Debunking the official myths about HDB flats (Part 2): HDB flats are affordable to the most Singaporeans

By Eugene Yeo, Consultant Editor

[In this 3-part series, Eugene Yeo sets out to debunk the three most pervasive misconceptions of HDB flats: - 1. Singaporeans own the flats, 2. The flats are affordable and 3. Their rising prices will lead to wealth creation]

MYTH #2: HDB flats are affordable.

TRUTH: HDB flats are affordable only to a minority of Singaporeans and is increasingly priced out of the reach of the average worker.

In spite of the relentless rise in HDB prices lately, the government insists that HDB flats remain affordable to the masses.

Recent pronouncements by the Minister of National Development Mah Bow Tan and HDB officers in replies to concerned citizens in the Straits Times Forum have largely sticked to the official stance: that the government will not intervene in the market to bring the prices down.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office Lim Hwee Hua maintained that HDB flats are affordable to ordinary Singaporeans as they cost no more than 30% of their monthly pay.

HDB’s deputy director Mr Ignatius Lourdesamy wrote to the Straits Times Forum lately that HDB flats remain affordable to eligible first-time households as they use between 21 to 25 per cent of their monthly income to service their loans on new and resale HDB flats which are well below the international affordability benchmark of 30 per cent. (read letter here)

Though he did not state it explicitly, he is likely to be referring to the average shelter-cost-to-income ratio (STIR) or the proportion of total before-tax household income spent on shelter. The shelter-cost-to-income ratio is calculated for each household individually by dividing its total annual shelter cost by its total annual income. A STIR higher than 30 per cent is conventionally taken as indicating a serious housing affordability.

As I was unable to obtain any international studies published online using the STIR to assess housing affordability in different countries including Singapore, I have to use the Median Multiple which is used widely by international organizations such as World Bank and United Nation to assess housing affordability.

[Please read the addenum to this "HDB flats will be unaffordable using the Median Multiple as benchmark for housing affordability" here]

According to the International Housing Affordability Survey which studies the affordability of housing in Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, U.K. and U.S.A, the “median house price to median household income multiple” or median index is used to judge housing affordability. (read article here)

Under its rating categories, a median multiple of 5.1 and over is considered as “severely unaffordable” while affordable housing is kept by a median multiple of 3 and below. The annual median income of a Singapore household is $65,760 in 2008 (source: singstat) which means that the upper limit is only $197,280 which is far exceeded by current prices of new and resale flats.

[The above figure is calculated based on the Median Multiple and not STIR which is used by HDB. I was unable to find out how HDB arrived at its figures of 21 and 25 per cent]

The prevailing sentiment on the ground is that HDB flats are becoming increasingly out of reach to the lower income group. Even the middle class will be stretched to their limits to finance the flats at today’s prices.

The crux of the issue is not whether HDB flats are “affordable”, but if they are “easily affordable” to the average Singaporean.

Let us examine the price of a 3-room HDB flat in the 1970s, 1980s and now based on anecdotal evidence (readers in their 40s and 50s will be able to attest to the veracity of these figures).

A new 3-room flat in Toa Payoh cost about $8,000 in the 1970s. The median pay of a graduate then was $1,000 a month. (8 times)

A similiar flat in Ang Mo Kio will fetch about $40,000 in the 1980s. The median pay of a graduate then was $1,600 a month.  (25 times)

Now, a new 3 room resale flat in Ang Mo Kio can cost as much as $270,000. The median pay of a graduate now is around $2,700 a month (100 times).

As we can see from the above figures, the prices of HDB flats have sky-rocketed to more than 30 times while the median salaries of a graduate has only risen by 2.7 times. Are HDB flats becoming more expensive or affordable to ordinary Singaporeans? Maybe they are still affordable by the government’s standards, but definitely not more affordable by the common man in the streets.

The median pay of a Singapore worker is $4,500. 30% of $4,500 is $1,350 which will enable him to afford a flat c0sting costing up to $450,000 assuming a bank interest not more than 2% and 30-year replayment period.

