The absence of any mention regarding new forms of wealth taxation or increase in current forms of such taxation in the 2019 Budget Statement is a cause for concern, as it may pave the way to greater wealth inequality in Singapore when coupled with slow economic growth and an ageing population, said Professor of Practice and Director (Leadership and Public Policy) at the Institute of Public Policy at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Donald Low.

In an op-ed published on TODAY Online on Wednesday (20 Feb), Prof Low, formerly the director of fiscal policy at the Ministry of Finance and associate dean of executive education and research at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore, dubbed the omission of wealth taxes from this year’s Budget as not only being “curious”, but also “unhealthy” for wealth redistribution in the Republic.

Citing French economist Thomas Piketty’s argument, whereby the gap in wealth is “a greater source of inequality than differences in labour income”, Prof Low said that such is because capital ownership is “far more unequally distributed” than labour, noting that “wealth comes from the ownership of capital, i.e. financial and physical assets”.

He also cited Prof Piketty’s observation in Capital in the 21st Century that “except in times of war and depression, the annual rate of return on capital has averaged nearly 5 per cent”.

“Inequality, Professor Piketty posits, rises when the rate of return on capital exceeds the growth rate of the economy,” wrote Prof Low.

“In mature economies, labour incomes are increasing at a much slower rate mainly because growth in these economies is well below 5 per cent,” he added, noting that “Singapore is now growing at below 5 per cent, even as we expect the return on capital to be close to its historical average of 4-5 per cent”.

“If we care about rising inequality at all, we should be taxing wealth — and therefore capital income — more,” argued Prof Low.

Extremely low pre-existing wealth taxation suggests capital owners pay lower taxes than middle-class, whose income is sourced from their labour

Prof Low highlighted that “capital is taxed very lightly” in the Republic, noting that “there is no capital gains tax or inheritance tax”, and that “dividend and interest income are also exempt from personal income tax”.

“Property taxes are relatively low, and only rental income is taxed at one’s marginal tax rate,” he added.

“Given that the rich,” which Prof Low classified as being “the top 1 per cent” in the income distribution, “derive a significantly larger share of their income from capital, the very low taxes on capital in Singapore means that capital owners may be paying a lower effective tax rate than the (upper) middle class whose main (if not only) source of income is their labour”.

While Prof Low acknowledged that even income taxes in Singapore are not very high, in addition to many Singaporean wage-earners having HDB flats as a form of capital ownership, he argued that taxation in the Republic overall is “less equitable than it should be”, seeing how labour income is largely taxed while much of capital income is not.

Wealth inequality as a by-product of disruption in the economy due to technological advancements, affecting labour more significantly than capital

The rise of technological advancements such as “automation, artificial intelligence and other digital technologies”, added Prof Low, will most likely have a negative impact on labour compared to capital or “knowledge-intensive” activities.

“The productivity gains from these disruptions will also accrue more to capital owners than to labourers, even if these disruptions create more jobs than they destroy.

“This is also why we hear arguments, by technologists such as Bill Gates, for governments to impose a tax on robots, a form of capital,” said Prof Low.

Capital gains, inheritances should be taxed to combat wealth inequality in Singapore

In order to mitigate the growing inequality in wealth distribution in Singapore, Prof Low suggested the implementation of a capital gains tax, starting with a low rate of around “5-10 per cent”.

He added that dividend and interest income should once again be taxed, due to the nature of global economic conditions in the present time.

Quoting a recent issue of The Economist magazine, Prof Low noted that “the cross-border flows of goods, services and money are growing more slowly (or not at all)”, in comparison to the start of this millennium, or the period he dubbed as “the era of hyper-globalisation”.

“Dividends and interest income were exempt from tax in the early 2000s as part of the government’s effort to lower income taxes to attract talent and capital to the country,” he wrote.

Prof Low noted that “it was widely believed that governments had to reduce income and capital taxes and shrink social safety nets to compete for talent and investments” during the early 2000s.

However, he said, “much of this neoliberal ideology has been discredited” following the global financial crisis of 2008-2009.

Singapore, Prof Low opined, “is giving up a potentially valuable source of revenue, which may necessitate higher taxes elsewhere to finance higher social expenditures”.

“At low levels, taxes on capital income will not reduce savings and investment. And because ownership of capital is much more unevenly distributed than labour income, such taxes increase the overall progressiveness of the tax system,” he explained.

On the question of imposing taxes on inheritances, Prof Low argued that such taxes are less likely to “reduce incentives to work” in comparison to income taxes, due to their relatively lower popularity, and are more progressive than labour consumption taxes such as the Goods and Services Tax, due to the emphasis on capital income as opposed to labour income.

