclaim a piece of land. All those costs money to taxpayers and we are just trustees of taxpayers and those costs are to be accounted for. And even when you have got that land prepared, land is only valuable when we invest in infrastructure, roads, MRT… And all those costs billions of dollars,” he said.

“Every year, hundreds of millions of dollars of losses were incurred by the HDB and that’s why MOF (Ministry of Finance) has to give the HDB an annual grant, otherwise the HDB will be in the red. It cannot be forever in the red, because there’s no way it can make money. Because every unit that we sell, we lose money, HDB loses money. The accounting for the HDB is deficit accounting. So if you incur a S$300-million loss, there is a grant of S$300 million that covers it. That is how we operate the HDB.”

“Let us not perpetuate this talk about HDB is making money out of building houses because if it was so simple, life would be straightforward, but that’s not the case,” he added. “The cost of building HDB flats includes the cost of land, design, construction, financing and other project-related costs. It varies from project to project and year to year.”

Govt as a whole does make money from HDB sales

HDB itself may be losing money but in actual fact, the government as a whole does make money. Let’s look at a specific example.

In Feb this year, HDB launched Tampines GreenDew comprised of four 15-storey residential blocks with 726 units of 3, 4, and 5-room flats. It also launched Tampines GreenFoliage comprised of four blocks with 542 units of 4 and 5-room flats. In total, 1,268 units were offered at Tampines in the Feb launch.

The 1,268 units were priced as follows:

Taking the average price of $219,500 for the 84 3-room flats, $324,500 for the 644 4-room flats and $448,500 for the 540 5-room flats, total revenue to HDB would amount to: $219,500 x 84 + $324,500 x 644 + $448,500 x 540 = $469,606,000.

The construction of the flats was later awarded to 2 companies through open tenders. Tampines GreenDew (726 units) was awarded to Prelim Construction Pte Ltd at $96,500,000 while Tampines GreenFoliage (542 units) was awarded to Ho Lee Construction Pte Ltd at $76,300,000. The construction also includes a multi-storey carpark with roof garden and other precinct structures like linkways, linkbridges, pavilions, trellis and shelters.

Therefore, the total construction cost for the 1,268 Tampines units, together with the associated precinct structures works out to be $172,800,000 or $136,278 per unit on average.

Hence, considering HDB as part of government, the government would have made: $496,606,000 – $172,800,000 = $323,806,000. Of course, this amount would include the infrastructure cost and, supposedly, the land cost too. But the infrastructure cost would only be a fraction of the $323,806,000. To calculate exactly how much the government made would then depend on the actual acquisition cost of the land by the government. Some were state land, to begin with. Others were compulsorily acquired from private entities at very low cost under the Land Acquisition Act many years ago.

For example, Bishan HDB estate was built from cemetery land forcefully acquired by the government at around 1980. The cemetery land originally belonged to Kwong Wai Siew Peck San Theng temple. In the end, the government only paid a compensation of $4.95 million to the temple for the 121-hectare (13,024,319 sqf) of cemetery land or about $0.38 psf.

So, with a low land cost incurred by the govt to begin with and later the govt marking up the land for sale at the current market price to the public, why would the government make losses in sale of HDB flats?

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

川普支持者闯入美国国会 一女子中枪不治

意图推翻总统选举结果,大批美国总统川普的支持者包围国会大厦,据知一名女子在冲突中中枪不治。 今日美国国会参众两院举行联席会议,点算各州选举人票,以确认民主党拜登当选总统,但期间却遭到川普支持者硬闯国会,致使会议一度中断。有支持者甚至坐到主席座位上,高喊“川普赢得总统选举”。 据美国媒体CNN的现场视频,可显示示威者“占领”国会大楼,迫使国会大楼需封锁,抗议者闯越安全警戒线1个多小时后,川普在推特呼吁支持者们“回家”:“请支持我们的国会警察局和执法单位。”、“请保持和平!” 寻求连任的川普,此前指控选举舞弊。他在本月6日中午,在白宫附近向支持者发话表示胜选结果遭到民主党、假新闻媒体窃取,“这是他们一直在做的事”,“我们永不放弃,我们永不认输。”

Over 2,100 opportunities available in S’pore’s logistics sector under SGUnited programme amid COVID-19 pandemic

From April to September this year, there were more than 2,100 jobs,…

【选举】行动党候选人林绍权被踢爆其实“很好练” 马善高:可自证清白

人民行动党在短短三天的线上新闻发布会上介绍了27名准候选人,更指他们都拥有亮眼的成就,但是准候选人之一的林绍权却被网民打脸,揭发他是精英主义者,实则性格“很好练”。马善高对此表示,若候选人以往有任何行为引起争议,准候选人应该站出来自证清白。 在6月24日,由行动党第一助理秘书长王瑞杰主持的介绍会上,准候选人吉宝岸外与海事总经理的林绍权(42岁),他自从完成O水平教育后,就进入了吉宝岸外与海事公司就业,并且获得考取文凭和学位的奖学金。 当林绍权被介绍为行动党候选人时,一些网民揭发,指前者实为一名“精英主义”者。 有网民发文,指林在新加坡武装部队服务时“表现得高高在上”,与其展现的朴实形象不符合。 另一名自称是林绍权新加坡理工学院同窗,兼吉宝岸外公司同事的网民,更指林绍权“傲慢且冷漠无情”。 也有网民揶揄,林绍权“自私”、“固执”,有时还很“好练”(福建方言,形容一个人爱炫耀) 随着这些评论的出现,引发了人们对行动党在甄选过程和林绍权人品的质疑和评论,也瞬间提高了人们对林绍权的关注。 行动党副主席马善高在今日(26日)的记者会上指出,他认为若准候选人过去的行为引起争议,应该站出来自证清白。 惟,他指出,几乎每回行动党介绍新人,都会引起一些争议,但是准候选人不应该因为以前的一些经历或时段,来定义和判断他的整个人生。 他表示,准候选人若在以往曾做过什么,那么未来就可以是他们赎罪的一个机会。 他强调,该党的新人都拥有良好的优秀领袖素质,相信他们未来会真诚地为民服务。

研究:加速脑退化增心血管病 室内烧香影响长者健康

香港中文大学医学院最新研究证实,屋内长期烧香,将损害年长者的大脑功能和削弱认知能力,甚至加速脑退化,提高心血管疾病的感染风险。 中大医学院指出,由脑神经科领导,于2014年展开的研究,涉及156名有室内烧香习惯和359名没有室内烧香的长者。 研究团队在2014年及接下来的第三年,分别为参与者进行认知能力测试和磁力共振扫描。对照两组参与者的脑补运作情况后发现,有烧香的那组在整体认知能力、思考能力、视觉空间能力和记忆力的这些认知表现上,明显比另一组来的差。而且在三年后的测试成果中,他们的认知表现也维持在较差的状态下,大脑区域之间的功能连接也比另一组来的少。 研究也指出,除了削弱认知表现,烧香也会对血管疾病及风险因素带来影响。 该医学院内科及药物治疗学系脑神经科研究助理教授、临床心理学家黄沛霖指出,烧香所带来的风险包括增加血管疾病,如糖尿病、高血脂及脑小血管病变,加速脑部退化,长期吸入甚至会影响脑健康。 而中大医学院内科及药物治疗学系脑神经科主人莫仲棠则指出,虽然建议尽量避免室内烧香,但是若老人家要在家中烧香,就建议保持室内空气流通,或选用更为安全的代替品,以避免年长者长期吸入污染物。