Do you think the latest Prime Location Public Housing model is fair? Share your thoughts below! Store - stackedhomes.com/store/?.com&PsjJzo1B4I Website - www.stackedhomes.com/?.com&PsjJzo1B4I Instagram- instagram.com/stackedhomes Facebook - facebook.com/stackedhomes TikTok - www.tiktok.com/@stacked.homes
What I'm worried about is in the future, like 30-50 years, people who earn slightly above the income ceiling will have no where to stay but the outskirts. They only have the choice to buy an outskirt resale or bto because they cannot bto prime, cannot resale prime, so even though they earn more but they are punished way more. At least now people who make above the ceiling can still buy a resale anywhere. Imagine working hard for your career and then only being able to buy tampines >10mins away from mrt. What are your thoughts about this?
Hey! It should be based on the MSR though, as it HDB properties. There's only so much that one can loan if there is a cap on the income ceiling, however, it does not stop cash-rich buyers. The income ceiling would dampen the prices of prime flats though.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! Ultimately it is public housing, so in a sense it is tax payer's money and not everyone feels like they've been included. But as with any big policy changes, it's also good to adjust and fine tune along the way than start something only to reverse it later!
When you zoom out and look at it, it becomes quite clear what are the priorities. The possibility of formation of wealthy enclaves in prime area isn't a priority. Duxton and other current existing city fringe HDBs will continue to see only wealthy residents able to afford the resale price. The priority is to prevent the lottery effect. And the schemes only affect new flats. I don't exactly understand why is it socially problematic that HDB requires to step in to prevent further occurrences. Fundamentally, it is Singaporeans paying other Singaporeans, transferring of wealth and helping families step up the wealth ladder. If the issue is that it only favours the lucky, theres luck in all aspects of life, in my view, trying to prevent this lottery effect is actually creating a new problem; increasing hdb resale price..particularly Duxton and likely Dawson.
The best adjustment should be state control that new batch of resales flats (of the newer prime location flat) should go back to the HDB administration with formulate X price of the initial price purchase divide by 99 and multiple back the number of years left (adjusted with norminal inflation rates). And later release back to the public for ballot (queue system). This should be a carefully controlled (given with the nature that SIngapore is small and guard against manipuliation) and Gov should consider invest more public administrators for managing public housing proceed of sales and manage resale unit supplies. This is the best approach for controlling the new supplies (prime location) for the sake for those who really need these houses in future .
We believe the government carefully considered this approach but decided against it as, perhaps given the upcoming supply, it would be too much of an administrative cost to maintain. The PLH model is just starting off - perhaps it'd be adjusted along the way!
what about singles/SPRs/other ineligible groups who genuinely wants to stay in prime location? are we really being inclusive as said in the video when they are clearly being excluded?
We think it's hard to justify the word "inclusive" if, to begin with, many Singaporeans cannot participate in this, and we think there are many Singles who would want to stay here. Perhaps not "inclusive" but "as inclusive as it can be" for such a pilot programme.
By definition it is hard to say it's inclusive. Not just for prime HDBs, but all HDBs considering that Singles can only purchase once they hit 35 and above.
It's unfair because the existing flats at duxton etc in central area continue to hit the millions. It's also unfair to the singles where they can't even buy a resale "prime" flat. The system is fair only to married couples, even when they have no kids.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! While it's true that the existing prime flat at duxton has hit $1M, many resale flat owners have also purchased the flats at this price already. There's also no telling that it could go further too. Many home owners who bought it when it was a BTO also paid quite a high price in 2004 before the property market doubled. Applying policies retroactively could also have far reaching effects on policy making - e.g. what if inheritance tax is implemented in the future and the government reaches back to take 20% of what you inherited from before. So we think that at the very least, this does cap the upcoming supply of more HDBs in the prime areas - over time the current prime HDBs will no longer be as prime due to lease decay 😀
@@StackedHomes Firstly, inheritance tax isn't implemented in Singapore. Secondly, if it were to be implemented, it is unlikely to hit public housing, unless the beneficiaries live in private housing. Thirdly, it'd take decades before lease decay sets in for flats built after year 2000. It takes only 5 years to MOP, take Duxton for eg, it has many units and each unit takes only 5 years MOP, there could still be many over $1mil transactions over the years since there is no curb implemented. Whereas for PLH, there would be spillover effects to its surrounding estates that are not under PLH regulations. For eg buyers might choose Telok blangah towers, TB Parcview or TB Beacon in resale without PLH restrictions over GSW BTOs with PLH restrictions. So unless these PLHs have very attractive attributes other than that of its geographical location, it may deter some genuine home owners. And because there aren't many good primary schools in prime location, it'd eventually attract couples who don't intend to have kids but wish to live in prime areas. Just my two cents worth.