“Nonetheless, the former estate duty did not raise much revenue. Its high exemption level meant that almost all estates were exempt from it,” noted Prof Low, adding that “inheritances above a certain threshold” should be considered “taxable income”.

“Since Singapore’s personal income tax regime is already low and progressive, taxing inheritances this way would deliver similar benefits,” he added.

“Taxing wealth”, opined Prof Low, “should be popular since most of us aren’t wealthy enough to pay these taxes”.

“But because of naive optimism, many of us may believe that we would eventually be wealthy,” he wrote.

Overall, opined Prof Low, “if the middle class are opposed to wealth taxes — even though it is in their interests — we would also expect wealth to continue being taxed very lightly in Singapore, to the detriment of society.”

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

The rise of the Inglourious Train Bast@#d

This article was first posted on The Offline Citizen. Joshua Chiang/ So…

侵扰行为“不属可逮捕性质”警无能为力 “地狱”邻居吓走六户人家

《海峡时报星期刊》今日报导,在榜鹅中心一座组屋楼层,出现“来自地狱的邻居”,她被指往邻居家门泼油、开大音乐声量和猛跺地板,甚至有邻居指她留了带血的猪耳在鞋架上。 至少有六户人家不堪这位邻居骚扰,而纷纷搬离该楼层。 这些住户也不是没有报警,但是警方却告知,这位51岁妇人“恶邻”的所为,不属于可被逮捕的性质。 其中一家在去年二月搬离的住户,更因为倍受压力,而向建屋发展局申请五年期限前卖掉组屋,惟被当局拒绝。“我无法再忍受了,放工回到家就会发现门前洒了一些液体,有时是食用油,有时是粥,最糟糕的是有次我在我的鞋架上发现猪耳!” 该住户反映这还是他买的首间组屋,只能自认倒霉,而且其他住户也争相想远离“恶邻”。 属黄志明议员选区 据了解,该选区属黄志明议员的选区。其中一位邻居还向记者展示17份报案纸,还向建屋局、议员和居民委员会投诉。 被指恶邻的51岁妇人已离婚,在2013年和儿子入住该楼层的两房式组屋单位。 居委会发言人则在电邮中回复记者,指“居委会志工知悉上述情况,也和有关住户接洽,居委会还会继续和相关机构合作以协助排解争议。” 而警方则表示,住户举报该“恶邻”,惟她的行为如刻意骚扰、噪音污染和恶作剧,都不算可逮捕性质的犯错,为此建议受影响的邻居申请推事投诉(Magistrate’s Complaints)。 其中一户住在妇人楼上的邻居,就因为先前调解不成,只得申请推事投诉。他反映妇人投诉他们组屋在上个月传出噪音,为此还被妇人拿一块大石头吓阻。…

网传SAFRA团拜晚宴照办为红包? 司仪“一哥”抨击造谣者

截至昨日(8日),在裕廊战备军人协会俱乐部(SAFRA)举行的歌唱班团拜晚宴感染群,累计确诊病例已激增至30起,包括其中一场晚宴的歌唱导师也确诊。 承办上述晚宴的,是位于SAFRA Jurong的美满楼餐厅。2月15日当晚有两场新春团拜活动,约600人出席。 其中一场晚宴据知是由歌唱导师梁凤艺主办,梁凤艺在本月7日也发简讯通知歌唱班学生,“同学们早上好!我已确诊感染病毒!希望同学们留意身体的状况如有不适请尽快就医!” 不过,在社交媒体上流传一段Whatsapp录音,“爆料者”在谈话中似乎和名为“Amy”的友人谈话,指为何当晚晚宴不改期、取消?因为主办者要“收红包”。当天两位歌唱导师高飞和梁凤艺,同天在同一场所办活动;且有出席者认为出了60块钱,不去可惜;“爆料者”也担忧若出席的600人没办法追踪监控“会完蛋”。 “爆料者”自称已待在家一两个月、活动都取消。 至于梁凤艺的“干哥哥”,艺名“一哥”的王先生早前则在《联合早报》为前者澄清,梁在晚宴前曾犹豫是否要如期举办,但和一些学生商量后,大家都鼓励她如期进行。 根据一哥说法, 由于临近晚宴主办日期,酒楼也不希望她取消。再来不希望已购票学生失望,所以才照办。 一哥是受邀主持当晚晚宴。他曾向《8视界》表示,已叮嘱出席者要小心,避免握手,只要“恭喜恭喜招招手”,也在台上提醒大家使用公尺母筷。 晚宴出现确诊病例,令他也感到纳闷“怎么会有漏网之鱼?”也直言“防范措施都做了,”是否现有检测机制都要检讨。 他说看到对梁凤艺的各种指责感到痛心,遗憾有造谣者企图落井下石。…

LTA to refine COE System to 3-Monthly Recycling Periods

From February 2014, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) will refine the COE…