Clarification required on changes to digital voucher scheme
- Revised eligibility rules for the second batch of handouts may have serious implications for new arrivals and emigrants in the long run
The broadening of the government’s digital consumption voucher scheme to include two new payment platforms ought to be welcome news. Yet it also raises questions following a change in the eligibility for the second batch of HK$5,000 handouts. There is a need for details to be clarified, especially when they may have serious implications for new arrivals and emigrants further down the road.
Under the latest criteria, those who are planning to emigrate or have been absent “without specific reasons” for three years will not be eligible. Separately, the scheme has been extended to another 300,000 people who are mainly entrepreneurs, talents and students under special admission schemes. How many people will lose out because of the new restrictions remains unclear, but the expansion is set to cost up to HK$1.7 billion more.
Given the original bill was HK$66.4 billion, some taxpayers may take issue with the latest show of largesse. But the expanded scheme promises to bring further benefits. Last year’s scheme, capped at HK$5,000 per head, was expected to have a stimulus effect equivalent to 0.7 percentage point of the gross domestic product on the economy. The four operators attracted more than 4.7 million new e-payment users and 96,000 additional merchants. With handouts of HK$10,000, and more people included, benefits should be greater this time.
Hong Kong to include non-PR residents, students on e-voucher handout from August
That said, further explanation is needed as to the exclusion of those who have already left Hong Kong or who intend to do so. Finance minister Paul Chan Mo-po said the move was in response to queries as to why those who have moved away could still claim. Arguably, that concern had already been addressed in the first phase, with a two-year residency required before making an application. The new restrictions may give the impression that they are to merely punish those who abandon the city. It is also difficult to determine who intends to emigrate, but authorities believe they can be identified by declarations made before withdrawing retirement savings and departing for good. However, there are still those who leave and defer such withdrawals.
As with other Covid-19 relief measures, the vouchers aim to increase consumption and promote electronic payments. While the government has maintained relatively loose criteria for other subsidies, the shopping handout has more strings attached. The restriction may give the impression that a well-intentioned economic initiative has been complicated by political overtones.
Even though the vouchers are not part of the welfare system, there are questions as to whether emigrants and those who intend to leave will still be eligible for other benefits and public services in the long run. This also requires clarification.
