Mah: cut petrol taxes not way to cushion rising oil prices
-
Minister Mah says cutting petrol taxes not the way to cushion rising oil prices
Posted: 21 June 2008 2024 hrsPhotos 1 of 1 
SINGAPORE: National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan has said the government cannot reduce petrol taxes despite the soaring oil prices.
He warned against taking the subsidy route, noting that even countries like China and Malaysia have started to re-think their policies on this.
Mr Mah was speaking on the sidelines of a community event on Saturday.
As pump prices here continue to rise, some Singaporeans are wondering why the government is not stepping in to cushion the impact by cutting petrol taxes.
The government has always maintained that petrol duty - currently about 40 cents for every litre - is meant to promote public transport and curb excessive use of cars.
Mr Mah said: "If you price it wrongly, if you subsidise anything, people will tend to use it more or people will tend not to use it as efficiently as possible and that is going to raise the demand. Once you raise the demand, I think that is in turn going to cause prices to go up even higher."
So instead of lowering taxes, Mr Mah said Singapore's strategy is to change habits and attitudes to cut down on energy consumption.
"If you are a motorist, how do you cut down (energy consumption)? Reduce the number of trips, if possible. Car pool, if possible. Better still, take public transport," he said.
Mr Mah was speaking to reporters on the sidelines of a dialogue session with Tampines residents.
To help reduce energy costs at the township level, he said, the Tampines Town Council is looking at replacing all lights in common areas with energy-saving ones.
The chit-chat session was instituted two years ago as a way for Mr Mah, who is the Tampines Grassroots Organisation adviser, to meet residents in a more informal and smaller setting.
Hence, a lot of municipal issues were raised, one of which was the issue of safety in the light of the recent spate of molest cases in the neighbourhood. To address this, Mr Mah said the town council will seriously look into installing CCTV cameras in blind spots and secluded areas around the neighbourhood. - CNA/irThe government has always maintained that petrol duty - currently about 40 cents for every litre - is meant to promote public transport and curb excessive use of cars.
----> .To promote public transport and curb excessive use of cars????? Joker Mah. Pap will have less earning by cutting petrol taxes. PAP will not resort to anything that will reduce their profit making. NObody is asking for subsidy, cut the taxes on petrol during this difficult time will help lighten the load.
-
cut their salary lah.. best way to make them wake up...
-
Originally posted by I-like-flings(m):
cut their salary lah.. best way to make them wake up...
Majority are for it, but it is impossible for they call the shots. Greed knows no bound, what a shame PAP. PM Australia cut his pay, Singapore PM, MM, SM????? -
Originally posted by Civilgoh:
Majority are for it, but it is impossible for they call the shots. Greed knows no bound, what a shame PAP. PM Australia cut his pay, Singapore PM, MM, SM?????
they increase their salary lor... cos too low cannot attract TALENT to solve the problem and their will eat money if u dun pay them enough lor...power hor.. -
Petrol taxes are different from subsidies.
With such sky rocketing petrol price, motorists will definitely readjust their driving habits. Then what are the uses for petrol taxes? As a mean of revenue for the government?
And we are not even talking about subsidies!
-
If Mah is right then we are all ears as to his solutions to the ever-rising costs of living due to government unnecessary GST increases profiteering by HDB and GLCs and all the double and triple taxing on vehicle ownership and usage. With annual land-sale surpluses amounting to some $3 billions per year why shouldn't such surpluses by used to help cushion the rising costs of medical care public transportation, public housing or utility.
Is the current solutions to tax and hoard monies to enrich the government and create surpluses and make profits for their GLCs the only solution?
We are waiting for Mah now to come up with an alternative to constant increases of GST and profiteering by government on lands and all assets belonging to people.
If Mah is worth his millions then he should get real and try to help all to lower costs of living or doing business to make the economy competitive again.
We do not have to employ and pay him millions just to let him ask people how to solve such problems. If we the people know the answer we do not have to have ministers or MPs as we the people will solve our own problems without them.
