Saturday, November 18, 2017
Sunday, March 19, 2017
借票卖空放宽．大户喜．散户惊
上月杪，大马交易所（BURSA）宣布调整受管制借票卖空（RSS）框架，进一步放宽卖空和借票条例，再一次昭显交易所开拓借票卖空市场，让马股国际化的雄心壮志。“哦，卖空啊，只有大机构才能玩啦，与我们一般投资者无关。”你或许会说。然而，卖空市场兴衰，真的与散户毫无关系吗？错！是大有关系！
推行4年
亚航惨况最怵目惊心
亚航惨况最怵目惊心
虽说大马交易所自2013年起积极推广借票卖空，但在4年后的今天，许多投资者仍然对卖空一知半解，也没有兴趣了解，原因是交易所至今只为大机构开启卖空大门，散户仍被拒于门外。
散户不允参与
交易所之前曾透露，禁止散户参与借票卖空主要是考虑到相关市场仍小，且交易条件对散户不友善，不适合开放给散户。
然而，不参与不代表没有关系，理由很简单；若大机构在小股东毫不知情下大量沽空一家公司的股票，散户的财富就很可能受到波及，甚至造成惊慌抛售，蒙受没有必要的亏损。
最好的例子当属亚洲航空（AIRASIA，5099，主板贸服组）。
在2015年初，当时股价还稳站2令吉80仙以上的亚航，突然被一系列坏消息缠身，其中又要以来自香港的GMT机构所做的系列指控最受关注，包括指亚航账目作假，盈利无法维持，将违约等等，这一连串消息造成亚航股价崩盘，同年8月杪甚至一度重挫至79仙，许多小股东惊慌断臂而逃，损失惨重。
巧合的是，在GMT造乱期间，亚航股票也突然惨遭投资机构大量沽空，令人有无限遐想。
不过，在连串坏消息结束后，亚航突然间又涌现诸多好消息，包括可能私有化，将高价脱售租赁臂膀，业绩预计大好等，使股价谷底反弹，结果不出一年内就又攀上2令吉80仙；这一来一回，让当时趁乱狙击亚航股票的投机客高唱丰收，却让不明就理的小股东寝食难安了好长一段时间。
从上述例子中，我们可以得一个重要结论；即交易所虽提倡“有序（orderly）”
卖空，大机构却未必愿意遵守，还可能透过制造虚实难辨的利空消息来达到获利目的，造成市场短暂失序，毕竟这些大机构往往正是各种财经消息的主要源头，尤其是来自外国的消息，交易所往往很难管制。
正是这样一个忧虑，让交易所鼓励借票卖空的举动，成了老老实实做投资的散户们的阴影，挥之不去，毕竟没有散户愿意看见自己持有的股票成为狙击客的目标，却又无力扭转沽空客越来越多的事实。
修正借票卖空2大重点
交易所在上月杪修正的借票卖空和协商借票（SBL-NT）框架，一共有两大重点，包括：
1.放宽卖空价
新框架下，卖空客能直接以“最低售价（best ask）”
下单，不再是之前规定的“高于最后挂价（higher than last done price）”。
要解释两者的不同，以实际例子做例会更易明白，就用人人皆知的马来亚银行（MAYBANK）吧。
框架调整前，若马来亚银行目前的最高出价（Best bid）是RM8.00，最低售价是8.01，最后挂价是RM8.00，那么，沽空者在脱售马来亚银行时必须把价钱设在RM8.01或以上，但即使Best bid和Best ask不变，最后挂价却升至RM8.01，沽空者在下单时也必须把售价调高至RM8.02，即所谓的“高于最后挂价”。
但在框架修改后，只要best ask依然是RM8.01，那即使最后挂价是RM8.01，沽空者也能以RM8.01下单，不再受“高于最后挂价”条例限制。
总的来说，交易所依然禁止沽空方直接把票卖给最高出价方，避免股价因沽空而狂泻，只是稍微放宽了卖空限制，让沽空方更方便下单（框架更改前，股票最后挂价不断变化让沽空方较难下单，造成诸多不便），强化交易效率。
2.提升借票补仓弹性
股市中，卖方无法履行递票（Delivery）责任，或买方无法履行付款责任，称之为“失败交易（Fail Trade）”；交易所今次对协商借票框架所做的调整，主要是增加借票补仓途径，降低补仓成本。
