A challenging year ahead

AS the Fire Monkey swings in to take its place, many have predicted this year as a challenging one. So, what’s in store for everyone in this particular year?

Many came to me for advice on how to deal with this challenging period. Frankly speaking, I am not a feng shui master or an astrologist who can somehow predict the future. Neither do I know how to read a crystal ball and tell you what lies ahead. Having been through a few round of recessions and bad times during my early days, I can, however, only share my own experiences and observations.

As shared in my last article “Lessons from my father”, I have learnt how to live frugally since young from my late parents. I recalled starting up my own architectural firm at the worst possible time. The year was 1964, and it was during the time of the Malaysia-Indonesia confrontation. The country was experiencing an economic recession and it is not hard to imagine how tough it was to make a living. I basically lived on “char kuey teow” as my lunch for two years! Being frugal and practising delayed gratification somehow helped me sail through that rough period.

While it is wise to spend prudently, it is even wiser not to be in debt during times of uncertainty. I read an article which highlighted that Malaysian household debt as of August 2015 was 88.1% of gross domestic product against only 60.4% in 2008. The figure was among the highest in the region. It is rather alarming considering most young people tend to be indebted with at least a car and a huge outstanding of credit card and personal loan repayment.

It is important not to put ourselves in a vulnerable financial situation, in order to face the challenges ahead. Most items purchased with the use of personal loan, credit card and hire-purchase are likely to depreciate over time. As a result, if repayments are not made on time or at all, these items with depreciated value becomes a loss. Such loans are then dubbed as “bad debt”. A “good debt” is one that brings returns. It is time to re-look into our debt categories and reallocate our resources appropriately.

Conserving funds, while important, is not enough to withstand the inflation impact. It is therefore crucial to invest to fight inflation especially monetary inflation (money printing) which is a real problem in today’s world economy and is currently also causing asset inflation to continue. It is difficult to know the best form of investment during uncertain environment. However, I believe each of us has areas of expertise, and we should focus on those areas.

If you are planning to own a property, a good inflation-hedging tool, do creative searching for your dream home.

Muhamad Azree Abdul Rahim, a 26-year-old Malaysian, solved his problem of owning a property by thinking-out-of-the-box. He turned a used shipping container into his home by taking a RM75,000 loan and buying a plot of 2,400 sq ft land some 25km from Shah Alam. He was able to build a decent, fully-functional home with a garden next to it. His unconventional way of building his own house without being manacled to a 30-year housing loan is something that we should learn.

While everyone would love to stay near to the city centre and preferably, own a big comfortable home, we need to be realistic in order not to be financially overstretched. Start with a smaller home, and buy a home that you can afford, not what you like. It is absolutely fine if you chose a house next to the last MRT station, far away from KL city centre, as long as you find it easy to commute. No point being near the city yet having to endure the daily routine of traffic madness and at the same time, forking out a large sum beyond your means.

In the 1986 recession (the worst recession that I could remember), I had a team of 20 sales team members. Instead of waiting for customers to drop by our office, we went door-to-door and street-to-street to look for customers. Imagine swimming against the current, you may feel very tired and exhausted, but at least you are few steps nearer to your destination and you become a much stronger person. Hence, building resilience and perseverance in weathering the storm during challenging times is just as important.

Back to the year of the Fire Monkey, I realised that there are similar characteristics that we can learn from those who are born in the year of the Monkey. According to Chinese zodiac analysis, monkey is the mnemonic symbol associated with intelligence, creativity, perseverance and flexibility. Perhaps, take the cue from the monkey and brave through this challenging year by applying some of its traits.

Land & Property Food for Thought Alan Tong

Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. He was the World President of FIABCI International for 2005/2006 and awarded the Property Man of the Year 2010 at FIABCI Malaysia Property Award. He is also the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties. For feedback, please email feedback@fiabci-asiapacific.com.

Related posts:

Developers of toppled Taiwan building detained

Executives face charges over professional negligence resulting in death Questions are being asked about the building’s construction (..

Start work on Friday for better luck? Sink or swing with the Monkey: Pay peanuts, get monkeys!

THE fifth day of the Chinese New Year, which falls on Friday, is the best day to start work in the Year of the Fire Monkey, China Press re...

Hard work the key to realising 2016 goals; Events that shaped China in 2015

Hard work the key to realising 2016 goals President Xi Jinping looked forward to 2016 in a speech calling for confidence and hard work f...

Penang property market to be resilient on sustained demand

PETALING JAYA: Penang’s property market is expected to stay resilient on the back of sustained demand, especially from Penangites working abroad planning to return and prospective retirees eyeing homes in the state.

“There has been a slowdown in the last year. There are a few categories of investors in Penang; those who are owner occupiers, those who are investors for the cultural developments, those who are in the Malaysia My Second Home (MM2H) and Penangites who work abroad but would like to settle in Malaysia,” said Penang Institute CEO and head of economics studies Dr Lim Kim Hwa (pictured) at the National Real Estate Convention (NREC) 2015 yesterday.

“For the last two categories, the properties in Penang would be priced significantly cheaper, thus I believe the demand in the property sector in Penang would remain rather constant,” concluded Lim during his presentation entitled “Penang: The Next Metropolis”.

In terms of the wider economy, Penang is expected to register a 5% to 6% growth in its gross domestic product (GDP), outpacing the overall country’s growth by 1%, he said, noting that last year, Penang’s GDP grew by 7.4% while Malaysia’s grew by 6%.

According to Lim, Penang contributes 21.8% of the balance of Malaysia’s trade surplus, specialising in machinery, transport equipment and miscellaneous manufactured articles.

“Penang’s economy is more export-orientated, and now there is a better demand for electrical and electronic goods,” he said.

The export sector is expected to improve with the recovery of the US economy and the weaker ringgit, he added.

“It is important that Penang provides the best environment to attract more investments. Penang is the main manufacturing and economic hub for electronic and electrical items. Bayan Lepas is already full. It is important to provide more space for industrial growth.”

