On GST
-
MMM:
INNOVATE:
Otherwise, when reach senior citizen status, hve to face the prospect of taking orders from a young manager. That's dam pathetic.
Personally, I think this part is a personal choice. Eg. if you cannot imagine yourselves taking orders from a young manager (your kids' age), then one should work hard to reach a certain level in organisation. So at that age, they still need to listen to you.
But if it is a personal choice that we are contented with current, then we have the bear the consequence of that in the future.
Disagreed with your statement. An enterprising senior executive should be able to generate another source of personal income as at that level, he/she is highly competent and hve the financial means to take risk.
One cannot forsee the future which is full of uncertainities. Even when one reaches CEO level, his company make me takenover and thus face the prospect of losing the job.
Preparing for any nasty financial situation is the hallmark of our govt. This is something we as citizens can learn from. -
INNOVATE:
MMM:
[quote=\"INNOVATE\"]Otherwise, when reach senior citizen status, hve to face the prospect of taking orders from a young manager. That's dam pathetic.
Personally, I think this part is a personal choice. Eg. if you cannot imagine yourselves taking orders from a young manager (your kids' age), then one should work hard to reach a certain level in organisation. So at that age, they still need to listen to you.
But if it is a personal choice that we are contented with current, then we have the bear the consequence of that in the future.
Disagreed with your statement. An enterprising senior executive should be able to generate another source of personal income as at that level, he/she is highly competent and hve the financial means to take risk.
One cannot forsee the future which is full of uncertainities. Even when one reaches CEO level, his company make me takenover and thus face the prospect of losing the job.
Preparing for any nasty financial situation is the hallmark of our govt. This is something we as citizens can learn from.[/quote]But the fact is that when you are of a certain level in the organisation, it should come with certain level of income. People at that level would have the financial ability to plan for their retirement. Eg. investment, etc...
I've been through a M&A or even retrenchment exercises and I do observe that those of a high level is able to \"survive\" it even without a job for a while. Based on their talent, they are subsequently able to find something else and though quite a no. of them are in their 40's or 50's, they are able to find equivalent high positions in another well known mnc. -
MMM:
But the fact is that when you are of a certain level in the organisation, it should come with certain level of income. People at that level would have the financial ability to plan for their retirement. Eg. investment, etc...INNOVATE:
[quote=\"MMM\"]
Personally, I think this part is a personal choice. Eg. if you cannot imagine yourselves taking orders from a young manager (your kids' age), then one should work hard to reach a certain level in organisation. So at that age, they still need to listen to you.
But if it is a personal choice that we are contented with current, then we have the bear the consequence of that in the future.
Disagreed with your statement. An enterprising senior executive should be able to generate another source of personal income as at that level, he/she is highly competent and hve the financial means to take risk.
One cannot forsee the future which is full of uncertainities. Even when one reaches CEO level, his company make me takenover and thus face the prospect of losing the job.
Preparing for any nasty financial situation is the hallmark of our govt. This is something we as citizens can learn from.
I've been through a M&A or even retrenchment exercises and I do observe that those of a high level is able to \"survive\" it even without a job for a while. Based on their talent, they are subsequently able to find something else and though quite a no. of them are in their 40's or 50's, they are able to find equivalent high positions in another well known mnc.[/quote]
Agreed with your observation/experience regarding senior executives affected by M & A activities. -
The other day, a colleague shared his \"theory\" on GST and see if it makes sense.
He said his savings in banks were after tax. We pay income tax on our income each year and the remain will either be used or saved in the banks.
Now he uses his savings to buy things and he is subjected to the GST.
Is this considered \"double tax\" ? I am clueless and confused!
:roll: -
No double taxation. Income tax and GST r different taxes.
Personal income tax is wat one pay based on income for dat fiscal year.
GST is a consumption tax dat one pays whenever one buys goods or uses a service. -
Way2GO:
Ok, income tax and GST are different but they are still tax!No double taxation. Income tax and GST r different taxes.
Personal income tax is wat one pay based on income for dat fiscal year.
GST is a consumption tax dat one pays whenever one buys goods or uses a service.
We will definitely use our savings in one way or another eg buy food, furniture, etc and thus paying GST is inevitable.
But we know GST is needed to sustain the growth of our country.
-
Heard that GST is going to increase to 10% soon. True?
-
Way2GO:
For me, I think it is a double-taxation. Before GST, everybody pays income tax and people always try to \"avoid\" / minimise income tax. Especially those richer ones may have more means and legitimate ways to minimize tax.No double taxation. Income tax and GST r different taxes.
Personal income tax is wat one pay based on income for dat fiscal year.
GST is a consumption tax dat one pays whenever one buys goods or uses a service.
After GST, those earning a certain salary and below got the GST rebate and effectively quite a large percentage of the population no longer need to pay income tax. But in return, they have to pay GST. For this group of people, it is a replacement tax.
But for those earning a certain income level, they still need to pay income tax. When they consume, they have to pay GST. To me it is double-taxation. The reduction in the income tax rate somewhat compensated for the GST plus other rebates... But implementing GST is a more effective way to collect tax (from the gahmen point of view) compared to income tax.
Waiver of GST on essential food items plus baby products are implemented in the UK. Not in Singapore. What you are advocating is good and make sense, that I think is the U.K way ie. no GST on milk and clothes for children for eg. But that will need a change in the GST administration which can only be addressed by IRAS.
-
DesertWind:
Income tax is only dependent on one’s income level. U don’t pay GST if u don’t consume or use any service.
For me, I think it is a double-taxation. Before GST, everybody pays income tax and people always try to \"avoid\" / minimise income tax. Especially those richer ones may have more means and legitimate ways to minimize tax.
After GST, those earning a certain salary and below got the GST rebate and effectively quite a large percentage of the population no longer need to pay income tax. But in return, they have to pay GST. For this group of people, it is a replacement tax.
But for those earning a certain income level, they still need to pay income tax. When they consume, they have to pay GST. To me it is double-taxation. The reduction in the income tax rate somewhat compensated for the GST plus other rebates... But implementing GST is a more effective way to collect tax (from the gahmen point of view) compared to income tax.
Waiver of GST on essential food items plus baby products are implemented in the UK. Not in Singapore. What you are advocating is good and make sense, that I think is the U.K way ie. no GST on milk and clothes for children for eg. But that will need a change in the GST administration which can only be addressed by IRAS.
How r d two taxes related? I fail to see d rationale in ur explanation dat it’s double taxation.
Income tax is a progressive tax whereas GST is a regressive tax.
GST is applied uniformly across all segments of population, and therefore imposes a greater tax burden on d poor n lower income group than higher income group n wealthy ppl with higher ability to pay.
D gahmen had to find another revenue stream when it became necessary to lower personal income tax n corporate tax to compete with HK n elsewhere. In doing so, d greater tax burden was shifted to d poor n lower income groups n sandwiched classes.
D GST rebates is like returning some from d left hand wat d right hand has taken n some more. Why do dis?
Just my 2.14 cents worth, maybe soon to be 2.20 cents after GE. :rotflmao: -
btw, there is no GST in HK (years ago, the proposal for GST implementation was abandoned due to wide public hostility)
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login