不过，鉴于现有卖空规则下，沽空方原本就得先借到票后才能开始卖空，“失败交易”风险相对低，故交易所今次修改借票条例，估计是为了让投资者更容易弥补下单失误（文告里有说到这点），如不慎无票沽空，可透过借票方式弥补过失，非被迫以更高价从公开市场买回等量股票，这能够将下单失误的亏损减至最低。
无论如何，由于科技进步使下单系统能自动限制无票卖空交易，故这类失误的发生几率如今已降低许多。
但需补充的是，鉴于借票能够以抵押方式进行，故一旦发生抵押品价值下跌，借票人又无力提供新资产时，亦可能衍生失败交易风险。
其实，借票补仓模式一直都存在，但原本只能透过交易所属下中央借贷机构（CLA）进行。条例修改后，获交易所批准的合格投资者，将能透过有牌代理，向其他合格投资者藉票补仓，简单来说就是多了一种借票补仓途径而已。
2013年借票卖空修正指南
在2013年公布的借票卖空修正指南中，交易所为能被卖空的公司订下几个标准，重点包括：
1.必须在3个月时间里维持至少5亿令吉市值
2.股票的公开流通量至少达5000万股
3.过去1年的月均成交量至少100万股
新上市公司若想成为被卖空公司，必须：
1.市值至少占富时全股指数的2%以上
2.必须成为综指成份股
3年卖空量暴增8倍
截至上周，获交易所允许卖空的上市公司合计达237家，占马股上市公司约25%，对比2006年的70家也明显增多；另外，借票市场和卖空交易规模也快速膨胀中，前者在过去3年半时间里涨大近8倍，由6亿增至49亿令吉，后者则由原本的每日几百万令吉交易价值，增至数千万令吉，显示大马卖空市场正快速成长中。
237股可卖空
交易所资料显示，月初至今，马股每天平均有介于2000万至4000万令吉的股票被卖空，但只占日均交易值0.7%至1.3%之间，规模仍不算大。
截至上周四，过去10天卖空市场里较显眼的是IOI产业（IOIPG,5249,主板产业组）遭沽空1747万股，沙肯石油（SKPETRO,5218,主板贸服组）则被沽出778万股，有趣的是，一些甚受市场看好的中资本股，如德达飞讯集团（DSONIC,5216,主板贸服组）、嘉登控股（GADANG,9261,主板建筑组）及WCT控股（WCT,9679,主板建筑组）等，亦屡获沽盘缠上，显示一些机构在股价快涨时趁机沽空，博回调时获利。
有兴趣知道哪些公司可被卖空，或哪些公司被频密卖空的读者，可在大马交易所官方网站里找到相关资料。
交易所“抢客”“稳市”求平衡
实际上，借票卖空一直是个深具争议的课题，且向来贬多于褒，更被判定是多次股市崩盘的元凶；那么，既然明知山有虎，交易所何以偏要向虎山行呢？
说白了，就为抢客。
常是崩盘元凶
卖空固然不受许多散户欢迎，但对于掌握亿万资金的投资机构来说，卖空却是另一种能带来可观回酬的投资模式，故深受大机构喜爱，大马交易所既然立志成为东盟之最，就必然得认真看待国际投资机构的喜好，认真看待卖空，因一昧禁止卖空只会让投资机构转战其他允许卖空的国家，使“客源”白白溜走，毕竟许多先进股市都允许卖空，条件还比大马更宽松。
顶着落在人后压力的交易所，只能竭尽所能地在“市场秩序”和“吸资”中划一道平衡线，以盼在吸引越来越多资金光顾马股之余，也别让一些嗜血的资金搞坏马股秩序，这就是交易所何以允许卖空，却附上诸多限制。
只不过，为了让卖空更具吸引力，交易所未来很难不选择继续放宽卖空限制，否则将很难与其他国家更宽松的卖空制度竞争。
一旦卖空条例继续放宽，马股受国际狙击手偷袭的几率也将跟着增加，这是无可避免的事，也是沽空所衍生的最大风险。国际狙击客心狠手辣，常会在市场动乱时藉卖空制造恐慌，趁火打劫，几乎多数允许沽空的先进股市，都曾遭这些大鳄落井下石，被掠走大量财富。
