Category Archives: Government

Cooling resale market: Not time to boost demand

THE cooling demand for resale Housing Board flats has put some sellers in a quandary.

These sellers are those who have already got, or will soon get, their keys to newly completed Build-To-Order (BTO) flats or executive condominiums.

They have to sell their existing Housing Board (HDB) flats within six months of getting their new homes. But with buyers thin on the ground, some can’t find buyers within that time frame. So far, the HDB has been flexible and given them more time to sell their flats.

But how tenable is this situation, and should more be done?

Anecdotally, a handful of sellers are asking to collect their keys later, or for an extension of the deadline to sell their flats. These will give them more time to find a buyer for their unit.

The issue was raised by MP Lee Bee Wah on her Facebook page recently.

In the first half of this year, the HDB got 18 requests a month to delay the collection of keys.

But is this a matter of sellers holding out for high prices?

One expert thought so. “I think most HDB resale flat sellers are finding it difficult to sell their flat because the price that is offered is too low for their consideration,” says R’ST Research director Ong Kah Seng.

But some sellers have said there were no viewers, let alone offers, for their flats.

How did this situation come about, of people being unable to sell their flats to gain possession of a new one?

It’s partly due to government property cooling measures.

Soaring HDB resale prices caused unhappiness during the 2011 General Election. Since then, a flood of new flats has been built. Home loan curbs have lowered demand, meaning lower prices and fewer flats sold.

As of June, the Singapore Real Estate Exchange’s HDB resale price index has fallen by 6.8 per cent from its peak in April 2013.

Last month, 1,315 flats changed hands, down from 2011’s average of more than 2,000. In this weak market, the difficulty some BTO buyers face in disposing of their existing flats may be an unintended consequence, but is also an unsurprising one.

The Government arguably bears some responsibility for their plight. But what should it do?

If the problem is a lack of buyers, the obvious solution might be to boost demand.

One reader wrote to me with the suggestion that property curbs be eased on the resale market, so that the market can pick up again.

Another reader had a specific tweak in mind: Allow private property owners to buy resale HDB flats, as was the case until 2010. Current rules require them to give up their private home if they want a resale flat. If this is relaxed, they could form a pool of ready buyers, said the reader.

But when posed this question by The Straits Times, some property experts dismissed this idea.

Any attempt to boost demand has wide-ranging effects, as this very problem demonstrates. The point of cooling measures was to reduce demand and bring prices down. Raising demand would risk raising prices again.

More to the point, it would be a very blunt solution for what is essentially a niche problem.

Most new flat owners don’t have an existing HDB flat to sell. Only “second-timers” do and they are a minority of BTO buyers. They form no more than 30 per cent of those buying two- and three-room flats, and 15 per cent for larger flats in non-mature estates.

For mature estates, a mere 5 per cent of the BTO supply is reserved for them. Of these, only a tiny number has problems disposing of the existing flat.

The 18 requests for delayed key collection each month in the first half of this year is a smaller proportion of all keys handed over than the 11 requests a month in the second half of last year.

Over the last one year, such requests represent less than 1 per cent of all flats to be handed over.

Mr Ong adds: “It may be better to grant such sellers a longer period to dispose of their flat, instead of introducing new types of buyers for resale flats, which might affect the dynamics and pricing equilibrium that the recent cooling measures have painstakingly hoped to better.”

The HDB has essentially been doing this, by considering and often granting deadline extensions. This may not seem like a long-term solution. But in the context of an ever-changing property market, it might well suffice.

OrangeTee head of research Christine Li thinks that HDB resale transaction volumes could bottom out this year.

Admittedly, things could also worsen. This year will see over 28,000 completed BTO flats and 17,000 private residential units.

This could mean a flood of people trying to offload their flats, making it harder to do so.

If the situation indeed worsens and more needs to be done, then targeted measures may be needed. For now, it is worth waiting to see if changing market conditions can do the trick.

