straits time 上关于bto价格问题的文章

seanjin LV15
2011-04-26 · 3729 阅读
» HDB land cost issue still vexes
Straits Times: Tue, Apr 26
THE heated debate between the Workers' Party (WP) and the People's Action Party (PAP) on prices of new Housing Board (HDB) flats is one that goes back 30 years. In the early 1980s, opposition leader Chiam See Tong claimed that HDB was making a ...
THE heated debate between the Workers' Party (WP) and the People's Action Party (PAP) on prices of new Housing Board (HDB) flats is one that goes back 30 years.
In the early 1980s, opposition leader Chiam See Tong claimed that HDB was making a profit on the sale of its new flats. Then National Development Minister Teh Cheang Wan challenged him: Build four blocks of HDB flats yourself and see if HDB is making a profit. Mr Chiam did not take up the challenge eventually, saying some conditions were not met.
This time round, the debate began when the WP manifesto released on April 9 suggested lowering new HDB flat prices by pegging them to median incomes.
National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan pointed out that new flats are already very affordable, with eight in 10 couples able to service their home loans with less than 25 per cent of their salaries - in effect, their Central Provident Fund (CPF) contributions. He warned that lowering new flat prices will depress the value of nearly one million completed HDB flats. It would also mean HDB paying lower prices for land to build its flats, which he pointed out would amount to an 'illegal raid' on the reserves.
Amidst the war of words, it is easy to miss the real issue, which is about how the Government prices HDB flats.
Some opposition parties and Singaporeans want the Government to price HDB flats according to what the National Solidarity Party (NSP) calls a 'cost-plus' basis: peg the price of a new flat to the cost of building it, with a slight mark-up.
As with all property projects, land and construction make up the bulk of costs for HDB flats. Other associated architectural and marketing costs account for about 10 per cent of total cost.
What do we know of these costs?
HDB last month awarded a contractor $102.9 million to build 741 standard flats in Bukit Panjang, including amenities like a multistorey carpark, commercial facilities and a precinct pavilion. That is $139,000 in construction cost per flat.
What about land to build the flats?
It is hard to know how much a plot of land for a HDB precinct costs, unless the Chief Valuer discloses it.
But an estimate can be worked out, based on the price of a new average four-roomer of about $275,000. Assume construction cost of $139,000. Assume other costs take up another $30,000 or just over 10 per cent. The residual land cost would then be around $106,000, nearly 40 per cent of the total price of a new HDB flat. This is a very rough estimate based on many assumptions. But it helps us understand the stakes involved.
Knowing what goes into the cost of new flats, the next question is: how do you lower costs?
Construction costs are already competitive, as they are determined by tenders. There is also a limit as to how much professional and other costs can be cut.
Why not lower land prices then? After all, according to WP chief Low Thia Khiang, the Government can simply charge HDB a lower land cost - it's just 'a question of taking your money from the left pocket and putting in the right pocket'.
This argument sounds reasonable, but in fact it is not so simple in Singapore.
Before 1985, HDB acquired and paid for its own land to develop. In 1985, HDB made a major change to its accounting system which resulted in the board returning all undeveloped land it was holding to the Singapore Land Authority (SLA), which manages all state land. HDB then started its practice of buying state land at market rates, which continues today. The rationale given was that it made transparent the value of government subsidies for public housing.
How does SLA then determine how much HDB should pay to build new flats? Why not use a cost-plus model?
In 1988, Mr S. Dhanabalan, then National Development Minister, explained why not. Pricing HDB flats according to its land cost - or how much the Government paid to acquire the land - was 'absurd' as what the flat buyer pays will 'depend on the luck of the draw'.
Indeed, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew revealed yesterday that the Government had bought up all vacant land at rock bottom prices in 1965, after Singapore separated from Malaysia, when investors feared the new state would not survive. The Government did so to pursue its vision of Singapore becoming a property-owning democracy.
Mr Dhanabalan explained then why pricing by land cost was absurd: If a flat was built on former government land, the flat buyer would pay virtually zero land cost. If it was on land acquired from private owners or on reclaimed land, the buyer would pay much more. Prices of new HDB flats would fluctuate widely and from area to area and from year to year.
The same logic applies today.
As it is not practical to value land based on the cost of acquiring it, the Chief Valuer, like other private sector valuers here and in other countries, uses two time-tested methods.
First, he looks at successful tender prices of state land located within HDB estates sold to the private sector. These prices serve as benchmarks, and values are adjusted depending on location, plot size, land tenure and market conditions, among other things. This is called market-based pricing.
Next, he uses the residual method. He starts out by looking at the resale prices of flats in the vicinity. He works out the expected selling prices of flats to be built on a certain plot, and works backwards to deduct the various costs of building them, such as construction, financing and professional fees. He factors in a reasonable profit margin for the developers' risk. The figure left is called the residual value for the land.
So if the Chief Valuer estimates a plot of land for an HDB precinct at $100 million, HDB pays that amount to the SLA. Land revenue goes into the reserves for future needs. Each year, HDB's revenue from selling new flats is not enough to cover all its costs, and its home ownership programme incurs an annual deficit of about $1 billion which is covered by the Government.
If HDB is offered the land at a discount so it can lower the flats' selling price, it may pay, say, $50 million for a plot valued at $100 million. That translates to $50 million less in the reserves, which may be seen as 'raiding' the reserves.
To sum up: If land cost is reduced, new HDB flats can indeed be cheaper. Young couples and new flat-owners would benefit. But there is a cost to others. Land revenue from sale of government land for public housing will fall. There will also be an impact on prices of completed flats.
The WP and NSP think Singaporeans want this, but the PAP does not agree.
But one thing is sure: the price of HDB flats is one issue that will not go away easily, even after this election.
[email protected]