在2011年欧债风暴期间，欧洲多个主要股市都曾遭狙击，连连暴跌，引发市场恐慌，后来为降低危害，几个国家同时宣布全面禁止沽空金融股，才慢慢逼退狙击客排山倒海的攻势；可笑的是，这也是各国多年来惯用，也似乎是唯一能用的伎俩，市好时大方允许沽空，出问题时才收回成命，平息市场怒火。
实际上，大马也曾在1996年允许卖空，却在短短两年后，便因金融风暴而宣布全面禁止卖空，直到2006年才重新允许卖空。
就学术眼光来看，允许卖空固然有其好处，这包括有助避免资产价格过度膨胀，易于投资者拟定护盘策略，进行多样化交易，深化股票回酬效益等，但鉴于资金市场本性贪婪，卖空亦很容易引发问题，如加剧或引发股市崩盘，迫使当局得耗费一番功夫来重建市场信心。
由此可见，允许卖空俨然是双面刃，好景时欲分割“卖空”这块大饼，不景时自然也得承受恶果。
大马交易所欲戴王冠，必承其重。
卖空是危也是机
总的来说，在一个越来越容易卖空的市场里，股市越来越波动是可以预见的事；对散户来说，这是危也是机，就像有人在亚航崩跌时损手烂脚，有人却以贱价得票，笑到现在。
只是，散户偶尔尝到甜头，并无法消除放宽卖空限制让大户更有优势的忧虑。
鉴于获准卖空的都是大型投资机构，市场难免会担忧鼓励卖空等于变相鼓励这些大机构强强联手，毕竟这类机构很多时候联合持有许多上市公司的大量股权，一旦合作起来，以藉票之名互相转移股票，要影响股价起落并不难。
当股市剧烈波动时，这些极具影响力，获准卖空的大户就能享尽好处，左右逢源，却苦了一般循规蹈矩的散户，这就是何以在资本市场中，钱多就是真道理，大户总是笑到最后的那一群。
虽然交易所目前限制个股的总卖空数额不能超过总股本的10%，多少限制了下行风险，但其实当市场情绪紧绷时，这10%的潜在卖压足以令人心寒。
上述限制下，一旦某家公司的被沽空的股票总量达总股本的10%，便会在未来4个交易日里不再允许被卖空；另外，交易所也在卖空条例704.13条文中，保留自己当卖空造成问题时，调整规则或禁止卖空的权力，显示交易所亦不敢对卖空可能引起的问题掉以轻心。
股市交易趋复杂
为跟上国际大咖，交易所这些年都在为“深化”马股而努力，允许卖空只是措施之一，这意味目前仍相对简单的资本市场，未来相信会越来越复杂，股市也可能越来越波动。
欲在如此格局中做投资，散户其实从现在起就该做好准备，认识各种新制度对市场的影响，提前为更波动的市况做部署；否则，即使股市深化了，层次提高了，赢家也只会是大户。
Friday, March 17, 2017
政府大力打击逃税 7月开户头须呈纳税所在地证明
为了打击全球避税活动，国内银行从今年7月1日开始将实施新措施，强制所有欲在我国银行开设新户头的客户，必须提呈供内陆税局用途的“纳税所在地证明书”（Certificate of Tax Residency)。
至于原有的客户，银行获得一年的时间去落实相关新措施。
通过“纳税所在地证明书”措施，可让相关国家准确追查避税活动。
我国是“多边税务行政相互协议”（MCAA)99个签约成员国之一，所有收集到的个人资料，也将提交给所属国家的税收机构。
这是我国落实自动交换信息（AEOI)全球标准下的“共同汇报标准”框架。
纳闽国际商业及金融中心（Labuan IBFC,简称纳闽IBFC）今日举办“未来税务规划及财富管理：全面透明度及实质性？”讲座，主讲者包括主讲者包括马来西亚德勤税务伙伴朱佩佩及陈飞明、博历维律师事务所（BLG)高级顾问（亚太地区）曾惠燕律师。
金融机构皆受新规约束
朱佩佩在座会上说，受“共同汇报标准”约束的金融机构非常广泛，计有存款机构（例如商业银行）、监护机构（例如代理人公司）、投资机构（例如投资银行、资产管理经理及信托单位）及特定保险公司。
她说，今后银行的前线员工，必须费尽心思，向银行客户解说“共同汇报标准”。
“国内银行从今年7月1日向新户头客户收集纳税在地证明书，然后于明年6月30日起，向内陆税收局提呈相关资料。”
