The e-invoice conundrum dilemma

 

Mandatory e-invoice countdown

CYBERJAYA: In just one week, the one-year countdown begins in earnest for all businesses in the country to switch to the mandatory electronic invoicing (e-invoicing) rule.

Ahead of its full rollout on July 1, 2025, the Inland Revenue Board (LHDN) will be officially launching a free software on June 1 to help businesses, both big and small, ease into the system.

LHDN chief executive officer Datuk Abu Tariq Jamaluddin (pic) said businesses could actually already use e-invoicing when the software was made available for free on May 15.

“The free programme will be officially launched on June 1. More than 60 pilot companies and service providers have committed to issuing e-invoices in a production environment by June 30 this year through the MyInvois integration,” Abu Tariq told The Star in a recent interview.

He added that on Aug 1, the first phase of the project will begin with about 5,000 companies, which record annual earnings of RM100mil and above, adopting the use of e-invoices.

The second phase will begin on Jan 1 next year for companies with annual earnings of between RM25mil and RM100mil.

ALSO READ: Give us time to adjust, urge small business

“The final phase is for all businesses or enterprises offering sales or services to come on board with e-invoicing by July 1 next year,” he added.

The gradual move by LHDN, Abu Tariq said, would help in the seamless transition to e-invoicing, while benefiting taxpayers and the board.

“It will also help stem billions in losses due to the shadow economy and is in line with the nation’s digitisation goals by 2030,” he added.

It was previously reported that the nation lost about RM70bil in tax revenue last year due to illegal activities and tax evasion.

Although a recent survey by LHDN showed about 98% of businesses accepting e-invoicing, Abu Tariq acknowledged that there was pushback from certain quarters, particularly small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and hawkers.

Among their concerns was the fine of between RM200 to RM20,000 for each breach of the e-invoicing regulations, he added.

He explained that companies earning less than RM100mil annually need not use e-invoicing this Aug 1 because they do not fall within the category.

“In general, at the initial stage of implementation, there is no need for taxpayers to get an e-invoice as proof of expenditure,” LHDN had said in response to a recent viral post by Datuk Seri Dr Wee Ka Siong.

The MCA president had questioned the manner in which e-invoicing was being “forced upon businesses, particularly petty traders and hawkers”.

Dr Wee, who is the Ayer Hitam MP, also questioned why businesses had to submit 55 data entry points under the system and whether their data was safe from hackers.

LHDN has since clarified that only six out of the 55 data entry points need to be filled up to complete the e-invoice for automatic appraisals.

Abu Tariq explained that e-invoicing can be filed once a month as a “consolidated invoice.”

The consolidated invoice, he said, represents monthly overall sales and services transactions instead of daily individual entries for each sale.

“This will make compliance easier for micro-businesses because they only need to submit their consolidated invoice once a month.”

However, he noted that consumers or buyers have the legal right to demand e-invoicing receipts once the system is fully implemented on July 1 next year.

“Action can be taken against the seller for failing to do so,” he said.

To allay worries, he said LHDN will deal with non-compliance on a case-by-case basis.

Other criticisms cited as impeding the use of the online filing system were the expected rise in operating cost, lack of mobile phone subsidy or aid, and poor signal coverage in rural areas.

Abu Tariq said LHDN is currently in talks with online platform providers providing cashless payment facilities on how best to capture sales transactions through their scanning or QR code systems.

With one year to go before e-invoicing is fully enforced, he said there is ample time for adjustments and improvements.

He also encouraged SMEs, petty traders and hawkers to start using the free e-invoicing software to familiarise themselves with the system and get their books in order by July 1 next year.

A look into the challenges of the new digital system which will be made mandatory in stages from Aug 1.

BY now, most of the business world is aware of the looming deadlines for the implementation of e-invoicing.

The thorny subject tends to elicit groans from company owners and their accountants and administrators.

But as the government is postulating, it is a necessary evil in order to ensure taxes are fully paid.

But then again, is it the only option? Is e-invoicing the best solution to having a more effective tax system?

It does seem that it is going to be a painful, expensive and time-consuming exercise, and hence, does the means justify the end?

In July 2023, the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) issued the first guideline under section 134A of the Income Tax Act 1967 for the implementation of e-invoicing.