Some of the projects and initiatives that are expected to contribute to this growth is the IT-BPO at Bayan Lepas, BPO Prime at Bayan Baru and Changkat Byram, south of Batu Kawan.

Other projects that will benefit Penang overall include the Penang Transport Master Plan, Penang Heritage Arts District – Ilham Penang at Sia Boey, Creative Animation Triggers at Wisma Yeap Chor Ee, and Komtar refurbishment. “All of these projects involve the private sector,” added Lim.

“The Penang Transport Master Plan (PTMP) is the catalyst to [turning Penang into a] metropolis, as it involves alleviating a lot of the problems locally in Penang, especially traffic congestion,” said Lim.

Expected to be completed in 2030, the RM27 billion project would include amenities such as trams for the heritage zones, LRT for the island and mainland, and water taxis.

Lim said Penang is on track to achieving its metropolis status.

“It is an ongoing process, and there is no deadline. Penang aims to transform into an international, intelligent city filled with life. To create a great metropolis, it has to be unique, and it has to attract people to want to live and expand the growth of the city,” he said.

NREC 2015 saw more than 250 participants from the banking, development, property and consultancy industries.

NREC is organised by the Royal Institution of Surveyors Malaysia (RISM) and co-organised by the Association of Valuers, Property Managers, Estate Agents and Property Consultants in the Private Sector Malaysia (PEPS).

Themed “Homes For Generations – Redefining Development Trends”, the convention highlighted concerns for the future of the real estate industry in Malaysia.

By Hannah Rafee / theedgeproperty.com 

Malaysian income: bread and butter, affordability of owing a house

JUST a few months back, a social media post on food price comparison between United Kingdom and Malaysia went viral and attracted plenty of attention.

This interesting post offered a peep into the average cost of living and purchasing power of Malaysians nowadays.

A Malaysian, Rysherz Rayn, posted on his Facebook that with about £5 (around RM33.50), he could purchase bananas, a box of grapes, 10 apples, an ice lettuce and five packets of his favourite chocolate in London. In Malaysia, the same items would add up to about RM44.

He went on to share that £5 is an hourly pay for a part-timer in UK. While in Malaysia, the average hourly pay for a part-timer is at about RM4. In other words, to afford the same items that a British buys with an hour pay, it may cost an average Malaysian 11 hours of work.

The post created a lot of discussions, some expressed shock and disappointment, others thought UK is too far away for comparison. To make it more relevant and familiar for Malaysians, I did a quick price check on Australian food.

Based on online information and personal experience, buying essential items such as a dozen eggs, 1kg of apples, a lettuce, and a loaf of sliced bread cost about A$9 (RM28) in Australia; on the other hand the same items come up to about RM20 in Malaysia.

In Australia, the minimum wage per hour is A$17.29 (RM53.50), while ours is only RM4.30 based on the minimum monthly wage of RM900.

Though this situation doesn’t paint the overall picture of the living standard in Malaysia, it does illustrate our average cost of living and purchasing power.

If we take a bigger picture, our issue of bread and butter relates closely to brick and mortar, which is the roof over our heads. When our wages are stretched in purchasing daily items compared to other countries, there is no surprise that our housing affordability level is also low.

According to the “Making Housing Affordable” report released by Khazanah Research Institute (KRI) in August, Malaysia’s median house prices were 4.4 times median annual household income in 2014. This signifies a “seriously unaffordable” housing market because an “affordable” market should have a “median multiple” (median house prices as a multiple of median annual household income) of 3.0 times based on global standards.

If we only take Kuala Lumpur into the computation, the median house prices is even higher at 5.4 times (based on annual median income of RM91,440, and the median for all house prices in Kuala Lumpur at RM490,000). Housing for Kuala Lumpur is categorised as “severely unaffordable”.

It is good that KRI reported the issue and highlighted that our country should gear towards improving the elasticity of housing supply and respond to the needs of all segments. However, other than supply, we should also look into the fundamental issue of our income level.

I remember when I first started working in 1961, my salary was RM628 and my first car was a Peugeot 404 which cost RM7,724. A single-storey house in Klang during that time was RM13,000. It cost me only one year of my salary to buy a car, and less than 2 years’ salary to afford a house.

Young graduate

However, a similar car today costs around RM100,000, and a landed house in Klang easily costs RM350,000. Looking at the salary of a young graduate which ranges from RM2,000 to RM3,000 nowadays, it takes 3 to 4 years of their salary to buy a similar Peugeot or equivalent car, and 10 to 15 years to purchase a house.

A recent news article pointed out that, only one out of two PR1MA housing loan applications are approved. It is ironic that even with affordable housing, the rakyat can’t afford a home.

The scenario and comparison above show the challenges of our young generation in securing a house today. It is unfortunate that when our car and house prices grow as a result of inflation and demand, our income doesn’t grow in tandem.

I also remembered in the 1970s, Malaysia and South Korea were started on the same level playing field in terms of gross domestic product (GDP).

According to data from International Monetary Fund (IMF), our estimated nominal GDP per capita in 1977 was US$1,084 (RM4,791), while South Korea was US$1,042 (RM4,605). During that time, when I travelled overseas with our strong currency, people in those countries looked up to me.

However, the IMF data shows the estimated GDP per capita in South Korea today is US$28,338 (RM125,256), while Malaysia is only US$10,654 (RM47,091). Other regional countries such as Taiwan and Singapore are also progressing at a fast pace, in which their estimated GDP per capita now are US$22,464 (RM99,293) and US$53,604 (RM236,935) respectively.

Back to the fundamental issue of our housing affordability, other than providing more affordable housing, the Government needs to move the rakyat up the value chain and increase the nation’s income level.

We know that the authority has been aspiring to do so under the 11th Economic Development Plan. One of them being to attain a per capita income of US$15,000 (RM66,000) by year 2020.

To expedite this, the Government and relevant authorities have to improve the competitiveness and productivity of the nation, so as to catch up with the other countries in the region.