她说，客户必须自己填写有关证明书，不能假手于银行，银行也没有义务协助客户填报。
她指出，如果填表上出问题，银行可被罚款最少2万令吉及最高10万令吉，或坐牢6个月，又或两者兼施。
她补充，至于原有银行客户，银行获得一年的时间去落实“共同汇报标准”。
小组讨论主持人是纳闽IBFC 业务发展主任邱梽法，除了上述3名主讲人，马来西亚纳闽银行协会主席凯鲁也是小组讨论成员之一。
纳闽IBFC总执行长丹尼尔马阿都拉也出席讲座。
邱梽法（左起），朱佩佩、陈飞明、曾惠燕及凯鲁在小组讨论中分享各自对反跨国避税全球合作的期待。
审核客户国籍收入来源
凯鲁认为，“共同汇报标准”只是美国海外户头税收遵从法（FATCA）的延伸，所以落实前者实际上挑战不大。
他说，其实银行一直以来进行的客户尽职调查（CDD)及银行界常年审核客户户头的做法，已包括客户国籍、收入来源等资料。
“所以在推行共同汇报标准，关键问题在于信息的素质。”
他说，在岸银行和离岸银行的差别在于，前者对跟客户的要求不比后者多，因为离岸银行和客户没有面对面的接触，纳闽银行界，95%是纳闽以外的客户。
在“自动交换信息”下，的资料，包括什么？
根据主讲者指出，自动交换信息下的资料包括纳税人名字、地址、居住国、纳税人识别号码、出生日期（个人信息）、户头号码、金融机构的名字（户头信息）及户头存额、利息及从户头资产中所得的其他收入、销售收入，金融资产的赎回支付或存入（金融信息）。
税务专家强调，“通用报告准则”旨在侦查蓄意避税者，无意用来对付在岸外置业的人士。
主讲人指出，可预见内陆税收局将收集到庞大个人信息。
Thursday, March 16, 2017
政府大追税 · 10个大盯点 · 你有几个？
“一个人是否逃税，一般上税收局会通过这10点来评估，“来历不明”的资产会成为他们的焦点。”
孔令龙表示，做为一个纳税人，必须要确保自己的账目清楚且拥有良好的记录。同时要保持警惕，每年要查询自己的结单，不要欠税，不能得过且过。
“一些会把你列入黑名单，令你不能出国的网站都要自己去查询。若你每月都要固定缴付大笔贷款，也要向国行的中央信贷情报资讯系统（CCRIS）查询自己有没有被列入黑名单。
谈到报上曝光率高的问题，他说，有关商人若有很多大型的公司活动、经常在媒体上出现、拿到很多代理权，但所呈报的公司收入却很低，就很容易让税收局起疑，认为你的公司所反映的状况和公司的收入不相符，因此，税收局在监督后会自行先做相应评估，以及审核后采取行动。
Saturday, March 11, 2017
大马拥东南亚最多国际学校学生
父母望子成龙，国际学校在大马深受欢迎！
根据国际学校咨询机构（ISC）调查显示，大马是东南亚10个国家內，拥有最多国际学校的学生的国家，学生人数比排在第二和第三位的泰国和新加坡多了逾万人。
在今年首个季度（1月至3月），国內共有7万1589名国际学校学生，泰国以6万4928名学生位列第二，而排在第三位的新加坡则有6万3789名国际学校学生。
其次分別是印尼（5万7402人）、越南（4万0003人）、柬埔寨（2万6188人）、菲律宾（2万4355人）、缅甸（1万3179人）、汶莱（6255人）和寮国（3374人）。
该调查也显示，在过去4年內，东南亚的国际学校学生人数，已经增加了33.9%。
在国际学校数量方面，印尼是拥有最多国际学校的国家，达190所英语国际学校，泰国同样排名第二，其国际学校数量为181所，而大马则排在第三位，国內共有170所国际学校。
其余则分別是柬埔寨（114所）、越南（111所）、新加坡（110所）、菲律宾（61所）、缅甸（46所）、寮国（9所）和汶莱（8所）。
东南亚需求高
发佈这项调查的国际学校咨询机构，是全球国际学校情报泰斗，即將在2017年3月22日至24日於吉隆坡InterContinental酒店举办「国际学校与私立学校教育论坛」（IPSEF）。