Companies with revenues of Rm100mil or more will have to carry out e-invoicing from Aug 1. Those with a turnover of more than Rm25mil will be next, with their deadline being Jan 1, 2025. All companies are to be filing their e-invoices by next July.

Thannees Tax Consulting Services managing director S M Thanneermalai says even though there is about a month left before the first group needs to do the necessary, many of them are unprepared.

“Many companies are waiting to see what will happen to the first batch. The impression that many have is that the e-invoicing deadlines will be postponed, similar to what happened with the low-value goods and high-value goods taxes,” he says.

There are parties who disagree with the idea of e-invoicing, especially in a country which has had a goods and services tax (GST) regime in the past. The GST was introduced in Malaysia in 2015 and abolished in 2018.

Tan Sri Soh Thian Lai of the Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers (FMM) says the GST is the panacea for Malaysia’s debt woes.

“The GST is a timely lifeline for the country’s debt dilemma and a means to shore up adequate fiscal buffers to weather the next economic downturn,” he adds, adding that the problem is that the government lacks the political will to reintroduce the GST.

“The government is focusing on short-term measures rather than doing the right thing for the benefit of the nation in the longer term.

“As the GST is a broad tax base system which would increase indirect taxes, it will also give the government flexibility to reduce direct taxes (personal income and corporate taxes) to make the country a more attractive business destination,” he says.

Soh notes that some companies have voiced their apprehension of e-invoicing, considering the sheer size, volume and complexity of transactions involved.

“These include export and import transactions that require companies to self-bill for overseas purchases. They are also concerned about the readiness of their systems for implementation and compliance with e-invoicing,” Soh says.

So, how complex is e-invoicing going to be? Companies have two ways of digitally filing their invoices to the tax office. One is through the IRB’S own Myinvois Portal. But this means that companies need to manually do it and the understanding is that only companies with a small number of invoices can take this route.

This is why the IRB will be providing all companies with application programming interfaces (APIS), which then will allow companies’ own systems to directly connect with the tax office, thereby automating the submission process.

This will require companies to upgrade their own systems or invest in a new system. “Companies must automate their existing enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems or use a software that can directly speak to the IRB’S Myinvois Portal. Initially, for the first year, it can be a burden to businesses cost-wise, similar to the implementation of the GST back then.

“Companies either have to customise their existing systems (if they are not up to date) or find a suitable middleware. It is going to be expensive,” says Thanneermalai.

He notes that businesses may also need to hire consultants, particularly if they require help to navigate the e-invoicing process and understand the required documentation.

“The IRB can provide assistance, but it is already inundated with many questions, making it challenging for it to address individual concerns comprehensively. Hence, the IRB may offer generic answers which may not hold up during audits, potentially leading to problems in the future,” he says.

However, others do not think that the cost is going to be prohibitive.

Ernst & Young Tax Consultants Sdn Bhd tax managing partner Farah Rosley says the cost for MSMES in gearing up for e-invoicing will not be burdensome, as they can access the Myinvois Portal which is free.

“Larger corporations will typically have the necessary manpower and IT departments to integrate e-invoicing into their existing systems,” she adds. Meanwhile, the government has also announced a tax deduction of up to RM50,000 per year (up to the 2027 year of assess

“The cost for MSMES in gearing up for e-invoicing will not be burdensome, as they can access the Myinvois Portal which is free.” 

Related post:  

Planned e-invoicing will be troublesome

The e-invoicing dilemma

13 hours ago

SST - for better or worse ?

What is Sales & Service Tax (SST) in Malaysia? - SST Malaysia

Today, the Sales and Service Tax (SST) makes a comeback on our tax radar screen to replace the three years and two months old Goods and Services Tax (GST), which was implemented on April 1, 2015.

The abolition of the GST and replaced with SST is an election promise of the Pakatan Harapan manifesto.

It has been claimed that the GST is a regressive broad-based consumption tax that has burdened the low- and middle-income households amid the rising cost of living. The multi-stage tax levied on supply chains also caused cascading cost and price effects on goods and services. That said, the Finance Minister has acknowledged that the GST is an efficient and transparent tax.

Following the implementation of the SST, the Government will come to terms that the budget spending will have to be rationalised and realigned with the lower revenue collection from the SST to keep the lower budget deficit target on track.

