• Sun
  • Dec 21, 2014
  • Updated: 9:40pm
PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 26 February, 2013, 12:00am
UPDATED : Wednesday, 27 February, 2013, 9:35am

Tsang's budget will do nothing to solve Hong Kong's twin problems

Despite city's rude fiscal health, a structural glut of government cash and sky-high property prices are two sides of the same coin

Tomorrow Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun-wah will stand up to deliver his sixth budget speech.

The finance ministers of most developed economies would be green with envy at the strength of Tsang's position.

In his speech he is likely to announce an economic growth rate for last year of around 1.5 per cent. That might not sound very impressive. But with much of the developed world struggling to escape recession, it counts as a robust performance.

Even better, as the first chart below shows, Hong Kong's economy is forecast to grow by almost 4 per cent this year, which marks the city out as one of the strongest rich economies around. At the same time, unemployment is low at just 3.4 per cent, while inflation remains muted at 3 per cent.

And almost uniquely outside the oil-exporting sheikhdoms of the Persian Gulf, Hong Kong's government finances are in rude health. Last February Tsang forecast that the government would run a deficit for the 2012/2013 fiscal year of HK$3.4 billion.

In reality, by the time all the receipts are counted, the government is actually likely to be in the black to the tune of HK$55 billion, or around 2.7 per cent of the city's gross domestic product (see the second chart).

What's more, last year's surplus was no one-off windfall. Despite riding a violent economic roller-coaster over recent years, the current fiscal year will be the ninth in a row that the city's public finances have been in the black.

As a result, while most developed economies are labouring under the shadow of ever-growing debt mountains, Hong Kong has amassed a stash of excess reserves worth around HK$1.4 trillion, or 70 per cent of the city's annual output; a clear sign that the surplus is structural in nature and not cyclical.

Yet although he delivers his budget from a position of enviable strength, Tsang is a troubled man. His biggest worry is Hong Kong's fast-rising home prices; a problem so acute he could not even wait for tomorrow's budget to reveal a doubling of stamp duties on property transactions, jumping the gun with an announcement last Friday.

Whether higher stamp duties will do anything to make homes more affordable is doubtful. If anything the punitive tax rate is likely to deter sellers, reducing supply even further.

In short, the stamp duty increase looks like a knee-jerk reaction from a government desperately short of ideas.

Yet if Tsang and his officials had stopped to think about it, they would have realised that the strength of their position and the biggest problem they face - a structural glut of government cash and sky-high property prices - are two sides of the same coin.

The government runs a structural surplus because it long ago adopted a high land price policy, restricting the supply of new building land in order to bump up its revenues from developers paying to convert land zoned for industrial or agricultural purposes to residential use.

And home prices are unaffordable today for exactly the same reason: the government operates a high land price policy in order to generate fat revenues from the property market.

Clearly the solution to both problems - an unneeded structural surplus and prohibitively expensive housing - is not to tinker with stamp duties. The solution is a root and branch reform of the way the market for building land in Hong Kong works.

Unfortunately, that's far too much to hope for in tomorrow's budget.



For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive



This article is now closed to comments

LKS, about a decade ago, in SCMP reported as telling the public that property investment is like ‘sugar dumplings in sugar water’. It was said at the time when property speculation was fierce and LKS made an honest assessment of the effect of putting money in property by ordinary folks. I will qualify what he said. It is not so for a wage earner since a profit can be had when property improves its value over time. In Hong Kong it is easily done through demand by increasing its population while curtailing housing supply. But LKS was perceptive. His one-liner implies perhaps that money invested in property is a dead end street for an overall economy for a place. Building after being built and decorated does not generate any more investment opportunity. Capitals that otherwise can be invested for other endeavors which can create work and profits are being firmly locked within those concrete and material. Thus, overinvestment in property has a diminishing return for a society especially in the long run.
Now, it is a different story for property developers of the like in Hong Kong. They create a market for the ordinary folks and well heeled mainlanders. For these developers, capitals are abundantly raised for doing either the same or divest into other businesses in Hong Kong and elsewhere. It is an additive economic for them. Just look at Cheng Kong, a super conglomerate. Don’t say LKS has not forewarned the society. For the individual, divest if you can just like LKS.
The Finance Secretary was reported as announcing the late surplus was due to revenue from property. His otherwise prediction earlier was a deficit to take place. Such pairing of state of government yearly revenue becomes a norm. As a result Hong Kong also faces another pairing in which structural surplus and unaffordable housing. The solution to the latter pairing by a reform in building land – a stable government revenue and property pricing, will bring about nothing short of a revolution. Most of the property owners in Hong Kong treat their property as financial source for retirement. A rise in the property price for them is a must. The property owners actually long support the yearly inflation of property in Hong Kong. Both the government in view of any social instability and property owners’ dependency on property, a Chinese proverb would say: ‘Difficult to dismount the tiger’. I hope there will be a way out whereby most importantly affordable housing is available while retirement income is assured.
I couldn't agree more. Hong Kong has always relied too much on land and property as a revenue source and a mainstay of the economy. The previous administration deliberately engineered the hyper-inflation in the market we have now. The tycoons were allowed to abuse the system so much that they were practically governing Hong Kong.
Everyone should have the right to an affordable home instead of being slaves to the banks and property developers.
A high land price policy is not a problem if at least 1/2 of the revenue from sale of land is channeled to finance the building of public house.


SCMP.com Account