国际学校与斯里学校教育论坛发起人罗娜格林希尔表示，从国际学校咨询机构所发佈的数据显示，东亚的国际学校如雨后春笋般开办，从2013年的828所，增加到2017年的1125所，增幅达32%。
而东南亚的国际学校数量，在同一段时间內从725所增加到1008所，增加了39%，显示东南亚的国际学校市场有很大的潜力。
「我们可以从东南亚国际学校和私立学校有很大的成长潜质，相信是东亚和东南亚经济崛起所致。」
家长冀孩子拓人脉
国际学校主要以英语为媒介语，并衔接了一些西方国家的教育制度，近来已经逐渐成为除了国家主流教育之外另一种选择。
国际学校的学生来源原本是来马定居或是工作的外国人子女，但近来越来越多本地人將孩子送入国际学校就读，尤其大部分为华裔，目前国际学校內的本地学生比国际学生多。
父母们望子成龙的心態，让他们不惜付出高额学费也要將孩子送入国际学校就读，他们认为就读国际学校能加强孩子的英语能力、培养人脉，以及希望孩子能以更注重培养学生能力的西方教育制度学习。
根据国际学校咨询机构（ISC）调查显示，大马是东南亚10个国家內，拥有最多国际学校的学生的国家，学生人数比排在第二和第三位的泰国和新加坡多了逾万人。
在今年首个季度（1月至3月），国內共有7万1589名国际学校学生，泰国以6万4928名学生位列第二，而排在第三位的新加坡则有6万3789名国际学校学生。
其次分別是印尼（5万7402人）、越南（4万0003人）、柬埔寨（2万6188人）、菲律宾（2万4355人）、缅甸（1万3179人）、汶莱（6255人）和寮国（3374人）。
该调查也显示，在过去4年內，东南亚的国际学校学生人数，已经增加了33.9%。
在国际学校数量方面，印尼是拥有最多国际学校的国家，达190所英语国际学校，泰国同样排名第二，其国际学校数量为181所，而大马则排在第三位，国內共有170所国际学校。
其余则分別是柬埔寨（114所）、越南（111所）、新加坡（110所）、菲律宾（61所）、缅甸（46所）、寮国（9所）和汶莱（8所）。
东南亚需求高
发佈这项调查的国际学校咨询机构，是全球国际学校情报泰斗，即將在2017年3月22日至24日於吉隆坡InterContinental酒店举办「国际学校与私立学校教育论坛」（IPSEF）。
国际学校与斯里学校教育论坛发起人罗娜格林希尔表示，从国际学校咨询机构所发佈的数据显示，东亚的国际学校如雨后春笋般开办，从2013年的828所，增加到2017年的1125所，增幅达32%。
而东南亚的国际学校数量，在同一段时间內从725所增加到1008所，增加了39%，显示东南亚的国际学校市场有很大的潜力。
「我们可以从东南亚国际学校和私立学校有很大的成长潜质，相信是东亚和东南亚经济崛起所致。」
家长冀孩子拓人脉
国际学校主要以英语为媒介语，并衔接了一些西方国家的教育制度，近来已经逐渐成为除了国家主流教育之外另一种选择。
国际学校的学生来源原本是来马定居或是工作的外国人子女，但近来越来越多本地人將孩子送入国际学校就读，尤其大部分为华裔，目前国际学校內的本地学生比国际学生多。
父母们望子成龙的心態，让他们不惜付出高额学费也要將孩子送入国际学校就读，他们认为就读国际学校能加强孩子的英语能力、培养人脉，以及希望孩子能以更注重培养学生能力的西方教育制度学习。
Friday, March 3, 2017
2017 Hyundai Sonata
新的 Hyundai Sonata ！外形时尚激进！採用 2.0L 涡轮引擎！
这款新车会不会掀起一场韩系风暴？
看来日系车 Honda Accord, Nissan Teana, Toyota Camry 将面对一个强劲的对手了！
The New Hyundai Sonota
The new handsome Hyundai Sonata!