Of course using this figure as the limit is deceptive as a majority of the population will be able to finance the 30 year loan even if they are earning less than $3,000 monthly.

Still, most flats under HDB’s Design, Build and Order scheme have already breached this upper limit. City View at Boon Keng was launched at prices of between $390,000 and $700,000 last year.

Again, the crux of the matter does not lie solely in the affordability of the flats, but whether Singapore households are plunged into greater debts as a result of financing over-priced HDB flats thereby leaving very little savings for retirement needs.

Anything can happen during the thirty year tenure. Retrenchment, unemployment and unexpected death can lead to an abrupt stop in the mortage payments.

A study conducted by NUS shows that housing affordability has decreased over the years, more so for private properties (source: NUS SCAPE)

In 1975, lifetime income of middle-income households with heads aged 30 was nearly 4 times the amount they would have paid for an average-sized private property.

By mid 1980s, their lifetime income was only sufficient to purchase one private property. The trend continued and during the 1994 – 1996 property price escalation, median income households would be in debt if they purchased an average-priced private property during this period. Price escalation since the late 2007 has brought down affordability again.

Comparing median income and property prices for the past nine years, there were five years when property prices outgrew income.

The prices of HDB flats have now reached or exceeded that of the last property peak in 1996 after which the market crashed, plunging many households into debts. Are we seeing another bubble in the formation?

Current prices are unsustainable in the long run due to combination of a few factors: the economy is expected to be sluggish in the near future, rental income has dropped by more than 30%, salaries are not going up by much and companies may have to retrench more workers if the economy does not pick by the end of year. It is kept high by the influx of new citizens and PRs who may sell off their flats should they leave Singapore later thereby increasing the supply of flats.

There will always be demand for HDB flats in Singapore as housing is a basic necessity. As such, leaving their prices entirely to free market forces will only lead to continuous inflation till the market is unable to support the prices any further leading to a precipitous crash.

The government should undertake a comprehensive study to examine the impact on the rising HDB prices on the savings and standards of living of ordinary Singaporeans.

If one has to work 70 hours a week without rest to finance the HDB mortage loan, even if one is able to “afford” the flat, there will be no quality of life to speak of. What’s the purpose of “owning” a flat at the end of one’s working life when one’s savings and CPF have been depleted by the mortage loans leaving very little for retirement needs? Do Singaporeans really want to work beyond the age of 80 till they drop dead?

The predicament of these Singaporeans had led to HDB to introduce a buy-back lease scheme lately for those living in 2 to 3 room flats in which HDB will purchase the flat from the owner at market rate and pay the sum to them in monthly installments over thirty years while the household continue to live in the flat which they now “lease” from HDB.

Affordability is not just an empty figure and more consideration should be given to its wider social implications and impact on the populace such as maintaining sufficient savings in the bank abnd CPF for retirement, domestic spending power, adequate work-life balance and most importantly, the standard of living.

HDB flats are definitely becoming less and less affordable to the masses and it is imperative that the government takes action now to reduce the prices so as to fulfill the original mission of HDB to provide cheap and affordable public housing to the people of Singapore.

[In part 3 of this series, I shall use an authoritative study by NUS economists to show conclusively that rising prices of HDB flats does not necessarily create wealth for Singaporeans, contrary to claims made by the Senior Minister of State for National Development, Grace Fu lately]

 

Other articles in the series:

>> Part 1: Singaporeans own their HDB flats

>> Addendum: HDB flats will be unaffordable using Median Multiple as benchmark for housing affordability

 

Related articles:

>> HDB uses unknown “benchmark” to assess affordability of flats

>> High cost of HDB flats a key reason for low birth rates by Jeremy Koh and Eugene Yeo

>> Mass market buyers now inflating property prices by Jeremy Koh

>> Record home sales: a boom or bomb in the making? by Jeremy Koh and Eugene Yeo

 

EDITORS’ NOTE:

If you like our work and would like to support us, please transfer your donations via paypal to our account (temasekreview@gmail.com). Any amount will be greatly appreciated! Alternatively, you can also help boost our advertising revenue by clicking on the ads displayed. Thank you!