The expected revenue collection from SST is RM21bil compared to an average of RM42.7bil per year in 2016-17 from GST.

During the period 2010-2014, the revenue collection from the SST, averaging RM14.8bil per year (the largest amount collected on record was RM17.2bil in 2014), of which 64% was contributed by the sales tax rate of 10% while the balance 36% from the service tax of 6%.

Faced with the revenue shortfall, the Government expects cost-savings, plugging of leakages, weeding out of corruption as well as the containment of the costs of projects would help to balance the financing gap between revenue and spending.

The sales tax rate (0%, 10% and 5% as well as a specific rate for petroleum) and service tax of 6% is imposed on consumers who use certain prescribed services. The taxable threshold for SST is set at annual revenue of RM500,000, the same threshold as GST, with the exception for eateries and restaurants at RM1.5mil.

As SST is levied only at a single stage of the supply chain, that is at the manufacturers or importers level and NOT at wholesalers, retailers and final consumers, it has cut off the number of registered tax persons and establishments from 476,023 companies under GST as of 15 July to an estimated 100,405 under SST.

The smaller number of registered establishments means no more compliance cost to about 85% of traders.

The distributive traders (wholesalers and retailers) will be hassle-free from cash flow problems, as they are no longer required to submit GST output tax while waiting to claim back the GST input tax. During GST, many traders imputed refunds into their pricing because of the delay in GST refunds. This was partly blamed for the cascading cost pass-through and price increases onto consumers.

For SST, 38% of the goods and services in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) basket are taxable compared to 60% under the GST.

It is estimated that up to RM70bil will be freed up to allow consumers to spend more.

Expanded scope

The proposed service tax regime has a narrower base (43.5% of services is taxable) compared to the GST (64.8% of services is taxable).

Medical insurance for individuals, service charges from hotel, clubs and restaurants as well as household’s electricity usage between 300kWh and 600kWh are not taxable. However, the scope of the new SST has been expanded compared to the previous SST. Among them are gaming, domestic flights (excluding rural air services), IT services, insurance and takaful for individuals, more telecommunication services and preparation of food and beverage services as well as electricity supply (household usage above 600kWh).

For hospitality services, the proposed service tax lowered the registration threshold of general restaurants (not attached with hotel) from an annual revenue of RM3mil under old service tax regime to RM1.5mil, resulting in expanded coverage of more restaurants.

Private hospital services will be excluded under the new SST regime.

How does SST affect consumers?

Technically speaking, the revenue shortfall of RM23bil between SST and GST is a form of “income transfer” from the Government to households and businesses. This is equivalent to tax cuts to support consumer spending.

Will it lead to higher consumer prices?

The contentious issue is will the SST burden households more than that of the GST? It must be noted that the cost of living not only encompasses prices paid for goods and services but also housing, transportation, medical and other living expenses.

The degree of sales tax impact would depend on the cost and margin (mark-up) of businesses along the supply chain before reaching end-consumers.

The coverage and scope of tax imposed also matter.

As the price paid by consumers is embedded in the selling price, this gives rise to psychology effect that sales tax is somewhat better off than GST.

The good news to consumers is that 38% of the goods and services in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) basket are taxable compared to the 60% under the GST.

Technically speaking, monthly headline inflation, as measured by the Consumer Price Index, is likely to show a flat growth or even declines in the months ahead.

It must be noted that consumers should compare prices before GST versus the three-month tax holiday (June-August).

Generally, consumers perceived that prices should either come down or remained unchanged as the sales tax is levied on manufacturers.

On average, some items (electrical appliances and big ticket items such as cars) would be costlier when compared to GST and some may come down (new items exempted from SST).

Nevertheless, we caution that consumers may experience some price increases, as prices generally did not come as much following the removal of GST in June.

There are concerns that prices may still go up in September when the new SST kicks in as irresponsible traders may take advantage to increase prices further.

Household consumption, which got a big boost during the three-month tax holiday in June-August, could see some normalisation in spending.

The smooth implementation of the new SST, accompanied by strict enforcement of price checks and the curbing of profiteering, especially for essentials goods and services consumed by B40 income households, are crucial to keep the level of general prices stable.

Strong consumer activism with the support of The Federation of Malaysian Consumers Association and the Consumers Association Penang as well as the media must work together to help in price surveillance and protect consumers’ interest.

