NST :SYED NADZRI: Fuel subsidies: Loaded, unloaded?

  • Click here to become an Official Member of BMW Club Malaysia Download Form

anxious

Club Guest
Joined
Dec 9, 2004
Messages
1,363
Points
48
Here is an interseting article from NST 13.11.2007 on Pak Lah recent comments on restructuring the petrol subsidy. SYED NADZRI: Fuel subsidies: Loaded, unloaded? By SYED NADZRI 13 November, 2007 A BIG task awaits the authorities on how to implement the proposed fuel price structure where, like electricity tariffs, the rich would be paying more than the poor. Convincing arguments were articulated during the Umno general assembly last week about the critical need to lessen the burden borne by the government in having to spend about RM40 billion a year on subsidies to keep the retail price of fuel down, including the widely indispensable petrol. The escalating global price of crude oil (which has trebled in just a few years to almost US$100 [RM334] per barrel) has, as enunciated by key speakers at the congress, necessitated a compelling review of the subsidies, but one that should not be hard on the poor. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was most receptive to the idea, saying the huge amount of money spent on subsidies could be used to further develop the country. He supported the need for a more equitable fuel subsidy programme which would result in the rich paying more for retail fuel. That was the hard part -- the task of explaining the rationale for the need to reduce the subsidies, which was done elegantly at the Umno congress. The harder part now is to find a way to put this into practice, especially for petrol which is used by at least 70 per cent of the 16 million vehicles in the country. Several possibilities could be considered: 1. THE DIRECT METHOD WITH A TWO-TIER PRICING SYSTEM AT THE PUMP: Option 1: This can simply be a blanket ruling affecting, say, cars above 2,000cc (for the rich) which will have to pay more per litre and a lower price for smaller cars. For this, the "loaded or unloaded" sections of the petrol station (a cheeky reference to people driving the cars) may have to be set up to separate the categories. But this entails strict enforcement as well as sound knowledge of cars and their engine capacity by pump attendants. On top of that, this system is easily open to abuse. And what about superbikes? Option 2: This can entail the modification of either the petrol pump nozzle at all stations or the fuel tank inlets of all cars. For example, a Mercedes Benz must be fitted with a gadget at its fuel tank inlet which could only fit a nozzle of a particular size. And this nozzle pumps in petrol costing, say, RM3 per litre as against a smaller car with a nozzle of a different size that gives RM2 per litre. This is more practicable but involves a huge exercise at fitting cars with compulsory special gadgets. Furthermore, it is not totally foolproof as gadgets can be tampered with and it would be difficult to monitor every car. Option 3: This can be done through the coupon or voucher system. A motorist producing a coupon would be entitled to cheaper petrol. But, as already seen in a similar scheme for diesel, the system has many flaws and is open to abuse. Furthermore, it is extremely difficult to determine who gets the coupons and who doesn't. While it appears to be the most visible method, setting two sets of prices at the pump can bring about an enforcement nightmare because some Malaysians have been known to be pretty innovative in beating the system. It might even create an artificial shortage of lower-priced petrol, affecting the genuine cases which will have no choice but to buy it at non-subsidised rates. 2. THE INDIRECT PRICING SYSTEM: Higher road tax or sales tax for bigger cars: This is already the system now and any further move to increase them would definitely make luxury cars an absolute luxury. This is easier to implement than the direct fuel pricing system and the higher road tax collection could be used to cross-subsidise fuel for the poor. But the drawback is that the concept of subsidy revision is not noticeable at all since the pump price of petrol will be the same for everyone. Through income tax where the rich will have to specifically pay for fuel subsidies: There will have to be a special provision in the income tax structure for fuel where the more a person earns, the more he will have to pay for fuel, irrespective of how many cars he or she owns or whether he or she owns a car at all. Like the above, petrol price will be the same at the pump across the board and this might not give the impression that the poor are actually benefiting from the subsidy revision. The above are samples of some of the options available to the government to make the proposed fuel price structure workable and the difficulties that come with them. © Copyright 2007 The New Straits Times Press (M) Berhad. All rights reserved. see http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Tuesday/Columns/2082718/Article/index_html What do you guys think?
 
i prefer option 1.

i drive a Saga, fill up full tank, siphon it to my UDM later. Repeat evy 3 days or when necessary.
 
Ok guys,

I drive a 2.5 liter car. For RM100, I get about 400km in Penang town driving.

My wife drives a 1.6 liter car and gets about 550km for RM100.

So my car is 37.5% less efficient than my wifes car.


My weekly expenditure on petrol is about RM90 unless I travel outstation.

My wife spends about RM70 a week as her office is a bit further.

My road tax is already RM899, my wife pays RM90.

Should I be penalised further for driving a 2.5 liter car?

A lot of people driving cars under 1.6liter are using as much petrol as I am, why should I bear the brunt of the price increase.

Is taxing drivers of bigger cc cars going to solve the problem. The greater majority of those who benefit from the subsidy are actually those driving cars below 2 liters.

In fact unless there is a price increase across the board, the government will still face the same problem.

Higher petrol prices are unavoidable. We all will have to bear higher prices of say RM2.50 per litre next year.