an invester perspective NO. for a family to just stay OK. for me will live in the house till over 70 than give back to govt and move to elderly type housing community. the BTO is just getting out of control
The solution is going in the right direction but not enough. The bto buyers should be subjected to 20 years MOP instead of 10 with certain conditions to allow sale within 20 years. Subsequent home owners to have 10 years MOP.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! We do think that 20 years is a tad bit long. There are many genuine homeowners that change homes before 20 years is up. A lot who buy resale or private properties also move out after 10-12 years due to changing circumstances - growing family, being nearer to school, wanting to move closer to another parent, change of lifestyle and so on. So the purpose of the MOP of 10 years is to discourage the flippers, since now the wait is 14-15 years and this could affect one's future loan tenor (and hence affordability) as they are older, and should be sufficient as a deterrence. Only time would tell!
Do you think the latest Prime Location Public Housing model is fair? Share your thoughts below!
Store - stackedhomes.com/store/?.com&PsjJzo1B4I
Website - www.stackedhomes.com/?.com&PsjJzo1B4I
Instagram- instagram.com/stackedhomes
Facebook - facebook.com/stackedhomes
TikTok - www.tiktok.com/@stacked.homes
What I'm worried about is in the future, like 30-50 years, people who earn slightly above the income ceiling will have no where to stay but the outskirts. They only have the choice to buy an outskirt resale or bto because they cannot bto prime, cannot resale prime, so even though they earn more but they are punished way more. At least now people who make above the ceiling can still buy a resale anywhere. Imagine working hard for your career and then only being able to buy tampines >10mins away from mrt. What are your thoughts about this?
Very smooth presentation 👍🏻
Thank you 👍
Thank you Ryan!
Thank you for watching!
Can I ask what is the effect of the income ceiling to the max loan and in turn, max price when reselling? Based on TDSR.
Hey! It should be based on the MSR though, as it HDB properties. There's only so much that one can loan if there is a cap on the income ceiling, however, it does not stop cash-rich buyers. The income ceiling would dampen the prices of prime flats though.
Great analysis and insight :) Thank you!
Glad it was helpful!
I actually think it is fair, looking at the long term planning that shifts the control back to the state rather the free property market.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! Ultimately it is public housing, so in a sense it is tax payer's money and not everyone feels like they've been included. But as with any big policy changes, it's also good to adjust and fine tune along the way than start something only to reverse it later!
Thank you for setting up the subtitles. But white wordings on your white shirt background doesn't really help😅
When you zoom out and look at it, it becomes quite clear what are the priorities.
The possibility of formation of wealthy enclaves in prime area isn't a priority. Duxton and other current existing city fringe HDBs will continue to see only wealthy residents able to afford the resale price.
The priority is to prevent the lottery effect. And the schemes only affect new flats. I don't exactly understand why is it socially problematic that HDB requires to step in to prevent further occurrences. Fundamentally, it is Singaporeans paying other Singaporeans, transferring of wealth and helping families step up the wealth ladder. If the issue is that it only favours the lucky, theres luck in all aspects of life, in my view, trying to prevent this lottery effect is actually creating a new problem; increasing hdb resale price..particularly Duxton and likely Dawson.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us! That's an interesting perspective!