Source: The Straits Times © Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Reprinted with permission.
版块:
投资理财
分类:
关注下面的标签,发现更多相似文章
回复

使用道具 举报

 

回答|共 28 个

vivocity2010 LV5

发表于 26-4-2011 09:40:23 | 显示全部楼层

If land cost is reduced, new HDB flats can indeed be cheaper. Young couples and new flat-owners would benefit. But there is a cost to others. Land revenue from sale of government land for public housing will fall. There will also be an impact on prices of completed flats.
The WP and NSP think Singaporeans want this, but the PAP does not agree.
But one thing is sure: the price of HDB flats is one issue that will not go away easily, even after this election.
说的8错!

vivocity2010 LV5

发表于 26-4-2011 09:40:35 | 显示全部楼层

If land cost is reduced, new HDB flats can indeed be cheaper. Young couples and new flat-owners would benefit. But there is a cost to others. Land revenue from sale of government land for public housing will fall. There will also be an impact on prices of completed flats.
The WP and NSP think Singaporeans want this, but the PAP does not agree.
But one thing is sure: the price of HDB flats is one issue that will not go away easily, even after this election.
说的8错!

redsnow LV6

发表于 26-4-2011 09:53:52 | 显示全部楼层

买resale的房子买得心疼。。。。

yishun2009 LV17

发表于 26-4-2011 10:06:30 | 显示全部楼层

本帖最后由 yishun2009 于 26-4-2011 10:07 编辑

If the land revenue falls, what's the impact?
How much renevue does government have now?
What's the revenue for?
Why does  land revenue have to be high?
"But there is a cost to others. Land revenue from sale of government land for public housing will fall. There will also be an impact on prices of completed flats."
Above remarks are results. What is "a cost to others"? Who are the others? Why will there also be an impact on prices of completed flats? No reasons are given, only results are given.

good99 LV7

发表于 26-4-2011 11:51:30 | 显示全部楼层

回复 yishun2009 的帖子

感觉没有讨论的基础。

cost to others。土地是国家的,是全体新加坡人的。没有卖到好价钱,那就是损失。如果你认为“崽卖爷田”是对的,那没话说。

an impact on prices of completed flats。这种问题也能提得出来?如果新的房子便宜5万,以后也会便宜5万,那么所有已经建好的房子,也会受到影响,要降近5万。因为不断有新的房子进入市场。当然,如果你认为都应该降,没话说。不过,这种impact是显而易见的,明白人都知道这个问题。

North-West LV10

发表于 26-4-2011 18:00:10 | 显示全部楼层

good99 发表于 26-4-2011 11:51
回复 yishun2009 的帖子

感觉没有讨论的基础。

这个需要适当平衡,也就是政府“理想的”平缓升值

因为如果卖太贵了,显然相比以前便宜太多买到房子的人,等于是在剥削后来者/下一代

不过,目前BTO的价格显然还是ok的,我看来吧。

问题是resale实在对他们不一定便宜。

所以如果要出政策的话,很可能是针对年轻夫妇,适当增加他们BTO的成功率,penalize BTO成功却不要的人。

good99 LV7

发表于 26-4-2011 21:18:35 | 显示全部楼层

本帖最后由 good99 于 26-4-2011 21:18 编辑
North-West 发表于 26-4-2011 18:00
这个需要适当平衡,也就是政府“理想的”平缓升值

因为如果卖太贵了,显然相比以前便宜太多买到房子的人 ...

问题确实是升的太快了,正如同原文说的,大选完了以后,这个问题还是会存在。

政府在这方面错误连连,反对党不讨论这个问题,反而非要在价格上计较,说明是想快速见效。其实问题很复杂,十年前盖了太多的房子,后来房子空置,审计署每年责问为什么花那么多钱管理空关的房子,发展部于是被骂得臭头并且不敢再盖房子,另一边厢又有6百万人口的宏愿、并乱批PR,更没想到国家经济发展的太好了,大家变得那么有钱了。结果是没有房子,有了房子马上被人高价抢走,利率又低,恶性循环。

只希望没有泡沫,其他只能顺其自然了。中低收入的,政府还是补贴了不少,只是BTO确实太久了。

所以,古话说:人无远虑、必有近忧!房子一定要早做打算。不管是个人还是政府

seanjin LV15

发表于 26-4-2011 21:38:20 | 显示全部楼层

顶楼上一个
政府也是怕了啊,06年才处理完上一轮经济危机留下的多余组屋。。。
这几年虽然又开始加大力度建了,但是建房子毕竟需要时间啊,不是今天说,明天就有的啊

headway LV8

发表于 26-4-2011 22:36:26 | 显示全部楼层

不明白hdb为什么要盖这么久
123下一页
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册会员

本版积分规则