夏伟文 & 陈子莹 (23 May 2016)
Imagine there is a
father who always gives allowance money to his son. Due to his son profuse
spending, the son asked for more money from his father. Do you think it is
right for the son to ask for more money? Yes, only if the allowance is too
little for survival. What make no sense or cause anger is not the demand for
extra allowance but the profuse spending.
Applying the story to
Goods and Services Tax (GST) issue, the “father” is the citizen. The “son” is
the government while the “allowance” is tax. Government has it logic to claim
that current base of tax paying citizen is too small. In February 2014, Prime
Minister Najib Razak announced that only one out of ten Malaysians pay their
taxes. This portion is considered “too little for survival”, especially to
rectify decades of budget deficit.
However, what anger the
Malaysians is the “profuse spending” of the government. Rampant report of
corruption (which is a leakage of fund) and inefficiency in public sector added
to call for to stop the wastage first before implement more taxes. Malaysians
also worry and sceptical on whether the extra revenue from GST will be wisely
used or not.
Let’s continue with the father-son-allowance
story. After the son get the extra allowance (GST) from the father, the son
still not satisfied. Citing that scholarship (oil revenue) has decrease, the
son announced reduce caring effort (budget cut) to the father. Will this be
acceptable?
In between its
implementation on 1st April 2015 to 31st December 2015,
over RM27 billions of GST revenue was collected. Surprisingly, this extra
revenue is seen as not enough to fight drastic drop of oil revenue due to
global oil price slump. In January 2016 during the recalibration of Budget
2016, Prime Minister Najib Razak announced that Malaysia’s oil revenue fell
closed to RM14 billion. Simple maths will give you a net RM13 billions from GST
extra revenue minus loss of oil revenue. This make extra budget cut not
acceptable and sceptical. Where are the revenues from GST?
Brief
Recap
From a high of over USD
100 per barrel, crude oil dropped to a low of USD 26 per barrel before rebound
to around USD 40 per barrel after Saudi Arabia and Russia co-operate for a
supply restriction. Subsequently, government of oil exporting countries include
Malaysia announced painful budget cut. Reason given is drastic drop of oil
revenue.
In wake of high federal
government debt and reduced revenue from Petronas oil loyalty/dividends, Malaysian
government adjusted its fiscal policy. Good and Services Tax (GST) was
introduced a year ago. Despite some havoc in its initial implementation, GST
brought in higher than expected revenue to the government. It also successfully
increase tax based (percentage of people paying tax) in Malaysia. Nonetheless,
there are some drawbacks. Its implementation is messy and costly. GST burden
the low and middle income consumer groups. People still doubt that government
will use the extra GST revenue wisely.
Despite many viewed GST
as “bad”, it is still a needed long-term fiscal adjustment to increase revenue
to eased huge budget deficits and debts. Thus, the “bad” should be restricted
to the two things mentioned, namely (i) more tax revenue from GST may encourage
more wastage from inefficiency and corruption, and (ii) the extra GST revenue
may not be wisely used.
In Malaysia context, some
called this twin fiscal adjustments (GST and budget cut) a “needed daring” move
in current unfriendly global economic scenario but some criticized it as “wrong
desperate” choice. Some think it is a “no choice” for the government.
Nonetheless, it is not “my choice” for most consumers. While GST is a “short term
pain, long term gain” (if its revenues are utilized wisely), budget cut,
especially in education and healthcare sector is reversed – a short term gain
but long term pain.
Education
and National Productivity
Academician or
administrator in Malaysia education sector may have realized the extent of
inefficient in our education system. Relatively low world universities ranking
and bad Program for International Assessment (PISA) results merely a
confirmation of our deteriorating education standard. All these are after
decades of efforts, plenty of resources (from budget allocations and private
investment) and overwhelming regulations/quality assurance (from Malaysia Qualification
Agency, MQA) to boost our education standard.
What will happen if all
those mentioned are suddenly reduced due to budget cut with no appropriate
fundamental reform? As compare to Budget 2015, Higher Education Ministry
suffered budget reduced by RM2.4 billion to RM13.378 billion. Public
universities’ funding is to be reduced by RM1.442 billion. Universiti Malaya believed
to has the most severe cut of 27.30% while Universiti Utara Malaysia is 19.31%,
Universiti Sains Malaysia is 17.14% and Universiti Teknologi Malaysia is
16.53%.
As results from the
allocation cut, various public universities in Malaysia have stopped their
subscription to journal databases. Both public and private education
institutions are also getting less research grants from the government. These
greatly hamper research capability for academicians and deprive students of necessary
education materials (subscribed online journals and books) and various tools
for scientific research.
Less optimistic on
current economic scenario plus increase cost due to GST have discouraged
business sectors to give funding or sponsorship to private education
institutions. Fierce competition in private education sector has driven down
profit margin and students’ intake. This may (or already) cause rounds of cost
cutting measures from less sponsorship for conference and scholarship to even stop
supplying toilet papers!