Credit to Lee Heng Guie - comment

Related post:

GST vs SST. Which is better?

 

GST vs SST. Which is better?

MALAYSIA’s decision to revert to the Sales and Service Tax (SST) from the Goods and Services Tax (GST) will result in a higher disposable income due to relatively lower prices it will incur in most goods and services.

Consumers will have a choice in their consumption – by paying service taxes based on their affordability and ability.

The coverage of GST was comprehensive and it covered too wide a sector. While it was able collect a sustainable sum of RM44bil for the country, it was not people-friendly.

The narrowing scope of the SST will at most, collect approximately RM23bil for the country but it will indeed relieve the people – so SST is needed by the people.

Methodology of SST

The Sales Tax Bill and the Service Tax Bill have just been passed at the Dewan Rakyat and are expected to get approval from the Dewan Negara when it convenes on August 20.

This leaves little room for businesses and entrepreneurs to get ready for the new tax regime in less than a month’s time.

Therefore, it is of utmost importance to understand the concept and mechanism of SST as stated in both the Bills.

SST comprises two legislations. The sales tax is imposed on the manufacturing sector as governed by the Sales Tax Act 2018 while service tax is imposed on selected service sectors, with one of the most notable ones being the food and beverage (F&B) service providers.

The Service Tax Act 2018 would govern the selected service providers and the details would be gazetted in the subsidiary legislation, PU(A) Service Tax Regulations 2018.

Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng has announced that the threshold for F&B providers is set at annual turnover of RM1mil.

This would mean that those who operate with less than RM1mil turnover would not charge service tax at 6%.

This translates into hawker food, cafes, take aways or food trucks being able to provide F&B at lower prices as compared to the GST regime of 6%. Consumers are deemed to be given an option to pay service tax or not, depending on their consumptions at places such as fast food outlets, restaurants or food courts.

Generally, living costs will be relatively lower in the SST era as the B40 group of consumers would certainly be relieved in their daily eating affair.

The existing GST regime sets up the threshold at RM500,000 per year, meaning that almost all restaurants, including simple mixed rice outlets, would have a GST of 6% imposed. The service tax regime would not impose service tax of 6% on service charge rendered in any restaurant or café operator.

Service charge in its true essence, represents tips or gratuity to the waiters working in the restaurant and it is entirely at the discretion of the F&B operators.

These operators may choose to charge from 5% to 15% or even free of charge. In summary, in the event service charge is imposed, it would not be subject to service tax.

SST is people friendly as the daily consumption of food and beverages would be much lower in price as compared to the GST regime. The imposition of service charge is not governed by any law and it is entirely at the discretion of the F&B operators.

In order to avoid disputes, it is advised that notice be placed outside the premises if the F&B operator is imposing a service charge ans the rate determined by them.

SST is one stage

Sales Tax is only imposed one time on the manufacturing company when a sale is made to a trading company. The subsequent sales of the goods by the trading company would have no sales tax imposed.

Business entrepreneurs must be mindful and careful in the cost management as Sales Tax – although imposed at 10% – would eventually result in a much lower pricing of goods as compared to the GST regime.

GST is operating on a value added concept with input tax available as deduction. The supply chain moving from manufacturers to distributors, dealers and to consumers would result in higher pricing as GST is imposed on final stage, comprising of value add and profit margin.

SST is a business cost

Under the GST regime, input tax is available as a credit or deduction against output tax based on tax invoice received from GST registrant suppliers.

This would mean that GST is never a business cost as deduction is available against output tax even though there is no sales generated. Sales Tax on the other hand, would be paid by the trading company purchasing goods from the manufacturing company.

It is a business cost and deduction is only available when there is a sale. This would mean that business cost would be higher as Sales Tax is part of the inventory cost and to be deducted as cost of sales when goods are sold or exported. In simple terms, no sales, no deductions.

Businessmen are urged to carefully analyse the cost and not overprice the goods for the benefits of the people and the sustainability of their businesses. The reduction of GST from 6% to nil would immediately translate a price reduction of 6%, which is a must for a businesses to adhere to.

Failure to adhere to the pricing would expose the operators to the fines and penalties on anti-profiteering governed by Price Control and Anti-Profiteering Act 2011.