When we talk about the affordability of our brick and mortar, the most fundamental way is to address the underlying problem of our bread and butter, i.e. our income. Until and unless our wages buy us more eggs and rice, it will be a challenge to afford a house.

- Viewpoint Food for Thought by Alan Tong The Star

Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. He was the world president of FIABCI International for 2005/2006 and awarded the Property Man of the Year 2010 at FIABCI Malaysia Property Award. He is also the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties. For feedback, please email feedback@fiabci-asiapacific.com.

Related posts:

Malaysia’s residential housing market ‘severely unaffordable’, said Demographia

Malaysian homes more unaffordable than Singapore, Japan and the US; Budget 2015 brings little joy

Malaysian homes more unaffordable than Singapore

, Japan ...

Malaysian homes more unaffordable than Singapore, Japan and the US; Budget 2015 brings little joy. File picture shows houses under construction in Kuala Lumpur. Malaysia has a 'severely unaffordable' residential homes ...

http://rightwaysrichard.blogspot.com/

Malaysian property market likely to regain momentum post GST

Malaysian property market likely to regain momentum post GST 

03 Jan 2015

CIMB Research head of research Terence Wong said in a report that this would be a “tricky” year given the pick up in sales momentum in 2014 on expectation of property prices rising post GST. He points out developers have ...

http://rightwaysrichard.blogspot.com/

A strata property living nightmare: leakage

The party responsible is not your upstairs neighbour but the management

Stiff penalty: Whoever fails to give access to the party carrying out the inspection commits an offence. The fine imposed is up to RM50,000 or imprisonment of up to three years or both, under regulation 63(2).

IF you live in a high rise building and have an inter-floor leakage issue, you can be rest assured that you are not alone. Inter-floor leakage is without a doubt one of the biggest problems faced by many dwellers of high rise buildings.

Whilst the leakage may appear only in a particular parcel, the source of the leakage may lie in the parcel above or even elsewhere. The cooperation of more than one party is therefore required; without which one cannot even begin to identify the problem, let alone solve it.

Two issues must be identified when there is an inter-floor leakage. Firstly, the source of the leakage and secondly, the person or body responsible for repair or rectification. Who is supposed to identify the source of the leakage to start with? The person or body responsible of course, you may say, but how do you know who is responsible before the cause of the problem is ascertained? A bit of a chicken and egg situation arises.

New Act

Will the new management Act answer to all ceiling leakages?

In February 2013 the Strata Management Act 2013 (SMA) was passed by Parliament. With that came a presumption in law, under Section 142 of the SMA, that if the leakage is on the ceiling, then such leakage is presumed to be from the parcel above unless it is proven otherwise. So, if you have a leakage from your ceiling, go to your upstairs neighbour and tell him/her that he/she is responsible and must therefore find the source of the leakage and do the repair. What if he/she disclaims responsibility? Simple, You just quote Section 142 of the SMA. What a magical section with a “one fits all” answer to ceiling leakages! I thought so too when I first read Section 142, but I was not completely right for the law does not place the entire responsibility squarely on the upstairs parcel owner.

It was to be another couple of years before the SMA was implemented in June 2015 but the good news is that with that came also the implementation of the Strata Management (Maintenance & Management) Regulations 2015 (SMR). Many thanks to those (including HBA volunteers) who worked tirelessly on drafting and fine tuning the provisions of the SMR, we now have some definite answers on what to do if you have a leakage from your ceiling.

Who is responsible?

In dealing with inter-floor leakage one must not just look at Section 142 of the SMA but also Part XV of the SMR. Indeed it is Part XV of the SMR which tells you what to do if you discover dampness, moisture or water penetration from your ceiling or if you were to go home one day only to find that it is raining in your apartment.

Go to the developer if you are still covered by the defects liability provisions.

If the leakage is still covered by the provisions of your sale and purchase agreement (SPA), follow the provisions of your SPA. For homebuyers, these are typically cases where the leakage or defect occurs during the defects liability period, and which the housing developers are required to rectify, as provided in the statutory SPA.

JMB/MC/Management first in the line of responsibility – regulation 56

If the leakage is not one which is covered by the SPA, then notice may be served by the owner of the affected parcel on the developer or the joint management body (“JMB”) or the management corporation (“MC”) or the subsidiary management corporation (“sub-MC”), as the case may be.

This is provided for in regulation 56(1) of the SMR. What regulation 56 essentially means is that you serve notice on the body responsible for the maintenance and management of the common property, which for convenience I shall refer to as “the management”. So, now you see, the party first in the line of responsibility is not your upstairs neighbour but the management.

Once notice is received, the management must, within seven days, carry out an inspection to determine the cause of the leakage and the party responsible for rectification (regulation 57). Thereafter, the management must issue a “Certificate of Inspection” stating the cause of the inter-floor leakage as well as the party responsible for rectification (regulation 59). A standard form certificate for this purpose can be found in Form 28 under the Second Schedule of the SMR.

So, what is the purpose of Section 142, you may ask? Section 142 merely creates a presumption that the defect lies in the parcel above. In practical terms, this does nothing towards resolving any inter-floor leakage issues other than perhaps as a starting point for inspection. After all, one cannot possibly rectify a defect which causes the leakage until and unless the actual defect is identified. The legal implication of Section 142, however, is perhaps best left to those much more qualified than I but I do wonder if this statutory presumption alone can be a valid ground for holding the upstairs parcel owner responsible and if so under what circumstances in light of the provisions of the SMR.

Determining factor(s)

Under regulation 58 of the SMR, the management must take into account not just the aforesaid presumption but also the following matters which to my mind are far more relevant once the defect is identified:-

(1) that any defect in something which serves more than one parcel is a common property defect; and

(2) that any defect in something which serves only one parcel is a defect of that particular parcel even though that something is situated in common property or in void space.