Join our tweet at: http://www.twitter.com/temasekreview

  • Share/Bookmark
Related Posts

16 Responses to “Debunking the official myths about HDB flats (Part 2): HDB flats are affordable to the most Singaporeans”

  • Richie:

    Ha hah!!

    Luckily I own a few bungalows..

    than I no need to care for your rising HDB flat prices !!

    Life is like that

    You will be squeezed if you are small

    and the BIG ONES control you and your life’s direction..

    this is the FAte of being (only ordinary) singaporeans..!

  • cy:

    this is a lettet from st forum rebuking citi’s economist view that there is no property bubble. always regard so called “experts” view with scepticism, esp those with vested interest like the banks because they get to make money when property loans get bigger.

    Essentially, Mr Kit was comparing the current high property prices with the peak of 1996 to determine if we are indeed having a bubble now. This is akin to comparing K2 with Mount Everest to determine if K2 is indeed a mountain. The fact that K2 is shorter than Everest does not mean that it isn’t a mountain.

    Similarly, the fact that the current situation isn’t as bad as that in 1996 does not mean that it isn’t a bubble. It is only from the perspective of those years of stable property prices that we are able to appreciate the current boom and the peak of 1996 for what they are – bubbles. So even though the current boom has not reached the levels of 1996 yet, it is close enough to warrant concern and should not be dismissed as being not near enough.

    Mr Kit should also know that average income is easily influenced by rising income gaps, so the median income is a better gauge of the average person’s earnings.

    Also, compared to individual income, household income is a better gauge of home affordability because it is mostly the household that buys properties rather than the individual. Furthermore, since individual income is lower than household income, using it to calculate home affordability would paint a bleaker picture. So it is surprising that Mr Kit used individual income but ended up with more rosy conclusions. But whether average or median income is used, the conclusion is the same: In five of the last nine years, property prices outpaced income.

    While Mr Kit is right to say that the average condo buyer will have higher than average income, this was true in 1996 too.

    The fact that households have seen a significant increase in financial assets does not mean anything for new households or future generations who have nothing to fall back on and would have to bear the burden of any property price increases that creep in over the years.

    Mr Kit has, in effect, justified the current boom as being within the tolerable limits of the previous bubble. This is like someone who says that even though he is only 20kg overweight, there is no cause for concern because he used to be 50kg overweight.

  • Kingsgrove:

    A convicing argument that is well supported by figures.

  • cy:

    Mr leong Sze Hian has wrote an article about the cost of building HDB flats, he has reached the same conclusion as me (in one of comment yesterday) from the latest contract awarded to BBR. that the maximum cost is about 120000.

  • PAPsmearer:

    Your article is very insightful, and accurate. However, u must add the impact of CPF upon the affordability argument. Yes, already HDB flats are unaffordable, but they are made doubly so by the encouragement and collusiveness of the PAP in allowing CPF to be used for the down payment and for monthly payments.

    Because CPF are in essence retirement funds, and a financial obligation on the part of the govt. any reduction in CPF caused by using it to pay for the monthly mortgage lessens this future obligation of the govt. Any prudent financial advisor will tell u to pay for present expenses with after tax dollars. e.g if you earn $3000, and your mortgage payment is $1500, than u have $1500 left over for other expenses for the month. Your CPF is untouched in this case. But by allowing your CPF to be depleted every month to pay for the mortgage, you will end up much less retirement money. This is a real and unacknowledge cost of CPF ownership.

    Unfortunately, because HDB flats are so expensive, people cannot debt service their mortgage without the use of their CPF funds.

  • cy:

    to admin, why was my comment censored? aren’t you behaving the same as the PAP? i have already stated i am in no way related to them and is not doing advertisement for them. i am just supporting a good article that have the same view as me.