As the breakdown shows, SST is well suited in the Malaysian environment, to both the business communities and the people.

Source: Dr Choong Kwai FattDubbed the Malaysian tax guru, Dr Choong Kwai Fatt is a tax specialist and advocate.

Related:

Lim urges Najib to tell the truth

 

 

Related Posts:

 

Implications of the 'RM19bil GST collected, RM18bil taken’ and RM19.4bil shortfall !

https://youtu.be/Ew5Fk-ml6Mo  The immediate concern is the budget deficit for 2018 spiking to 4% if the GST refunds are made this ye..  

Jobs ahead for Pakatan's first 100 days fiscal reform

Implications of the 'RM19bil GST collected, RM18bil taken’ and RM19.4bil shortfall !

https://youtu.be/Ew5Fk-ml6Mo 

The immediate concern is the budget deficit for 2018 spiking to 4% if the GST refunds are made this year

ON May 31, when Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng announced that the new government would be able to meet the budget deficit of 2.8% for this year, the sum of RM19.4bil that is to be refunded to companies since the goods and services tax (GST) was discontinued, never came into the equation.

Now, since that money is not in a trust account that was specifically set up to meet the refund obligations, does the government need to borrow more to ensure it meets the refunds? In doing so, would it incur a bigger budget deficit than had been envisaged?

There are wider implications on the shortfall of the RM19.4bil, assuming the refunds are to be done this year.

The biggest challenge for Lim is to cover the shortfall to maintain the budget deficit for 2018 at 2.8%.

The hallmark of the Pakatan Harapan government’s first 100 days of rule is to bring down the cost of living and cost of doing business. Towards this end, it has subsidised the price of petrol and diesel and removed the GST.

The cost of keeping up with the Bantuan Sara Hidup and subsidy for petrol and diesel is estimated to be about RM6.2bil between June and December.

Revenue loss due to discontinuing the GST from June 1 onwards is estimated at RM21bil.

The shortfall is made up of cutting down government expenditure by RM10bil, increasing dividends from government agencies such as Khazanah Nasional Bhd and Petroliam Nasional Bhd, a higher petroleum income tax of RM5.4bil and proceeds from the implementation of the sales and service tax from September onwards.

Nowhere was the RM19.4bil figure that is to be paid back to companies under the GST that was discontinued mentioned.

Lim has said that the money was supposed to be in the trust account, but is not there and has gone “missing”.

Former Finance Ministry secretary-general Tan Sri Mohd Irwan Siregar Abdullah has said that all proceeds from the GST went into the consolidated fund of the federal government. The amount to be refunded is allocated to the trust account monthly based on the requirements of the Customs Department and the financial position of the government.

Customs director-general Datuk Seri Subromaniam Tholasy has revealed that since the GST was implemented on April 1, 2015, the total refunds amounted to RM82.9bil and the amount allocated to the trust account from the federal government consolidated fund was only RM63.5bil – representing a shortfall of RM19.4bil.

Generally, refunds for the GST are to be done within 14 days. But the amount allocated is less because not all refunds are paid within the two-week period.

At times, refunds are held back up to one year, pending investigations. Hence, the cash allocated to the trust account maintained by the Customs and the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) is less than the total amount due for refunds.

For instance, in 2017, the amount allocated to the IRB trust account for refunds was RM7bil when the total amount to be refunded was more than that.

In the case of the Customs, the outstanding refunds for 2017 was RM15bil, but the amount allocated was less.

Under the previous government, the GST provided a steady flow of cash every month. The thinking was that the money for refunds should be allocated when it comes due to best manage the cash-flow position of the government.

However, the view of Lim is that money meant for refunds should have been put into the trust account, irrespective of whether there is a need to pay immediately or otherwise.

Hence, the issue is not really the question of the RM19.4bil meant for refunds going “missing”.

It is whether the money is still in the consolidated accounts or whether it has been utilised. If it was utilised, did the government have the right to use it for other purposes in the name of cash-flow management?

The bigger implication for the Pakatan government is how it is going to cover this RM19.4bil shortfall.

One of the ways the government can cover the RM19.4bil hole without increasing the deficit is to cut more of the excesses.

On this score, the Pakatan government has so far handled public funds in a more judicious manner compared to the previous government. It has cut down the budget for inflated infrastructure projects and stopped unnecessary spending.