The government and
relevant stakeholder should understand that research and teaching are important
source for productivity growth. Productivity is important source for economic
growth and sustainability. Economic growths that based on increase in production
inputs are not long-lasting. Increase in productivity (technology progress)
through education, research and innovation is long-lasting. Asian Miracle
during the 1990s is a good lesson to learn.
Asian
Miracle Lesson – Perspiration vs. Inspiration
South East Asian and
South Korea continuous very high economics growth for years had been dubbed as
“Asian Miracle”. However, Paul Krugman (Economic Nobel Prize) revealed that
those “miracle” were actually due to rapid increase in population growth. He
cautious us that the miracle will not last because total factor productivity
(TFP) for those countries has been stagnant or even decline slightly.
The moral of the
Krugman story is Asian countries use “perspiration” (hard work) to growth while
developed Western countries use “inspiration” (innovation/technology
progress/productivity) to growth. Perspiration is not lasting and less
impactful. Inspiration needs consistent investments in education, research and
development especially in science and technology areas. Not only investment in
term of money is important, great political will is also needed in providing resources
and fostering the spirit of innovation.
A sudden cut in budget
on education sector will deprive needed funding. It also gives bad impression
that education is not important in national agenda. Once our momentum towards
improve productivity through education, science and technology improvement is
stopped, it is hard to kick it back to high speed level – it’s a Newton’s
scientific law of moment. Hence, should the government risk of long term pain
for short term gain?
Healthcare
– Public Amenity vs. Private Initiatives
Healthcare is one of
twelve “National Key Economic Areas” (NKEA) in Economic Transformation Plan
(ETP). Forty projects are announced and private investments are encouraged to
participate and collaborate with public sector. All these plans are announced
in September 2010 when oil price was strong while existing debt and continuous
budget deficit are still not a big issue.
In January 2016, budget
for Health Ministry is expected to be reduced by 10% or between RM250 million
to RM300 million. Health Minister is optimistic that budget cut will be counter
with increase in efficiency in health sector at various levels. Nonetheless, budget
cut in healthcare trigger many alarming questions. For example, will budget cut
in healthcare jeopardize or at least delay the ETP progress? Will the citizens,
especially those who are depending on public amenity (like public hospital)
suffer due to lesser allocation to public healthcare? Can the private sector
fill the gaps left void by public amenities? How about the different of cost
for healthcare services between public and private providers? All these
questions need detail data and information to answers. Ineffective, costly and
secretive nature of information regarding public sector hamper debate and
discussion to find precise effect and alleviation methods to safeguard public
welfare after budget cut.
Nonetheless, one aspect
needs serious attention – low expenses on insurance means that dependency on
public healthcare or “god blessing for good health” are still crucial. In the
United States, the Affordable Care Act (more famously known as “Obama Care”)
defines affordable health insurance as cost less than 8% of your annual
modified adjusted gross income after subsidies. If their citizen can’t find a
plan that will cost less than 8% of their family’s income, they won’t be
required to have insurance starting in 2014. However, most Americans
shopping in the private market will be able to find an affordable insurance
option.
How about Malaysia?
Affordable insurance options are widely available. Unfortunately, willingness
to spend on insurance is relatively too low as shown in Table 1. Despite
increased 1.5 percentage points from 1990 to 2014, Malaysia most insurance
expenditure as percentage of Gross National Income (GNI) in 2014 is only 4.4%,
which is about half of the standard required by Obama for United States. While
there are effort and progress to expand private insurance sector in Malaysia,
it take time and changes of Malaysians’ mind-set towards acceptance of
insurance as an important element in their life and financial planning. Before
we reach United States or developed countries level, budget cut in healthcare
most likely will give significant negative impact to its citizens.
Table
1: Insurance Expenditure as percentage of Gross National Income (GNI)
Year
|
1990
|
2006
|
2007
|
2008
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
2014
|
Premium (% of GNI)
|
2.9
|
4.5
|
4.3
|
3.8
|
4.4
|
4.3
|
4.2
|
4.4
|
4.4
|
4.4
|
Life (% of GNI)
|
1.5
|
3.1
|
3.0
|
2.6
|
3.0
|
2.9
|
2.6
|
2.8
|
2.8
|
2.8
|
General (% of GNI)
|
1.4
|
1.4
|
1.3
|
1.2
|
1.4
|
1.4
|
1.6
|
1.6
|
1.7
|
1.6
|
Conclusion
Reform in budgeting
strategies has been long overdue. Implementation of GST is a short term pain
but promise a healthier fiscal strength to the country. Yet, its implementation
is disappointing. Its benefits could be dwarfed by big amount of seemingly
unstoppable wastage in government spending. In contrast, government’s response
to reduced revenue from global oil price slump by cutting budget is a short
term gain but long term pain. This is especially cut in allocation in two
critical sectors, namely education and healthcare.
[Chinese version published at 南洋商报经济周刊 Nanyang Press – Business News, page A9 on 18th January 2016. Available online at http://www.enanyang.my/news/20160523/收270亿却削减预算案br-消费税去向受关注. This English version may be slightly different from the Chinese online/printed newspaper version]
No comments:
Post a Comment