  • CPF WAS INTENDED By 1st PM "AS OUR RETIREMENT FUND" ... And NOW ... HAS IT BEEN PAP's "FUN" FOR ALL THEIR 'Fund FUNS" ... ???!!!:

    First THINGS FIRST …

    1. “Mentor” as 1ST PM and middle-age man told US that HE CALCULATED 25%+25% = 50% “IS ENUFF” – “MEANING” FOR “RETIREMENT And HDB Flats ONLY” Of Course??? Trust he WAS truly sincere then … BUT then … It’s like Wah ah ah … So Smart AH … As CAN see into 540-59 years AHEAD eh???!!! And so like I’ve said too elsewhere in TR/WP He Of COURSE said NOTHING about HOW HE Ever got around “KNOW” A total monthly CPF contributions WOULD BE ENOUGH … FOR RETIREMENT???!!! …

    2. And So … For Decades by now .. THAT”S HISTORY ISN”T IT!!! BeCaws The Present Feedback from most and many citizens online and in other ways all say THE SAME Thing … CPF “NO ENUFF For RETIREMENT”!!! … AS Changes TO It’s ORIGNAL PURPOSE AND USAGE … AND Singaporeans ARE A ForGiVing and SHORT memory lot … AS …

    3. CPF PAYS TOO For …
    3.1 Private Housing …
    3.2 Then HDB’s DAB flats …
    3.3 Hospitalisation …
    3.4 Then Some Specialist Medical Treatments … like dialysis because It HAS become MORE EXPENSIVE THAN … in Malaysia … and some other ASEAN countries!!!
    3.5 Higher Education … like University AND Polytechnics …
    3.6 … Any care to ADD for participation …?
    3.7 PRICE INCREASES FOR ALL OF THE ABOVE ITEMS …!!!

    4. Is then then ANY MYSTERY THAT Mr. Lee’s CPF System of “IS ENUFF” IS now Showing OTHERWISE??? … OH … I Can already hear some rumblings … like we mMUST BE Fair to him!!! …BUT WHY??? … AS …DOESN’T HE ALWAYS SAY “WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY” to US ALL??? … SO … IS IT THEN UnFair for US TO TAKE ISSUE With Him and HIS PAP NOW???

    5. I say … I saY … I sAY … I SAY … “I SAY” … “I SAY!” And FINALLY … I DO WANT TO SAY TOO … DI DI DI DA DA DA … FOR EXPLANATIONS … Nothing Wrong AND Bad WITh THIS I BELIEVE???

  • JT:

    I agree with PAPsmearer that CPF should play a bigger part in the analysis on affordability.

    Many Singaporeans use up as much of their CPF as possible to pay for their HDB flat. So if you have 1000 per month in your CPF ordinary account and take up a 30 year loan, you will be able to pay up to 360,000 (although much of it will end up in interest payment).

    Add in the a bit of savings for the initial payment, and then consider that usually it is 2 working adults contributing to the payment, then well, I’m lazy to do the exact math, but you can see why HDB prices has risen to the present level.

    In the absence of CPF, would newly married couples be willing to commit up to $2000 cash every month for property? Very likely not. Cash has a lot of alternative uses; CPF has much more limited alternative uses. Thus I believe that CPF has actually contributed to the rising HDB prices, and I can predict that it won’t rise much further than what is affordable from the CPF ordinary account monthly contributions of the average income earner, because above that, it means paying cash monthly.

    One further thing: when HDB prices increase, rentals also increase: the 2 are complementary goods. When rentals increase, cost of labour increases and general prices also increase. Thus, CPF has an overall inflationary effect on Singapore.

    Now, all this is still relatively fine as long as the economy is doing well, and PAP can blandly console us with how our net worth is increasing with our HDB property values. However, we are sitting on this inflationary tide and with the rising labour costs: if one day Singapore loses its competitive edge, the whole HDB/CPF deck of cards will come crashing down. We have seen a bit of this in the current downturn. With paycuts and job losses, people who are maxed out to their ability to pay become unable to service their housing loans.