The light rail transit 3 and East Coast Rail Link projects are only some examples. It has stopped prestigious projects such as the KL-Singapore high-speed rail and the less glamorous mass rapid transit line 3 project. The government of today has earned full marks for being transparent and diligent in handling public finances.

Despite declaring that the federal government debt is at RM1.07 trillion, business sentiment is at a seven-year high, while consumer sentiment is at a 21-year high.

The stock market is looking good so far, much better than the likes of China and Hong Kong, although the improved sentiments are likely to be temporary.

As for the ringgit against the US dollar, its performance is better against many of the Asian and emerging-market currencies. The tumbling of the Turksih lira and Russian rouble is testimony that the ringgit is not that bad after all.

The government can probe, produce a White Paper or do anything else to look into the RM19.4bil shortfall, but the bottom line is that Lim and Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad will have to face the reality of making up for a RM19.4bil shortfall in government finances for this year.

Economists are predicting that the federal government budget deficit would be higher than the 2.8% estimated on May 31 this year on the assumptions are made this year. Some are looking at the budget deficit to be as high as 4%

Would there be an impact on Malaysia’s credit rating and the ringgit?

Yes, a spike in the budget deficit would have an impact for the short term.

However, the government of the day will score brownie points in its drive to bring about reforms and governance in the management of public funds. Rating agencies would appreciate any government that promotes transparency and improves on its finances purely by spending within its means.

So far, the government has done away with the GST and taken measures to put more cash into the hands of the people and business to improve domestic spending. The stabilisation of petrol prices and threemonth (June to September) tax-free period between the implementation of the GST and SST has put RM20bil into the hands of the people and businesses. This should help improve the domestic economy for a few months.

However, for the longer term, investors and rating agencies will be looking at how the RM19.4bil hole in the federal government finances will be covered. What are the government assets that will be sold?

Certainly, we are not looking at an expansionary budget come November this year.

Source:  The Alternative view by M.Sshanmugam The Star

RM19bil GST collected, RM18bil taken’

KUALA LUMPUR: The previous government has not been able to refund companies their tax credit that came about following the implementation of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) because 93% of the money was not placed in the correct account, Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng revealed.

He said some RM18bil of the RM19.4bil input tax credit under the GST system since 2015 was “robbed” by the previous administration.

“I was very shocked when informed that this happened because the previous government had failed to enter the GST collection in the trust account specifically meant for the repaying of GST claims.

“Instead, the Barisan Nasional government pilfered the trust account and entered cash GST collection directly into the consolidated fund as revenue to be spent freely,” he said when tabling the GST (Repeal) Bill 2018 during its second reading in Parliament yesterday.

He said that as of May 31, the outstanding GST refund stood at RM19.397bil whereas there was only a balance of RM1.486bil in the repayment fund.

Lim said from the total input tax credit, RM9.2bil or 47% was recorded between Jan 1 and May 31 this year, RM6.8bil or 35% in 2017, RM2.8bil (15%) in 2016, and RM600mil (3%) in 2015 (from April 1 to Dec 31, 2015).

Under GST, the input tax credit allowed businesses to reclaim credit for taxes paid on purchases, subject to filing of input tax documents.

In his winding-up reply, Lim said a comprehensive investigation would be carried out to determine the cause of the missing funds.

When debating the Bill, Lim also said he had asked for documents to show how the input tax had ended up in the consolidated fund.

“I asked the Chief Secretary to the Government for the Cabinet papers on the matter.

“However, he told me he could not remember anything of such,” he added.

Lim said former Bank Negara Governor Tan Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz, when told of the missing funds, said it was imperative that the money was returned to the claimants as it was fiscally moral to do so.

Later, at the Parliament lobby, Lim said a former Treasury secretary-general may have been aware of the missing RM18bil.

The previous government, he said, had committed wrongdoing over the missing funds.

“I would assume the previous KSP (ketua setiausaha perbendaharaan/Treasury secretary-general) would have known about this.

“We want something definite because we want to look at the circle of decision-makers,” he said.