Ease ABSD for Singaporeans, urges Wing Tai boss

Wing Tai chairman Cheng Wai Keung has a solution for the property sector’s angst over the ABSD (additional buyer’s stamp duty): “Keep ABSD for foreign buyers but fine-tune it for Singaporeans who wish to buy more than one property.”

He argues that the ABSD should be retained for foreigners who buy residential property, as the danger posed by foreign hot money still lurks.

However, there is scope to fine-tune the ABSD for Singaporeans, given that the total debt servicing ratio (TDSR) framework is in place to limit their debt exposure.

Foreigners buying any residential property here pay 15 per cent ABSD; the same rate applies to buyers that are corporate entities.

Singaporeans are spared ABSD when they buy their first residential property. But they have to pay 7 per cent ABSD when they buy a second property, and 10 per cent for third and subsequent purchases.

While many players lament a drying-up of foreign buying – especially in the high-end residential sector due to the punitive ABSD rate, and hope that the authorities would reduce the rate, if not do away with the charge altogether – Mr Cheng shared a different perspective in an interview with BT.

“ABSD is still necessary to deal with foreign hot money. Recall the original intent of the ABSD: it is to deal with excessive liquidity flooding in from developed countries’ monetary policies. Looking at the global economy now, the conditions that necessitated the introduction of the ABSD by MAS (the Monetary Authority of Singapore) have not abated.

“Notwithstanding QE (quantitative easing) tapering moves in the US, interest rates are still expected to stay low, and countries like Japan and Europe are still expanding their liquidity policy. Hence, for now, it is prudent for government not to remove the ABSD, to effectively manage the influx of foreign hot money and to stabilise our economy.”

However, Singaporeans who wish to purchase additional residential properties here for investment should be given relief from the ABSD, he added. “Why should they be dealing with three policies – SSD, ABSD and TDSR? Especially with the TDSR in place to limit debt exposure and SSD to prevent short-term trading, I believe that it is redundant to continue imposing ABSD on Singaporeans who have the financial ability and wish to invest locally in real estate.”

SSD is the seller’s stamp duty, payable on residential properties sold within four years of purchase. Under the TDSR framework introduced in June last year, financial institutions (when granting new property loans to individuals) have to ensure a borrower’s total monthly debt obligations (including car loan repayments and credit card bills) do not exceed 60 per cent of gross monthly income.

Given that the market has already responded to the cooling measures – demand has shrunk and prices softened – it is timely for the government to consider opening up options for Singaporean investors so that they may invest their excess funds in the local property market, which provides greater protection for buyers and is considered relatively less risky than foreign property markets.

“This can be a win-win situation for both the industry and the domestic investor market,” Mr Cheng said, adding that Wing Tai would continue to price its properties at “what market can bear, without eroding market confidence”.

He argued that there was a need to consider market segmentation in adjusting prices. The reaction to a price cut is different in the mass and high-end markets. A price chop for the mass market, where buyers are more price-sensitive, is more likely to be met with an immediate increase in sales, whereas a price drop at the high end could magnify buyers’ wait-and-see attitude.

“That is why pricing has to be calibrated in order not to dampen market confidence and cause an unnecessary downward spiral.”

When asked if Singaporeans’ affinity for property reflects an Asian trait, Mr Cheng said: “I don’t see it as a specific Asian trait. I’ve also observed that in Anglo-Saxon economies generally, real estate investment has become an important factor of growth.

“Today, given a lacklustre stock market, people are putting their investments in fixed assets to hedge against inflation. For long-term returns, if you have the financial means to sustain that investment – that is, to ride out the cycles – real estate is a good investment. Which is why, at certain points in time, governments do encourage their people to invest in property.”

He says Singaporeans will learn that when they invest in property, they need to stay prudent and consider their ability to pay. “They would understand that all business has a cycle and that the government, from time to time, would intervene in the (property) market, for the overall good of the economy.

“They will need to have sustainable financial means to help them ride out the cycles and tide over the storms, so that they can continue holding the investment for the long run in order to generate a superior return from the investment.”