-
reducing a tax IS NOTequal to giving a farking subsidy! since when is petrol tax a way to curb car usage? why cut road tax then say petrol tax cannot cut because it will make more people want to drive their car? Mah still think he is talking to uneducated coolies in the 1800s? don't want to help Singaporeans say don't want to help. Dont come up cock n bull story please.
-
Originally posted by holygoh:
reducing a tax IS NOTequal to giving a farking subsidy!
since when is petrol tax a way to curb car usage? why cut road tax then say petrol tax cannot cut because it will make more people want to drive their car?
Mah still think he is talking to uneducated coolies in the 1800s?
don’t want to help Singaporeans say don’t want to help. Dont come up cock n bull story please.
The government tends to give conflicting reasons regarding petrol tax, vehicle additional tax, ERP and road tax.
One moment it is to curb traffic, the next moment it is to allow more car ownership.
-
Originally posted by Spartans:
The government tends to give conflicting reasons regarding petrol tax, vehicle additional tax, ERP and road tax.
One moment it is to curb traffic, the next moment it is to allow more car ownership.
All for the name of money, anything is possible. ren shi ta men, gui ye shi ta men. They can allow to lose so much in investment but cannot allow reduction in petrol taxes. People are not even asking for removal of tax in petrol - just merely ask for reduction in tax, why so stingy? Isn't ERP enough for the gahmen to make lots of profit out of it and what is the reduction in petrol tax.
This bunch of pap gahmen simply don't fit to serve the people of Singapore. They do as they please and ignore the needs of the nation.
-
Originally posted by Civilgoh:
All for the name of money, anything is possible. ren shi ta men, gui ye shi ta men. They can allow to lose so much in investment but cannot allow reduction in petrol taxes. People are not even asking for removal of tax in petrol - just merely ask for reduction in tax, why so stingy? Isn't ERP enough for the gahmen to make lots of profit out of it and what is the reduction in petrol tax.
This bunch of pap gahmen simply don't fit to serve the people of Singapore. They do as they please and ignore the needs of the nation.
I feel they have lost touch with reality and ordinary Singaporeans. They need to stand in the shoes of normal Singaporeans and think in our perspective as well. -
Originally posted by Spartans:
I feel they have lost touch with reality and ordinary Singaporeans. They need to stand in the shoes of normal Singaporeans and think in our perspective as well.
Depends on what they want. If their top priority is to earn as much from the people as possible, they will not bother to put serving the nation first. -
No mass protest, cannot wake up.
Still dreaming of next pay increase.
Try this sort of shit in south korea, all ministers die first.
-
To promote public transport usage, they better dun approve the price hike later part of the year.
Dun give the crap of the oil price hike and the poodle have no control.
These poodles are just plain blood suckers and proven short idiots.
-
Originally posted by Spartans:
The government tends to give conflicting reasons regarding petrol tax, vehicle additional tax, ERP and road tax.
One moment it is to curb traffic, the next moment it is to allow more car ownership.
1)You can own a car to go on trips and meals on the weekends, for family/social reasons. They have been making it cheaper for Singaporeans to do that.
2)It gets more costly if you use it often like driving to work for example. That is where they are trying to curb excessive use where it might lead to a traffic standstill for example.
-
-
they are farking blind. even the farking gurkha are feeling the pinch
-
they are farking blind. even the farking gurkha are feeling the pinch
-
Increase Petrol + Increase Number of ERPs + Increase ERP Prices = Increase in their salaries.
-
It is pretty dumb for MBT to attempt to distort the view that Government Tax on fuel will become a subsidy when removed.
Has it not been a fact that the high fuel costs is part of the mechanism to discourage Singaporeans from becoming car owners ?
If at all, any Tax Reduction by Government on fuels - will surely help in lowering the operating costs for all economic activities, which eventualy will have a knock-on effect at lowering the costs of living
Subsidy ?
Are Singaporeans being tested today ?
-
cut their farking millions pay.
-
Hey Singaporeans!
No subsidy of any sort.