By martin carvalho, hemananthani sivanandam, rahimy rahim, and loshana k shagar The Star

Khairy urges gov't to bring 'GST robbers' to book

BN MPs want Najib, RM18b GST 'robbery' claim investigated

Related 

GST refunds should be in trust account: ACCCIM - theSundaily

 

RM18b input tax credit under GST system robbed ... - The Straits Times

 

Related posts:

 

What concerns Malaysians most ? 

 

Jobs ahead for Pakatan's first 100 days fiscal reform

 

Singapore budget 2018: hiking its sales tax, but not until 2021 or later

 

Singapore budget 2018: hiking its sales tax, but not until 2021 or later

https://youtu.be/QbytAqqXiCk

http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/budget_2018/
https://twitter.com/MOFsg

 

Higher GST: A file picture showing people walking along busy Orchard Road in Singapore. The country says its sales tax will rise to 9% but the change will come sometimes between 2021 and 2025

 

 Singapore is hiking its sales tax, but not until 2021 or later

 

 SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Singapore said its sales tax will rise to 9 percent from 7 percent, but the change will only come “sometime” between 2021 and 2025, making it likely that the increase would kick in after the city-state’s next general election.

Instead of getting a GST hike soon, Singaporeans aged 21 and above will get a “hong bao”, or Lunar New Year red packet, as Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat announced a “one-off” bonus in 2018 of up to S$300 ($228.50), depending on their income.

The bonus comes after Singapore’s trade-reliant economy grew 3.6 percent in 2017, its best pace in three years. 

Global economic growth, plus comments by policymakers on the importance of raising revenue to meet future spending needs for Singapore’s ageing population, led many analysts to expect that the Goods and Services Tax, kept at 7 percent since 2007, would increase as early as the coming fiscal year. 

“The surprise for us was that the planned increase was for a much later period,” said Jeff Ng, chief economist Asia for Continuum Economics. 

“This eases the need for a future government or administration to announce the GST,” Ng said. 

Singapore’s next general election is due to be held by January 2021. In the last one in 2015, the ruling People’s Action Party won 70 percent of the vote, a strong improvement from the 60 percent garnered in 2011. 

After announcing the planned GST hike, the finance minister said “the exact timing will depend on the state of the economy, how much our expenditures grow, and how buoyant our existing taxes are. But I expect that we will need to do so earlier rather than later in the period.” 

Singapore introduced a GST in 1994, with a 3 percent rate. This was raised to 4 percent in 2003 and 5 percent in 2004, then to 7 percent in 2007. The current rate is among the world’s lowest for a consumption tax.

CARBON TAX COMING 

 

Besides the plan for raising GST, Heng unveiled other tax measures. 

These include increasing the top marginal buyer’s stamp duty on residential property worth more than S$1 million effective from Tuesday, raising the excise duty on tobacco products and introducing GST on imported services from 2020. 

Coming in 2019 is a carbon tax, which will be S$5 per tonne of greenhouse gas emissions until 2023. The plan is to increase it to between S$10-S$15 per tonne by 2030. 

Heng said spending needs will rise across various sectors in coming years, including in healthcare, infrastructure and security. 

The government expects average annual healthcare spending to rise from 2.2 percent of GDP currently, to almost 3 percent of GDP over the next decade, he added. 

“With an ageing population and an increasing chronic disease burden, the demands on families and Government will rise,” the finance minister said. “We will need to spend even more on healthcare.”

Heng, one of several cabinet ministers considered a possible successor to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, said in the speech “We must anchor Singapore as a Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise.” 

Song Seng Wun, an economist for CIMB private banking, said the one-off “hong bao” bonus was a product of Singapore’s economy having a “better than expected outcome” in the last year.

(For a graphic on Singapore's ageing demographics click reut.rs/2BzapNH) 

($1 = 1.3125 Singapore dollars) 

By Masayuki Kitano, John Geddie

Additional reporting by Aradhana Aravindan and Fathin Ungku; Editing by Richard Borsuk

Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Top stories

 Singapore announces one-time bonus of S$100-S$300 for adult Singaporeans - ASEAN/East Asia

Budget 2018:
Singaporeans to
get 'hongbao' SG
Bonus of up to S$300 following 2017 Budget surplus

Channel NewsAsia

Singapore Matches
More Problems
With More Money
in Budget

Bloomberg

Singapore Budget
2018: 'Well-
calibrated', will
help lift wages, say Money FM 89.3 panellists

The Straits Times