    Thus I feel that CPF should not be allowed to be used for housing payments so that housing prices do not get over-inflated.

  • PAPsmearer:

    JT, that is bang on. In fact, when the PAP says our net worth is rising with the HDB property values is another big fallacy.
    when they say this, they are essentially asking u to speculate on real estate. There is no guarantee that your HDB flat value will rise. In fact, many people in the last decade have experienced a loss on the sale of their flats and subsequently, a decline in net worth. Why speculate like this? Much better for the PAP to mandate that all CPF funds be in a guaranteed fixed term deposit at a rate of say inflation rate plus 4%. After all, they earn much more than that when they use your funds to speculate in real estate and stocks all around the world.

    By equating the house value with retirement fund, it does not answer many questions. Like how do u fund your retirement? Sell the flat? Where would u live after that? In an even more expensive retirement home? Or get a new mortgage on the flat to pay for your retirement? WHich bank would lend to a retiree with no income?

  • fpc:

    //JT

    You got to be kidding.

    Not using CPF to pay for rent means that people have to fork out cash to pay for the housing loan in addition to be stack up cpf monies which you cannot take out when you retire.

    You are trying to kill the average singaporeans is it.

    CPF is not inflationary.

    govt policies are inflationary. the way they change the rules for minimum downpayment and the downgrading rules are the factors that drive the housing price. Not to mention their pricing strategy.

    Other countries have similar cpf system but they don’t have that bloated housing price problem.

    Many countries who don’t have cpf system also have bloated housing price problem.

  • blacksheepshepherd:

    THOUGHT OF TYPING A LOAD OF THESIS WITH EVERYONE TO SHARE A TWO CENTS WORTH OF COMMENT. BUT REMEMBERED A FAMOUS QUOTE BY A FAMOUS LEADER “THERE’RE NO FREE LUNCHES” SO I’VE DECIDED TO CONTINUE GRINDING MY BONES TO DUST.

    OOH..BUT I’VE REALLY ENJOYED CATCHING A GLIMPSE OF A RECENT TV PROGRAM TITLED “THE PERFECT MEAL” WHICH ON THE FINAL EPISODE (NOT TOO SURE IF IT’S FINAL EPISODE, COS I’M BUSY GRINDING MY BONES.) SHOWCASED SOME HAPPY FACES ENJOYING THEIR PERHAPS ‘FREE LUNCHES’. STILL, SOME MIGHT COMMENT IT’S ‘SOUR GRAPES’…OH WELL..

    ~ HAPPY GRINDING ~

  • mm HELP ...:

    As HE said long ago and even BEFORE some of US were born … THAT … “BIG FISH EATS … (WELL) … small fish”!!! WE GET!!! … AS “WE NOW SEE THE BIG FISH PAP EATING … us … the small fish”!!!

  • XXX:

    Lets vote for other parties!

  • [...] >> Part 2: HDB flats are affordable to most Singaporeans [...]