In other words, the determining factor is not the location of that defective something but which parcels that something serves. If it serves just one parcel, that particular parcel owner is primarily responsible and must rectify the defect failing which the management shall carry out the rectification works and charge the expenses to that particular parcel owner. I say primarily because whilst regulation 61 of the SMR imposes the obligation on a specific parcel owner such obligation is expressly stated to be without prejudice to that parcel owner seeking indemnity from someone else.

That of course begs the question of who can be held liable for such indemnity; a question which is beyond the scope of this article but I certainly will not rule out any parcel owner, including the affected parcel owner, who contributes towards the defect or any delay in the rectification of the defect.

The decision of the management is, as expected, not final. Anyone not satisfied with a decision made against him/her may refer to the Commissioner Of Buildings (COB) who shall ascertain the cause of the leakage and the party responsible in accordance with regulation 64(1) & (2) and the decision of the COB shall be complied with by all parties concerned.

Grant access for inspection or risk prosecution

It goes without saying: that neither inspection nor rectification works can be effectively carried out without access to all relevant parcels and common property. Hence, the imposition of a statutory obligation on all relevant parties to give access as provided by regulation 63(1) of the SMR comes as no surprise at all.

Whoever fails to give access to the party carrying out the inspection commits an offence! And the punishment is severe too; a fine of up to RM50,000 or imprisonment of up to three years or both, under regulation 63(2).

Given that the lack of cooperation on the part of some parcel owners/occupiers has remained one of the main causes of delay in resolving inter-floor leakage problems, these provisions are definitely a step in the right direction. It does puzzle me, however, that whilst a failure to give access for inspection tantamount to an offence, the same does not seem to apply to a failure to give access for rectification.

Some of you cynics out there may be tempted to brush this aside as something unlikely to be enforced by the authorities but do you want to take that chance? Do you really want to risk prosecution over something as simple as giving access for inspection and/or rectification?

Beside, now that the Strata Management Tribunal has been set up you may be slapped with an order much sooner than you think.

By Chang Kim Loong Buyer Beware

Chang Kim Loong AMN is the honorary secretary-general of the National House Buyers Association: www.hba.org.my , a non-profit, non-governmental organisation manned purely by volunteers.

Related posts:

• 

  By-laws governing strata property management in Malaysia, part 1

  Third Schedule of Strata Management Regulation 2015 WITH the demise of the Deed of Mutual Covenants, the Third Schedule of the Strata...

• By-laws governing strata property management in Malaysia, part 2 ... 

High cost under new law may affect property investors' profit margin

Strata regime: Return on investment will always be a consideration as higher cost would certainly affect the possible margin of profit in today’s buyers’ market.

Counting the cost: Investors' profit margin may be affected under new law

PROPERTY has topped the list of investment options for those who have extra cash. Property investors and those who prefer other instruments, are trying to gain maximum returns on their hard earned money.

Property investment has gained momentum because of the price boom in the last 10 years as seen by the massive development and high take-up rate.

Because the bulk of these properties are stratified residential properties, legislations have been updated for a more efficient delivery of strata titles. Essentially, these new legislations provide more protection to house buyers.

Among these are the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) (Amendment) Act 2012 (“HDAA”), Strata Titles (Amendment) Act 2013 and Strata Management Act 2013 (both “Strata regime”). The Strata Management Act came into effect on June 1, 2015.

Return on investment will always be a consideration as higher cost would certainly affect the possible margin of profit in today’s buyers’ market. While having new legislations are good news for house buyers, these new legislations could also impact the cost of any investment in strata residential property.

For a start, there is now higher compliance cost for the housing developers, as there is an increase in the amount to be deposited in the housing development account.

There is also the new requirement to maintain the common property defects account prior to the delivery of the keys to the house buyers.

This means that under the new regime, developers will have a higher compliance cost, which may indirectly result in fluctuations of property prices. This means developers need to be financially strong and there is the possibility that they may incur financial costs as they try to maintain a feasible and sustainable cash flow.

This will discourage the smaller players. Having fewer choices is definitely not good news for the investors.

In addition, there is also a higher transactional cost for those who plan to flip their properties.

The earlier issuance of strata title upon delivery of vacant possession will require investors to fork out expenses related to the stamp duty before selling the completed property to the next buyer.

In other words, there is no longer savings on the stamp duty on transfer for those investors who bought directly from the developers. This lowers the return on investment, not to mention having to bear with the longer and complicated process of double transfers for those who are eager to dispose of the property on delivery of vacant possession.

The new template of the prescribed sale and purchase agreement HDAA (Schedule H) also requires that the payment shall be in compliance with the schedule of payment and no person shall act as stakeholder to collect such payment.

In simpler sense, the developer is no longer allowed to collect booking fee from the investors for their preferred unit and the unit they have selected is only secured upon the signing of the sale and purchase agreement with the 10% payment.

As such, there is no turning back once you have signed on those dotted lines and there is no way to secure your unit of choice with lower amount while you are working on the full 10% deposit.

Another cost that will burden property investors is the maintenance fees charged by the management office when they get their keys to their properties. The new strata regime has provided for the possibility of limited common property usage and the exclusive use of certain facilities – a privilege – which comes with a price tag. If the management adopts any limited common property, they are looking at a two-tier service charges and sinking fund, with one for those who have the use of one set of common properties and the other for the use of limited common property, to be enjoyed only by a selected few.

Despite monetary cost, time cost is also a factor for investors. A purchase into a strata development now calls for more involvement in the management as the management corporation of the development is formed much earlier now with the possibility of having the title and the keys delivered at the same time.

The new strata regime requires the active participation of all owners, as the tenure of the office bearer is limited. Other owners are required to sit in the management corporation committee on subsequent years. Despite the fact that taking up the responsibilities of committee members offers monetary gains, any misconduct or negligence may now result in a penalty.

The new restrictions on advertisement and representation by the developers also mean that the investors are required to spend time on research and do their own due diligence to better understand the investment. There is no longer permitted representation such as time/distance from a particular venue, projected monetary returns/gains and rental income. Thus, before making decision to invest, the consumers have to do more personal research on the investment.