Wow, so firm with this policy.
Many countries give subsidies to help their citizens.
Given that the people appears to accept this policy, I take it that you people accept the policy and this should mean that you guys supports it and the leader's vision.
I am amazed how 'successful' this system is.
Cheers to you!
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
No mass protest, cannot wake up.
Still dreaming of next pay increase.
Try this sort of shit in south korea, all ministers die first.
Fact 1. Singapore do not have fossilized fuels or own any.Fact 2. Singapore is only one of the major refining centres in the world.
Fact 3. Singapore still have to import oil for domestic consumption.
Fact 4. Every major nation on Earth is currently cutting back on fossilized fuel, to conserve depleting supplies of easy surface oil as well as harm to our environment.
Fact 5. Oil is a revenue for govts to use such revenues for social spending. They export oil at a premium price to other nations. Such premiums on oil if sold without it to citizens, the premiums will become subsidies for them. Oil exporting countries now have to remove such subsidies, for they need the money for social spending as well as to curb oil consumption.
Fact 6. Singapore do not have enough land for more roads. Less roads equates to more congestion. Petrol tax is one way to curb more cars on the road, ensure citizens use the roads more efficiently. And petrol tax is also one way for our society to have more funds for social spending. Petrol tax is based on free will. You pay only what you need. If you don't need, you don't pay.
Fact 7. Domestic use of oil and other fossilized fuels for energy use, similarly has a tarrif which is a govt tax imposed. Again it is best on free will. You must use it efficently or if the demand is allowed to spiral, we will face with high energy costs due to depleting sources.
Fact 8. Not everyone owns a car in Singapore. You own a car, then you would have to compensate those who owns singapore - our citizens - too. Those taking public transports, pays add on charges by transport companies. However, in line with our society's policy to maximise efficiently on energy use, these transport companies cannot arbitarily raise prices, and must meet with approval from MOT and debated in Parliament, not easily obtained as proven the difficulties over the years.
No one likes the current impasse, but the funds collected from tax revenues are being channeled to look for alternative energy resources, and not just anyone, but those that are credible ones so that our money may effectively be use.
Before anyone acts emotionally , do consider logic please.
-
That's how they always see things and it's evident in every speeches/comments they make... as long as the government is not making more money than they should have, they call it a subsidy.
It the same mentality as that rich landlord when the property prices were going down.. they say they are subsidizing the tentants because they are paying rent lower than what the landlord is paying the bank for the loan. It's never about true value or demand and supply.. it's all about how much the peasants are supposed to be helping the rich generate their wealth and hey, if you're not giving them enough money, they are giving you a discount - "Subsidy".
-
"No one likes the current impasse, but the funds collected from tax revenues are being channeled to look for alternative energy resources, and not just anyone, but those that are credible ones so that our money may effectively be use."
What alternative energy resources????? Very nice speech but it's more like the revenues are channelled into fat paychecks, bonues and investments captial where returns from those investments are not directed back to the country's usage.
Remember this is a government that increase their pay by more than 20% when inflation is 6.6% and average salary increment is 3-4%. This is also the government that rejected the call to increase help to the old and poor by $100 a month more.
-
Only by facing up to facts and not complains, or lies and halftruths can credible solutions be found.
It is only simple economics. The rise in price of oil is largely due by demand. The more people use oil, the higher it will rise. Only by curbing its demand, will oil price falls.
There is a crucial need to seek alternative energy uses. Fortunately, Singapore has the funds to do so, except that such technologies are not avaliable yet. However, in the case of energy for cars, conversion to CNG is a viable option.
Our country survived today and not crippled was due to the hard work and frugal ways of our previous generation and govt. The govt can easily play populist measures and even lower petrol taxes and everything else.
But then, our next generations will be the ones who will suffer with even higher prices of depleting resources. Our society had always, always thought far and never to neglect or mortgage the next generation's future, and we are not about to do so. Thus the need for funds to find alternative energy resources, quickly. And for that, we need more intelligent people properly compensated to do research and find solutions.