Search Our Site
Scrolling Bulletin Board
Sponsor Our Site for $5 a day
http://www.cosme-de.com/SG Love Testhttp://www.tradekey.com/
YesStyleJShoppersOctupus Travel
Recent Comments
  • LPPL: 李卖蚬, you are good and funny. Anyway, your 解读 are highly likely what he meant when he said...
  • Winston Cheng: I had attended CSJ’s rally once. At one point, some people were shouting at the police...
  • New_threat: @patriot No point arguing with sensiblePR. Nothing we can do except suck thumb.
  • Terence: @Goh You retarded or what? Go to baidu.com and search for such postings yourself. There are tons...
  • Sianzcitizen: In the first place, why offer bonds to PRCs or foreign students…? Can’t we just...
  • Screwuli: The more I see where RP is heading and the people they attract, the more I am convince that they...
  • wa kong sui sui laio: sui sui liao pap tao toa toa liao tua ki liao siao liao jipye see liao reform party...
  • Fact or Fiction: Ah yes & HDB keep claiming they make loss in yearly report. What loss they are talkin...
  • Pink Man: @atobe: Alamak! Stupid me. I always noticed that he walks weirdly but have never think much abt...
  • anti-dictator: [Quota] Our immigration dept acting as fairy god parents to these PRs are too docile. Every...
  • Karma: This had happened for decade when was a student in my university day. Seriously cant accept why...
  • J: I am sure any Singaporean who has academic ability that is equivalent or anywhere close to that of the...
  • SureOrNot?: @scoff: September 3, 2010 at 10:24 am The policy makers don’t really want us to boost...
  • Goh: The above postings is a fake! The Chinese language used and the sentence structure is definitely not...
  • LIM PAY SAY HO SAY: HO SAY LIOW, SAY COW E BEH JIN CHU
  • Battle akan datang: So relieved to see so many strong oppositions this time round. Now, PAPayas can’t...
  • jo: It is not illegal to ‘burn’ CDs into your PC. It would be illegal to ‘burn’ CDs...
  • alvinlwh: They have to be careful. Same as the YOG group, they have to be careful of “invites for...
  • James Lai: 开源节流!
  • Screwuli: All your anger is frustration, should be channel into real action. By donating to an opposition...
  • I got my rights: @sensiblePR we have different culture and resources we will manage our family problem do...
  • Demoralised..: this guy is a joke..
  • reform party pls: reform party pls don’t come yishun .because yishun is super clean now.. back in...
  • 妈包蛋: 妈包蛋, Without a doubt, You are the king of the screw-up minister among your peers. No one...
  • Marionette Lolita: @china pr veteran your trolling fails to amuse me. good try though, keep it up. =D
  • Screwuli: I know you are a traitor in WW2 but I don’t know you are also a modern day pimp.
  • Moles aplenty: Beware of moles, RP! Many have sold their souls to the PAPayas! So, be extra careful.
  • errol: Ladies and gentlemen, its great to hear your clamour for the oppositions but realistically what is...
  • I got my rights: JUst an example FT talking to us right now fierce man ….there will be more argument...
  • K: She is a role model for “unmotivated”, “lazy” singaporeans. All Singaporean...
  • So, you also bad la!: @CHN PR Veteran Calling yourself a ‘good PR’? Then why are you defending...
  • Halleluyah: @ patriot: September 3, 2010 at 8:39 pm “thought I heard from BBC the plane crashed into...
  • dear lee xian loonnggg: license casino den, prositutes at hdb, prc gang clash.murder at kallang . singapore...
  • Patriot: @Sunrise: September 3, 2010 at 7:18 pm “Hypothetically, if I were a politician I would field...
  • HDB excess unit is because it is very expensive: @ BAH: September 3, 2010 at 8:23 pm It may be true that...
  • FeverGuy: Should get all TR facebook users to support RP as helpers?
  • HDBlover: @BAH Ah Mah keeping these flats in secret because they are reserved for the FT and PR pets of the...
  • Lan Jiao: Bloody hell! NS was alot tougher compared to now. Last time where got SFI? And all other welfare...
  • patriot: @Hmmmmmmmm….. I thought I heard from BBC the plane crashed into the south china sea and...
  • sia lan kia: @china pr veteran oh fuck ‘i fucked your family again don’t hide behind you...
  • AhTo: All the Singaporeans who married foreigners should divorce!
  • veron: I saw a pin-up job flyer in CDC Toa Payoh. I was desperately searching for job, as I had been...
  • patriot: I wonder which retarded scholar or minister came out with these retarded schemes??
  • coffeetok: Most of the gripes are coming from first time home buyers who blame high COV for driving up...
Support Our Site


Weekly Newsletter
Subscribe with your email address.

TR’s Official Host
Site Statistics
Latest Statistic
User Registration
Online Poll

Come GE, you will vote for:

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
Statbadge
Stadtbadge
Statbadge by www.teledir.de
Sponsored Ads
Sponsored Advertisement
Tag Cloud