While property investment remains feasible over the longer term, investors are advised to take these legislations into consideration to come out with a realistic projection of investment return.

By CHRIS TAN Real Legal

Related posts

• 

  Property prices will hold as ringgit falls to new low against USD and S$

  PETALING JAYA: The depreciation of the ringgit will not lead to real estate prices crashing. The Malaysian Institute of Estate Agents ...

• 

  By-laws governing strata property management in Malaysia, part 1

  Third Schedule of Strata Management Regulation 2015 WITH the demise of the Deed of Mutual Covenants, the Third Schedule of the Strata...

• 

  By-laws governing strata property management in Malaysia, part 2

  General duties of a proprietors according to the Third Schedule of Strata Management Regulation 2015 WHILE last week's article cove...

Not wise to sell property or house to shore up ringgit Malaysia

ON Thursday, at a seminar organised by Malaysia Property Inc, the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) said it would continue to seek “opportunistic” investments abroad.

There are various reasons why EPF and the other funds absolutely need to do so if they are to provide a steady dividend stream to contributors over the longer term and to diversify risk.

As we have seen the last year or so, the ringgit has come under tremendous pressure and year to date, it has weakened against most currencies, especially the US dollar, the British pound and the Singapore dollar.

Had EPF not made forays abroad in 2009, its 14 million odd contributors would not have received dividends ranging between 6% and 6.75% between 2011 and 2014 and in the interim years of 2012, 6.12% and 2013, 6.35%.

Prior to this, EPF declared dividends of 5.8% in 2007, 4.5% in 2008, 5.65% in 2009 and 5.8% in 2010.

The Asian financial crisis in 1997/98 and the 2008 global financial crisis were costly lessons for EPF and the other funds.

Before its move to buy property abroad in 2008, less than 1% of its total funds were invested in real estate. Today, it has the mandate to invest up to 4% of its total funds of about RM700bil in local and foreign properties. It can also invest up to 26% of its available funds in non-ringgit denominated investment instruments including bonds, securities, properties and other others.

So far, EPF has invested more than £1bil in UK and more than 1bil euros in France and Germany. It also has properties in Japan and Australia.

Its core investments in Europe, excluding UK, are in the office and logistics sector. In UK, it has offices, logistics and 12 hospitals under the Spire brand. It also has a 20% stake in Battersea Power Station mixed used project. According to its head of global real estate in the private markets department Kamarulzaman Hassan, EPF would like to add retail hypermarket chain to its stable.

It is prudent and logical for EPF to seek opportunities in mature markets because although it knows the home market well, it is already in every sub-segment of the local real estate market - logistics, retail, office, residential.

As Kamarulzaman aptly said, EPF is “a big fish in a small crowded pond.” Other big fish in this small pond include Permodalan Nasional Bhd, Retirement Fund Inc (or KWAP) and Lembaga Tabung Haji, Perbadanan Hartanah Bumiputra among others.

There are several reasons why EPF has made forays abroad. It was badly hit in 1997 and 2008. Prior to this, it invested only in Malaysia. It had all its eggs in one basket.

Earlier this year, as the ringgit was weakening, certain parties in the government called on the various funds to bring their money home to shore up the ringgit. They were to curb investments abroad.

EPF subsequently sold 1 Sheldon Square, UK for £210mil (RM1.14bil), which it bought in 2010 for £156.7mi, giving EPF a net gain of £54 mil. Whether it made that decision to sell based on that call to bring the money home is a moot point. That property was tenanted out to Visa Services Europe until December 2022, with a 5.75% annual yield.

So far, KWAP and Felda have said they will not be selling their investments which gave them a good yield.

The thing is, if there is better yield to be had, and forex to earn, why dispose of them?

And why curb funds from investing abroad if they have done proper due diligence and are able to manage these investments well.

As it is, according to Kamarulzaman, London properties are so hot today that investors are willing to get 3.5% to 4% in annual yield.

Selling overseas real estate which were purchased when the pound was low, when it is offering a good yield, just to shore up the ringgit does not seem to be a wise call.

It is like killing the goose that lays the golden egg just to provide food for a day. Yes, London’s property prices are frothy now, but these property investment have long leases.

Besides, the markets it has invested in are mature markets with high liquidity. There is interest in these markets from around the world.

Because property sector is cyclical, the timing is important. EPF entered UK when the it was about RM5 to a pound. These investments came with long leases, which fit into EPF’s need for a steady income flow as it needs to pay dividends to contributors.

In short, going abroad gave it a much needed new investment platform which was not available at home.

These mature markets offer transparent legal and tax structures and clearly, governance was well established.

There is a clear exit option and this was demonstrated when it sold 1 Sheldon Square earlier this year.

UK properties have gone up in value considerably since. Whether EPF will continue to liquidate depends on various factors but to liquidate just to bring home the money to shore up the ringgit should not be one of them, especially when its investments are yielding good returns.

Property is today the biggest alternative asset class for institutional investors and forms the largest allocation for pension funds, insurance companies and sovereign wealth funds.

It is also not homogenous but in today’s volatile environment, it is more tangible than most other asset classes.

Comment by Thean Lee Cheng The Star/Asia News Network

Related post:

• The riddled Ringgit Malasia hits 17-year low again against US dollar...
• 
  

Penang property in steady demand, will the housing market facing a glut?

Investment-friendly: A file picture shows visitors at the recent Star Property Fair in Penang. Affin Hwang believes that property developers with land bank and established presence in Penang will benefit from rising property demand.

PETALING JAYA: An increasing population in Penang coupled withlong-term property demand will be supported by major projects driven by public-private partnerships (PPPs), according to Affin Hwang Capital Research.

Among the PPP projects, the largest being the RM27bil Penang Transport Master Plan (PTMP), could be awarded by September. Singapore’s Temasek Holdings also has a proposed joint venture with Penang Development Corp (PDC) to develop an RM11.3bil business process outsourcing centre and an international technology park.