A stylish and dynamic shape Korean car that come with 2.0 turbo engine!
Japanese Honda Accord, Nissan Teana, Toyota Camry will face a strong opponent!
Monday, February 13, 2017
Thursday, February 9, 2017
Monday, January 16, 2017
Proposed Stamp Act changes cause a stir
SOME proposed amendments to the Stamp Act 1949, which seek to impose stricter requirements on the stamping of contracts, have caused a stir among property developers who worry that the amendments will push up their cost of doing business.
Several developers The Edge spoke to expect to be materially affected by the amendments. While the actual scope of the impact remains unclear, they expect costs to rise substantially due to the sheer volume of contracts signed in the sector.
“This is something we will protest against,” says one developer who declines to be named, adding the changes could be gazetted within a year, going by due process.
The amendments are contained in the Stamp (Amendment) Bill 2016, which has already gone through the first reading in Parliament but has yet to be passed. The next parliamentary sitting begins in early March 2017.
Key amendments include strengthening the wording of Section 4 of the Stamp Act to provide that the chargeability of stamp duty — and exemption from it — shall be subject to the Stamp Act only, rather than multiple pieces of legislation.
A construction player says one concern from this change is that existing stamp duty exemptions provided for under various Acts will be taken away, meaning stamp duty will be payable on more instruments than before.
The wording of the section will also be amended to stress that all instruments chargeable with stamp duty “shall be duly stamped”, implying that there will be a stricter requirement for contracts to be stamped.
This, in particular, will affect businesses that sign a big volume of service contracts such as property developers and construction firms, say lawyers familiar with the subject matter.
“In practice, stamping is [currently] done selectively. People pick and choose what to stamp,” says one lawyer who declines to be identified. “In the worst case, not stamping your document means it will be inadmissible in court as evidence.”
Even then, a common practice is for an affected party to simply pay late stamping penalties to admit such documents to court, says another lawyer. The current penalty for executing and signing documents not duly stamped is currently RM1,500. The amendments seek to increase this to RM6,000.
As for late stamping penalties, the fines currently go up to RM100 or 20% of the deficient duty, whichever is greater, for stamping done more than six months late. The bill seeks to increase the penalties to be as high as RM100 or four times the deficient duty if more than six months late, whichever is greater.
In its current form, the penalties for non-stamping are not seen as prohibitive. Not stamping a contract does not render the contract invalid, the lawyers say.
Rather, the current consequences of not stamping an agreement are more administrative in nature. While some stamp duties are fixed, others are levied on an ad valorem basis, meaning they are calculated in proportion to the contract value.
If the bill is passed by Parliament and gazetted without changes, a main concern for affected businesses is the possibility that a blanket stamping requirement will mean paying stamp duties on each contract signed.
“Our cost of doing business will go up,” says one developer. “There is a huge number of smaller contracts in each project.”