@@StackedHomes look how it turned out :\
The best adjustment should be state control that new batch of resales flats (of the newer prime location flat) should go back to the HDB administration with formulate X price of the initial price purchase divide by 99 and multiple back the number of years left (adjusted with norminal inflation rates). And later release back to the public for ballot (queue system). This should be a carefully controlled (given with the nature that SIngapore is small and guard against manipuliation) and Gov should consider invest more public administrators for managing public housing proceed of sales and manage resale unit supplies. This is the best approach for controlling the new supplies (prime location) for the sake for those who really need these houses in future .
We believe the government carefully considered this approach but decided against it as, perhaps given the upcoming supply, it would be too much of an administrative cost to maintain. The PLH model is just starting off - perhaps it'd be adjusted along the way!
what about singles/SPRs/other ineligible groups who genuinely wants to stay in prime location? are we really being inclusive as said in the video when they are clearly being excluded?
We think it's hard to justify the word "inclusive" if, to begin with, many Singaporeans cannot participate in this, and we think there are many Singles who would want to stay here. Perhaps not "inclusive" but "as inclusive as it can be" for such a pilot programme.
I actually like that the HDB is doing this!
Thanks for your feedback, Kevin!
327 McClure Drives
How is this inclusive?
By definition it is hard to say it's inclusive. Not just for prime HDBs, but all HDBs considering that Singles can only purchase once they hit 35 and above.
It's unfair because the existing flats at duxton etc in central area continue to hit the millions. It's also unfair to the singles where they can't even buy a resale "prime" flat. The system is fair only to married couples, even when they have no kids.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! While it's true that the existing prime flat at duxton has hit $1M, many resale flat owners have also purchased the flats at this price already. There's also no telling that it could go further too. Many home owners who bought it when it was a BTO also paid quite a high price in 2004 before the property market doubled. Applying policies retroactively could also have far reaching effects on policy making - e.g. what if inheritance tax is implemented in the future and the government reaches back to take 20% of what you inherited from before. So we think that at the very least, this does cap the upcoming supply of more HDBs in the prime areas - over time the current prime HDBs will no longer be as prime due to lease decay 😀
@@StackedHomes Firstly, inheritance tax isn't implemented in Singapore. Secondly, if it were to be implemented, it is unlikely to hit public housing, unless the beneficiaries live in private housing. Thirdly, it'd take decades before lease decay sets in for flats built after year 2000. It takes only 5 years to MOP, take Duxton for eg, it has many units and each unit takes only 5 years MOP, there could still be many over $1mil transactions over the years since there is no curb implemented.
Whereas for PLH, there would be spillover effects to its surrounding estates that are not under PLH regulations. For eg buyers might choose Telok blangah towers, TB Parcview or TB Beacon in resale without PLH restrictions over GSW BTOs with PLH restrictions. So unless these PLHs have very attractive attributes other than that of its geographical location, it may deter some genuine home owners. And because there aren't many good primary schools in prime location, it'd eventually attract couples who don't intend to have kids but wish to live in prime areas. Just my two cents worth.
an invester perspective NO. for a family to just stay OK. for me will live in the house till over 70 than give back to govt and move to elderly type housing community. the BTO is just getting out of control
Single should be able to buy
The solution is going in the right direction but not enough. The bto buyers should be subjected to 20 years MOP instead of 10 with certain conditions to allow sale within 20 years. Subsequent home owners to have 10 years MOP.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! We do think that 20 years is a tad bit long. There are many genuine homeowners that change homes before 20 years is up. A lot who buy resale or private properties also move out after 10-12 years due to changing circumstances - growing family, being nearer to school, wanting to move closer to another parent, change of lifestyle and so on. So the purpose of the MOP of 10 years is to discourage the flippers, since now the wait is 14-15 years and this could affect one's future loan tenor (and hence affordability) as they are older, and should be sufficient as a deterrence. Only time would tell!