The research house said in a report that its top stock picks for infrastructure and property exposure to Penang were Gamuda Bhd, IJM Corp Bhd, and Eastern & Oriental Bhd (E&O).

It said the Penang government had pushed for the economy to move up the value chain by encouraging knowledge-intensive and innovation-led manufacturing and services.

“Property development companies such as E&O, Eco World Development Group Bhd and Ewein Bhd are embarking on new large-scale mixed development projects in the state with total gross development value (GDV) of RM60bil,” it added.

E&O has the highest exposure to Penang with property development projects in the state comprising 77% of GDV totalling RM34bil. The multi-billion ringgit PTMP has seen keen interest, with six consortiums submitting bids to be the project delivery partner (PDP) while Affin Hwang Capital understands that discussions for the joint venture with PDC were in the final stages.

“The joint development agreement is expected to be inked in July or August. Work on the BPO Prime is expected to start in the first quarter of 2016.” The entry of Temasek would also attract more Singapore companies and other foreign investors to Penang.

“We believe Gamuda will likely be appointed the PDP for the project. Also, being one of the largest contractors in Penang, IJM Corp is expected to win a substantial portion of construction work for the PTMP,” it said.

“The Penang government also managed to convince Hewlett-Packard to choose Penang as the location to set up its new RM1bil manufacturing facility instead of Iskandar Malaysia.”

The plant would produce high-speed inkjet printer heads for the global market.

A ready pool of skilled workers out of a total workforce of 797,700, developed infrastructure, established information technology eco-system, and consistent and investment-friendly state government policies could be the reasons why Penang continue to be attractive compared with Iskandar Malaysia.

The island’s popularity with tourists, diverse culture, historical attractions, beautiful coasts and famous cuisine were added attractions.

“We believe property developers with land bank and established presence in Penang will benefit from rising property demand in the long run.

“Job creation from rising investments in industrial and service sectors should support population growth from organic expansion and inbound migration,” said Affin Hwang Capital Research.- The Star/Asian News Network

The housing market in Penang today

With an abundance of newly built high-rise condominiums, is Penang facing a property glut?

Malaysia’s population crossed the 30 million mark in February 2014. According to the Population and Housing Census 2010, about three in 10 people fall in the 20-40 years old age group – the one most likely to be firsttime home buyers. By 2020, that group is projected to grow to 11.3 million. In Penang, the current estimate for this age group is at 0.6 million, or 36% of the state population. The average property price in Penang currently stands at RM336,521. Even with the 50% stamp duty cut, middle-income earners with two dependents can only afford houses priced at RM300,000 and below [1], and looking at the current national average price for all types of properties, RM300,000 is well below the average (Figure 1).

Besides increasing prices, public concern is on whether or not the property market is overheated; many suspect that currently there is an oversupply of properties, especially in Penang. The current existing stock of residential properties can house more than six people per household (Table 1), and as smaller households are the global trend for developed and developing countries, statistics indicate that there is still a growing demand for housing.

Source: The Malaysian House Price Index Q1-Q2 2014, National Property Information Centre (NAPIC).

To meet market demands and expectations, a steady addition of incoming and planned supply to the existing property stock in Penang is still expected in the near future. Based on the population projection given by the Department of Statistics for Penang (1.75 million in year 2020), Malaysia Property Incorporated found that there is an oversupply of about 45,000 units this year and 22,000 units by 2020 [2], assuming that the average household size stays at 3.98 people and housing supply stops after 2015.

A growing demand for housing with a potential oversupply of properties sounds contradictory enough, begging the question: will the potential glut be for a certain type of residential property, and are the right kinds of properties being built in the right areas?

Whither the low-medium cost housing?

On Penang Island, the most densely populated district is in the north-east; the area encompassing George Town, Jelutong, Air Itam, Gelugor, Tanjung Tokong and Tanjung Bungah still remains one of the most sought-after places for property. Despite limited land spaces, incoming and planned unit supply to this district has seen no sign of abating.

However, in recent years, the south-west of the island, where the airport and the industrial area are located, has become the hottest investment spot for bigname developers. The highest growth of property supply on the island is expected to be in this area, with the likely addition of 17,518 incoming units (33.3%) and 17,058 planned units (32.4%).

Source: Property Market Report First Half 2014, NAPIC and own calculation.

On the mainland, the more populated central Seberang Perai (SP) is expected to see more new housing units in coming years, compared to north and south SP. The opening of the Second Penang Bridge and the announcement of a series of development projects in Batu Kawan, including IKEA and branch campuses of University of Hull and KDU University College, certainly give south SP a huge appeal for future housing development. So far, the housing demand there has not jumped markedly. However, as a prelude, following the announcement of the projects, land prices in south SP skyrocketed to between RM50 and RM60 per sqft, compared to previous prices of RM8 to RM9 per sqft [3].

Within the high-rise category, there is a trend of developers preferring to build higher value condominiums (Table 3). In coming years, especially on Penang Island, a higher proportion of new highrise units will come from condominiums. Although the construction of low cost flats is emphasised by both the federal government and the Penang state government, the supply of such units is slow and short in coming – at just half the number of the future supply for condominiums. The future supply of medium cost flats also cannot catch up with the supply rate and units of condominium, indicating that condominium sales seem more profitable for developers and that there may be an oversupply of higher value high-rise units in the near future.

Probably as the result of an influx of affluent local or foreign buyers, the supply for bungalows (detached) units has increased significantly. Service apartments have also become a new niche in the property market; the number of service apartment units is expected to double.

Source: Property Market Report First Half 2014, NAPIC and own calculation.

The island factor
Penang Island’s attractiveness as a place to invest or settle in can be seen from its property prices; one condominium unit on the island normally costs more than twice or thrice that on the mainland. The same goes for the price of landed properties (Table 3).