In addition, for developers especially, there is concern about a proposed amendment whereby ad valorem stamp duty would be imposed on the contract or agreement instead of the memorandum of transfer for property.
Essentially, this may imply that the stamp duty is payable when a homebuyer executes the sales and purchase agreement — even before obtaining a housing loan — instead of upon vacant possession of the property in question.
“This raises the entry bar for aspiring homebuyers as there will be more upfront costs,” says one developer. “If developers pay on their behalf at that point, to whom is the duty refunded to if the sale is later aborted?”
The bill also contains clauses that increase the Inland Revenue Board’s (IRB) power of collection vis-a-vis stamp duty. Among others, the IRB will be empowered to make an assessment if it finds that a chargeable instrument is not duly stamped.
The IRB’s powers are also expanded so that it may conduct an audit, whereby it will be empowered to require relevant documents to be produced as well as search properties and other places for auditing purposes.
This comes alongside a new requirement for every duty payer to keep the relevant instruments and documents for a period of seven years from the payable date.
Non-cooperation with such requests will be deemed an offence under the amendments. The bill seeks to increase the maximum fine for non-compliance from RM250 to RM10,000.
Also worth noting is a proposed new power that allows the IRB to appoint any person to be an agent of a duty payer. Such an agent will be required to pay any duty or penalty due under the Stamp Act on behalf of the duty payer. Such an appointment can be objected to by notice in writing to the IRB within 14 days from the date of appointment.
In addition, the Bill also proposes to allow the IRB to recover unpaid duty or penalty from a deceased party, whose estate shall not be distributed unless the owed sum is provided for.
From the taxation and legal perspectives, however, the Stamp Act amendments are seen as collectively necessary given the age of the Act. One tax consultant described parts of the Act as “archaic”.
“Currently, the Stamp Act can be quite confusing,” the lawyer says, adding that the amendments will simplify and update the Stamp Act, which was originally modelled after 19th-century legislation from the UK.
However, the main benefit for the government would be on the revenue collection side, the lawyer says, given stricter stamping requirements alongside increased collection and enforcement powers.
While relatively small compared with the government’s annual revenue, total stamp duty collection represents a sizeable contribution annually.
In 2015, the government collected RM5.974 billion in stamp duty against RM219.09 billion in total revenue, based on Putrajaya’s financial statements for 2015. This was a 7.5% drop year on year from the RM6.46 billion collected in 2014, whereas total revenue in 2014 was slightly higher at RM220.63 billion.
The 2016 financial statements are not yet available.
From the IRB perspective, the amendments as a whole are seen to rebalance the scope of its enforcement powers, says the first lawyer. This would bring its powers to be more in line with its powers on other types of taxes such as income tax, which is more strictly enforced with more well-defined powers.
“Stamp duty has been like a [neglected] stepchild all these years, but it is coming to the fore now,” opines the lawyer.
Several developers The Edge spoke to expect to be materially affected by the amendments. While the actual scope of the impact remains unclear, they expect costs to rise substantially due to the sheer volume of contracts signed in the sector.
“This is something we will protest against,” says one developer who declines to be named, adding the changes could be gazetted within a year, going by due process.
The amendments are contained in the Stamp (Amendment) Bill 2016, which has already gone through the first reading in Parliament but has yet to be passed. The next parliamentary sitting begins in early March 2017.
Key amendments include strengthening the wording of Section 4 of the Stamp Act to provide that the chargeability of stamp duty — and exemption from it — shall be subject to the Stamp Act only, rather than multiple pieces of legislation.
A construction player says one concern from this change is that existing stamp duty exemptions provided for under various Acts will be taken away, meaning stamp duty will be payable on more instruments than before.
The wording of the section will also be amended to stress that all instruments chargeable with stamp duty “shall be duly stamped”, implying that there will be a stricter requirement for contracts to be stamped.
This, in particular, will affect businesses that sign a big volume of service contracts such as property developers and construction firms, say lawyers familiar with the subject matter.
