Tag Archives: Capital Gain Tax

TUESDAY’S editorial, ‘About the ‘right’ property behaviour tax’, was wrong on the facts of the recent public consultation on income tax treatment for individuals who sold their properties.

There was no proposal that had the effect of ‘making more property deals taxable’. The proposed change was not aimed at doing so, and would not have resulted in more individuals having to pay income tax on gains from selling their properties.

The proposed change, following feedback received over the years, had sought to provide certainty of non-taxation for one group of individual owners (those who had not sold any other property in the preceding four years) without any implications for taxation of other individuals.

For all these other cases, whether the gains from a property sale are subject to income tax would have continued to depend on the facts and circumstances of the case – as has been the longstanding practice of the tax authorities in Singapore as well as many other jurisdictions. Continue reading →

THE odd feature of the Finance Ministry’s decision to not change the law on taxing gains made in individuals’ property deals was that the public was asked its comment. This was being truly consultative, but was the outcome ever in doubt? There would not be a living person on earth who would say, without a trace of irony: ‘Yes, tax me some more.’ Without prejudice to the merits or demerits of the case, opposition was a foregone conclusion. The ministry received 64 responses to its proposal to make unambiguous the definition of which transactions over how long a period of time are not subject to income tax. This had the effect of making more property deals taxable as additional personal income. All but four of those who made submissions were opposed. The surprise was that it was not 64-0. Straight off, professional speculators and dabblers alike would be delighted, as the taxability stand is up to the taxman’s interpretation of how ‘regular’ transactions had been. Tax law is better clear-cut than open to interpretation and court challenge.

The announcement last week came smack in the middle of a real estate revival, where prospective price volatility caused partly by speculative Continue reading →