Although this tendency is likely to persist for some time, the number of residential property transactions slowed down on the island for the first three quarters of last year whereas property sales in SP were generally unaffected (Table 4). Due to market-cooling measures – i.e. the introduction of more stringent real property gains tax (RPGT) and maximum loan-to-value ratio for individual and non-individual borrowers – laid by the federal government and Bank Negara to curb property speculating, the upward price index trend for both landed properties and high-rise units slowed down significantly for the first half of 2014. Given that the number of sales was also at a lower level in the third quarter compared to the previous year, property prices on the island for the latter half of 2014 were probably stagnant.

Source: Residential Property Stock Table Q2 2014, NAPIC.

With the implementation of the goods and services tax (GST) on April 1, firsttime home buyers may rush to make property purchases in the first quarter of 2015 to avoid paying the incremental cost. Although residential properties fall under the “Exempt Rated” basket of goods, property prices look set to increase due to the inflation cost of construction materials. According to a market survey, developers are facing ever higher compliance costs. Therefore, it is unlikely that house prices will drop this year when higher inflation is expected. Meanwhile, the “Youth Housing Scheme” announced in Budget 2015 may encourage young families from lower and middle income groups to make their first home purchase. Under the scheme, those who qualify and are selected will be given RM200 monthly financial assistance by the federal government to pay the loan instalments, 50% stamp duty exemption on loan and transfer agreements as well as 100% loan financing.

Source: Residential Property Stock Table Q2 2014, NAPIC.

Old is gold
Interest from investors in George Town’s pre-war heritage properties has never been greater since the city was inscribed as a Unesco World Heritage Site in 2008. Under the draft of the George Town Special Area Plan, there is a total of 4,665 buildings located within the core (50.2%) and buffer (49.8%) zones. Given the immense potential for capital appreciation or gain from investments, these heritage properties are in red-hot demand. With the booming tourism in George Town, many investors have transformed old, neglected heritage shop houses into boutique hotels or commercial premises.

Before the repeal of the Rent Control Act in 1999, there were very few transactions and the price index did not move much for properties situated within the conservation zones. Since then, the compound annual growth rate for such properties from 1999 to 2013 was at 12.7% [4]. For the first half of last year, the average price for pre-war properties in George Town registered a new highest record at RM1,300 per sqft.

Source: Henry Butcher Malaysia (Penang) and NAPIC.

Similarly, the number of pre-war property transactions also soared especially after 2008 (Figure 2). However, despite the new highest record of average transaction price, there were fewer property transactions last year; the Penang Real Estate Market Research Report on pre-war properties published by Henry Butcher Malaysia (Penang) [5] suggests that the prewar heritage property market has more buyers than it has sellers due to a limited supply of good listings. Because of this, the pre-war property market price could be very much distorted. For example, in March 2012, a 2,000sqft shop house along Lebuh Pantai (considered a prime heritage area) was sold at RM4mil (or RM2,000 per sqft) [6] – an isolated case but way above the average market price nonetheless.

Since the number of pre-war heritage buildings in the historic George Town is fixed and more than a thousand of such properties were transacted since 2008, the proportion of “sellable” properties in the market will shrink by year while market demand for such properties remains high. Hence, it is reasonably expected to see even steeper transaction prices and fewer transacted pre-war property units in years to come.

 By Lim Chee Han
Lim Chee Han received his PhD in Infection Biology from Hannover Medical School, Germany. He is a senior analyst in the economics section of Penang Institute.

GST will push up home prices by 2.6%, said Real Estate and Housing Developers Association Malaysia

But it says still too early to determine exact increase

PETALING JAYA: Home prices will rise by about 2.6% once the goods and services tax (GST) comes into play, said the Real Estate and Housing Developers’ Association Malaysia (Rehda).

The chairman of the association’s task force on accounting and taxation, Datuk Ng Seing Liong, said that the calculation was based on its consultations with industry experts and member developers.

Real Estate and Housing Developers' Association of Malaysia (Rehda) says the GST is likely to raise property prices.

Rehda’s 2.6% estimate differs from that of the Customs Department, which expects the GST to have an impact of between 0.5% and 2% on house prices, assuming there’s no change in supply and demand conditions.

Ng said the association was in full support of the GST and concurred with Customs GST director Datuk Subromaniam Tholasy, who had said that land did not incur the 6% GST rate.

However, he said land was by no means the largest cost component in property development.

“As our calculation clearly spells out, the construction cost, which constitutes 46% of the total development, is not only the largest component but also the component which will attract the GST of 6%,” he said in a letter to StarBiz.

He said the GST on this component would inevitably lead to an increase in house prices.

Appending calculations for a housing unit originally priced at RM400,000, Ng said the price post-GST would be around RM410,560.

Under the 46% construction component, costs were broken down into non-service taxable and service taxable segments, representing 44%, or RM176,000, and 2%, or RM8,000, respectively.

Under the non-service taxable segment comes items such as cement/concrete, steel, bricks and sand, while the service taxable segment includes tiles and fittings/sanitary. Under the existing sales and service tax, no tax is imposed on the non-service taxable category, while the service taxable category has a tax of up to 10% imposed on it.

Post-GST, Rehda’s calculations showed that the non-service taxable cost had gone up to RM186,560, while the service taxable cost remained at RM8,000.

It maintained the same cost estimates for other items, including land (15% or RM60,000), infrastructure and pre-development works (10% or RM40,000), professional fees and marketing costs (6% or RM24,000), finance costs (6% or RM24,000) and profit (17% or RM68,000).

Ng said Rehda also disagreed with Subromaniam, who had said that developers could easily absorb cost increases as their margins were around 30%.

He said it was currently impossible for developers to earn up to a 30% profit, as most development costs were on the rise, along with various capital contributions and charges imposed on developers.

“On average, as tabulated in the calculation, developers, most of which are public-listed companies, are only making around 17% at best,” he said.

However, Ng said it was still too early to determine the actual house price increases post-GST, as Rehda was still in discussions with the Government and there appeared to be many more issues to be ironed out.