“In practice, stamping is [currently] done selectively. People pick and choose what to stamp,” says one lawyer who declines to be identified. “In the worst case, not stamping your document means it will be inadmissible in court as evidence.”
Even then, a common practice is for an affected party to simply pay late stamping penalties to admit such documents to court, says another lawyer. The current penalty for executing and signing documents not duly stamped is currently RM1,500. The amendments seek to increase this to RM6,000.
As for late stamping penalties, the fines currently go up to RM100 or 20% of the deficient duty, whichever is greater, for stamping done more than six months late. The bill seeks to increase the penalties to be as high as RM100 or four times the deficient duty if more than six months late, whichever is greater.
In its current form, the penalties for non-stamping are not seen as prohibitive. Not stamping a contract does not render the contract invalid, the lawyers say.
Rather, the current consequences of not stamping an agreement are more administrative in nature. While some stamp duties are fixed, others are levied on an ad valorem basis, meaning they are calculated in proportion to the contract value.
If the bill is passed by Parliament and gazetted without changes, a main concern for affected businesses is the possibility that a blanket stamping requirement will mean paying stamp duties on each contract signed.
“Our cost of doing business will go up,” says one developer. “There is a huge number of smaller contracts in each project.”
In addition, for developers especially, there is concern about a proposed amendment whereby ad valorem stamp duty would be imposed on the contract or agreement instead of the memorandum of transfer for property.
Essentially, this may imply that the stamp duty is payable when a homebuyer executes the sales and purchase agreement — even before obtaining a housing loan — instead of upon vacant possession of the property in question.
“This raises the entry bar for aspiring homebuyers as there will be more upfront costs,” says one developer. “If developers pay on their behalf at that point, to whom is the duty refunded to if the sale is later aborted?”
The bill also contains clauses that increase the Inland Revenue Board’s (IRB) power of collection vis-a-vis stamp duty. Among others, the IRB will be empowered to make an assessment if it finds that a chargeable instrument is not duly stamped.
The IRB’s powers are also expanded so that it may conduct an audit, whereby it will be empowered to require relevant documents to be produced as well as search properties and other places for auditing purposes.
This comes alongside a new requirement for every duty payer to keep the relevant instruments and documents for a period of seven years from the payable date.
Non-cooperation with such requests will be deemed an offence under the amendments. The bill seeks to increase the maximum fine for non-compliance from RM250 to RM10,000.
Also worth noting is a proposed new power that allows the IRB to appoint any person to be an agent of a duty payer. Such an agent will be required to pay any duty or penalty due under the Stamp Act on behalf of the duty payer. Such an appointment can be objected to by notice in writing to the IRB within 14 days from the date of appointment.
In addition, the Bill also proposes to allow the IRB to recover unpaid duty or penalty from a deceased party, whose estate shall not be distributed unless the owed sum is provided for.
From the taxation and legal perspectives, however, the Stamp Act amendments are seen as collectively necessary given the age of the Act. One tax consultant described parts of the Act as “archaic”.
“Currently, the Stamp Act can be quite confusing,” the lawyer says, adding that the amendments will simplify and update the Stamp Act, which was originally modelled after 19th-century legislation from the UK.
However, the main benefit for the government would be on the revenue collection side, the lawyer says, given stricter stamping requirements alongside increased collection and enforcement powers.
While relatively small compared with the government’s annual revenue, total stamp duty collection represents a sizeable contribution annually.
In 2015, the government collected RM5.974 billion in stamp duty against RM219.09 billion in total revenue, based on Putrajaya’s financial statements for 2015. This was a 7.5% drop year on year from the RM6.46 billion collected in 2014, whereas total revenue in 2014 was slightly higher at RM220.63 billion.
The 2016 financial statements are not yet available.
From the IRB perspective, the amendments as a whole are seen to rebalance the scope of its enforcement powers, says the first lawyer. This would bring its powers to be more in line with its powers on other types of taxes such as income tax, which is more strictly enforced with more well-defined powers.
“Stamp duty has been like a [neglected] stepchild all these years, but it is coming to the fore now,” opines the lawyer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)