[Sline]

If cow don't drink water,  who can lead them? I am sure it's mostly coached by agents who want to secure deals.  However i am also sure are the greedy buyers who want to avoid ABSD by assuming the "small" risk.

[WhatDoYouThink!]

How about 98-2? 70-30? 51-49?

[K88 shu shu]

make money times happily collect the profit and when kena investigation, blame the agents, well done sinkies.

[Sline]

How about 98-2? 70-30? 51-49?

If buyers & agents really want to avoid tax,  1-2% transfer is all it takes. Make no sense to transfer more to pay higher tax.

[Sline]

make money times happily collect the profit and when kena investigation, blame the agents, well done sinkies.

Agents & their Co, lawyers, bankers all want deal closed to earn money ma.Buyers also want to avoid tax to be richer ma.

[K88 shu shu]

How about 98-2? 70-30? 51-49?

confirm plus chop you are not financially savvy.

[K88 shu shu]

Agents & their Co, lawyers, bankers all want deal closed to earn money ma.

you works for free?

[WhatDoYouThink!]

confirm plus chop you are not financially savvy.

No more money how to be savvy

[Sline]

you works for free?

I worked legitimately,  u don't?

[K88 shu shu]

I worked legitimately,  u don't?

those ppl you mentioned also worked legitimately exploring the loophole of the law.

[p1acebo]

Very concise explanation of what is 99-1.

Eg Sg Buyers are subject to 20% ABSD on second property. So $1 million house attracts absd of $200k.

But loophole co-own. 1st buyer no attract absd because 1st house. Then rope in 2nd buyer (existing 1 house) will attract absd.

They divide purchase to 99-1 ownership. Thus 2nd buyer pay 1% of $1 million ie $10k. Absd is $2k.

[Sline]

those ppl you mentioned also worked legitimately exploring the loophole of the law.

If the intent to explore loophole is to gain an unfair advantage, evade responsibilities, or harm others, then it's more likely to be seen as unethical. However, if the intent is simply to take advantage of a legal opportunity in a way that aligns with the law's purpose, then it may be more defensible. So are you ethical?

[p1acebo]

This is not tax evasion which is criminal. This is considered tax avoidance. Not ethical and borderline semi legit.

[K88 shu shu]

If the intent to explore loophole is to gain an unfair advantage, evade responsibilities, or harm others, then it's more likely to be seen as unethical. However, if the intent is simply to take advantage of a legal opportunity in a way that aligns with the law's purpose, then it may be more defensible. So are you ethical?

well at least you know the different.

[p1acebo]

Nice titties

[WhatDoYouThink!]

If the loophole was created and approved shdnt the creator and approver take the blame?

[A2Z]

This is the culture here- anything goes wrong the top guns no blame it is the tail end gets all the blame. in this case the property agent!

[Ola]

So, IRAS can now slowly dig the records for the past few years

And so? Make owners pay back base on 20% interest rates?

Cannot but they still talk so much like got power.


https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapor...ty-3395916

[Sticw]

Technically the buyers and real estate agents did nothing wrong. It was the authority that created this loophole. If the authority wants to claim back the absd, they better go through all the deals since the start of the absd and make all buyers pay up for the difference. Else it's not fair to anyone. If the authority does nothing to fault the previous offenders, then it simple means no offence committed and therefore anyone moving ahead can still use the same arrangement.

[Wy:Nox]

PAP will not dare to touch rich people. Merely investigating and after that, case close.


https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/05...ax-2155926

[talky]

If cow don't drink water,  who can lead them? I am sure it's mostly coached by agents who want to secure deals.  However i am also sure are the greedy buyers who want to avoid ABSD by assuming the "small" risk.

takes 2 hands to clap