By Isabelle Lai The Star/Asia News Network


Related posts:

Property prices to further rise in Malaysia, Credit Suisse ...

Property prices to further rise in Malaysia, Credit Suisse predicts. Higher selling prices does not necessarily mean bigger profits for developers with Credit Suisse noting that developers' cost of doing business has reportedly ...

 

Malaysian Tax Budget 2015 Highlights and Snapshots

Najib, who is Finance Minister, had presented his budget speech at 4pm in the Dewan Rakyat on October 10, 2014  Here are highlights: ... 

 

Home, sweet home for young couples will lead to housing industry boon in M'sia

A NEW Youth Housing Scheme has been set up by the Government to help young couples, whose household income does not exceed RM10,000, buy...

Home, sweet home for young couples will lead to housing industry boon in M'sia

A NEW Youth Housing Scheme has been set up by the Government to help young couples, whose household income does not exceed RM10,000, buy their first home.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said the maximum 35-year loan offered a funding limit not exceeding RM500,000 for married youth, aged between 25 and 40 years old.

“The Government will provide monthly financial assistance of RM200 to borrowers for the first two years to reduce the burden of monthly instalments,” he said.

Najib described the scheme as a smart partnership between the Government, Bank Simpanan Nasional, Employees Provident Fund (EPF) and Cagamas.

The Government will also give a 50% stamp duty exemption on the instrument of transfer and loan agreements, as well as 10% loan guarantee to enable borrowers to obtain full financing, including cost of insurance.

Borrowers can also withdraw from their EPF Account 2 to top up their monthly instalment and other related costs.

“I urge the youth to grab this opportunity which is offered on first-come-first-served basis for 20,000 units only,” he said.

To address the issue of home ow­­nership at affordable prices, RM1.3bil will be allocated to build 80,000 units under the 1Malaysia People’s Housing Programme (PR1MA).

To enable more people to own houses, under the scheme, the cei­ling of household income has been raised from RM8,000 to RM10,000.

“In addition, a Rent-To-Own Scheme will be introduced specifically for individuals who are unable to obtain bank financing,” he said.

RM644mil will be allocated to the National Housing Department (JPN) to build 26,000 units under the People’s Housing Programme (PPR).

He said Syarikat Perumahan Negara Berhad (SPNB) would build 12,000 units of Rumah Mesra Rakyat, 5,000 units of Rumah Idaman Rakyat and 20,000 units of Rumah Aspirasi Rakyat on privately-owned land.

For first-time house buyers, the Government has agreed to extend the 50% stamp duty exemption and increase the purchase limit from RM400,000 to RM500,000.

Exemption will be given until Dec 31, 2016.

The minimum eligibility for hou­sing loans will be increased from RM80,000 to RM120,000 while the maximum eligibility limit will be increased from RM450,000 to RM600,000.

The RM100 application processing fee for housing loan will be abo­lished.

The Government will improve the1Malaysia Civil Servants’ Housing (PPA1M) by reducing the minimum price of houses currently at RM150,000 to RM90,000 per unit.

He added that the qualifying requirement of household income for this would be increased from RM8,000 to RM10,000 per month.

Housing industry boon

PETALING JAYA: Measures under Budget 2015 will positively impact the housing industry, especially in promoting home ownership among the lower and middle income group, said the Real Estate and Housing Developers’ Association Malaysia (Rehda).

The association supported the Government’s effort to raise the ceiling of household income from RM8,000 to RM10,000 for PR1MA homes and the Rent-To-Own scheme to help those unable to obtain financing, said Rehda president Datuk Seri FD Iskandar.

He said Rehda also lauded the new Youth Housing Scheme which would “certainly benefit young couples who wish to own a home.”

He said the 10% loan guarantee to enable borrowers to obtain full financing and the RM200 monthly financial aid would help reduce the burden of borrowers.

HBA secretary-general Chang Kim Loong also said the housing scheme for young married couples was commendable.

However Chang said providing the RM200 subsidy, in the first two-years, may send a wrong message.

He said borrowers may start to spend beyond their means and might end up in financial difficulty after the subsidy ends.

Chang said the Government must also ensure eligible first time house buyers actually stay in these units and not rent it out.

Chang said HBA supported the move to build more affordable housing but wanted these homes to reach the right target market. “These homes must be built at the right place and reasonable prices of between RM150,000 to RM300,000; and not more than RM400,000 in prime locations,” he said.

By Neville Spykerman The Star/Asia News Network

‘First-time house-buyers will spur property market’

GEORGE TOWN: First-time housebuyers are sure to spur the property market following the introduction of the Youth Housing Scheme.

International Real Estate Federation Malaysia vice-president Michael Geh said the scheme announced under Budget 2015 will help them to own property costing less than RM500,000.

He said the property market had been “cool” for the past six months since the developers interest-bearing scheme was abolished, resulting in many first-time buyers unable to obtain bank loans.

“The scheme shows our Government is well aware of the plight faced by this group.

“It will certainly spur the property market,” he said.

The scheme, a smart partnership between the Government, Bank Simpanan Nasional, Employees Provident Fund and Cagamas, is offered on a first-come first-served basis for 20,000 units only.

It offers a funding limit for a first home not exceeding RM500,000 for married couples between 25 and 40 years old with a household income not exceeding RM10,000. The maximum loan period is 35 years.

The Malaysian Association of Hotels Penang Chapter said that the RM89bil from tourism targeted under Budget 2015 was an ambitious figure.

Its chairman Khoo Boo Lim said the RM316mil allocation for various programmes under the Ministry of Tourism and Culture should be used wisely to ensure good returns.

By Tan Sin Chow AND Chong Kah Yuan The Star/Asia News Network

Related post:

Malaysian Tax Budget 2015 Highlights and Snapshots

Najib, who is Finance Minister, had presented his budget speech at 4pm in the Dewan Rakyat on October 10, 2014  Here are highlights: ...