Unfortunately as a political gimmick, the government may resort to increasing road tax on higher cc cars just to "wayang" to the public that the "rich" are also seen to be "made to suffer".
 
I agree that all the other suggestions are utter nonsense and impractical!
 
As usual, our govt might shoot itself again. Not easy to have such a system without abuse.

This time round, everyone will have to bear the increase.

Oh, guess why the govt has come out with the policy to "tax" the rich to subsidise the poor? ELECTIONS are coming, that is why. They need the support of the majority. It is plain to see. IMO, the govt should not buat wayang. One day it will backfire.
 
celaka man.... either option 1, 2 or "3"... i'm screwed big time.. mauhahahah

but seriously, how can they take this so seriously but yet spend money so easily i.e. space program.... or should i say, space ride.... how these activity contribute to the development of our country? jes a thought....
 
its ok la. sooner or later, we all have to buy a kancil and drive around. rm50 roadtax and rm30 full tank.

petrol subsidy was offset by road tax. now no more subsidy, but more road tax or other tax. very good.

sooner or later, we will become like indonesia. hopefully i'll be out of the country by then.
 
Agreed, this is all wayang kulit to stir the emotions of the lower income group, since they are not really playing the racial card this year.

If the government cant even properly monitor and implement the diesel subsidy to the fishermen which led to them being diesel suppliers to our neighbour up north, what makes them think they can handle a grandeur fuel subsidy system as proposed.
 
wayang kulit is the key word. if u dont want to see the truth, or u think u can change things, then u'll be caught in the downward spiral....
 
Well, if they can't enforce the current diesel subsidy... you can imagine the rest.

Let's look at the situation from a few perspectives.

Effectiveness

How many people are in the rich category and how many are in the poor category? When they say reduce subsidy for the rich, what is the cutoff point? Where does the bulk of the RM40 billion go?

For a start, lets forget the super rich. The odd super car here and there are very fuel-hungry but they are hardly taken out, so it won't make a dent in the RM40 billion. You can tax the super rich anything car-related you want; they can afford it, but it won't make a dent.

So, the only target left is the middle income group. Which happens to form the bulk of the national GDP. Not to mention a significant percentage of the voting public. So, hitting them directly in the wallet does not bode well for the economy, which is already not so healthy.

Tagging subsidy reduction to the vehicle capacity misses the point. Newer vehicles consume less fuel than older, less-maintained vehicles of equivalent capacity. What will happen is that the market will react by switching to lower-capacity vehicles. Rotary engine cars like the 1.3 litre Mazda RX will become very popular. So will turbo charged cars.

Enforcement

It is not possible to implement multi-tier pricing, or in economic terms, price discrimination, on a product that is uniform, indistinquishable, easily stored and transported. Enforcement would be a nightmare. The same amount spent on enforcement would yield more benefits elsewhere, like improving the police force. It would be ironic if there are more fuel police than regular police on the road.

Existing Measures

Specific ways of making the rich pay more are already in place.

Income tax
Road tax
Car import duty
Car import AP

Time and resources would be better-spent in improving and collecting on these measures.

There is no way to reduce the RM40 billion fuel subsidy without directly impacting the economy. Inflation, coupled with recession is the likely outcome. And the impact to the economy won't be compensated by money spent to "further develop the country", at least not immediately. Government income from taxation will be hit by recession as well. So, the net budget savings from the reduction of the subsidy will be less than it appears.

Subsidies are an artificial crutch which distort the economic system and is detrimental in the long term. So, removing it is a noble and rational objective.

One feasible approach worth considering is a gradual subsidy reduction plan across the board, spread over a number of years to lessen the impact, while taking measures to improve productivity of the population. A more effective and transparent system based on open competition would be a good starting point.

And finally, this statement is quite revealing.

"this might not give the impression that the poor are actually benefiting from the subsidy revision."

Are we trying to address the problem, or just giving the appearence of doing so? Will the impression make a dent in the RM40 billion?
 
do you think they govt can afford to lose 40B of revenue? then who is going to pay for all the 'projects'???? then the contractors cannot sell rm40 screwdrivers sets for rm150. like this then cannot call m'sia bole.....
 
Sickening WORLD I ever had the joy of filling RM10 full tank in the early days, I think petrol was at 1.10 a gallon (not a liter) for a fiat 850 my 1st car. its all because of the bast.....d that make the world oil price up and up. I think no need to xplain who he is. its a sickening world with no peace that make all of us suffer.
 
Lee36328;262159 said:
Rezzy,

Ne'ermind. We'll be running our cars on solar power soon...

Looks like I will have to bring out my trusty and dependable bicycle.:21:
 
I'm beginning to appreciate my SLK aka Small Little Kancil more now.

380km-400km for a rm40 tank full.
 
I guess the only way is to go diesel as a way forward...

I think its better to slowly take away the cost of subsidy for petrol...and scrap the tax for cars. They really need to improve public transportation...

However, commercial vehicles would still enjoy subsidies to keep prices checked.
 
its just to gain political mileage...no practical and efficient way of enforcing it... if they can waste mney on the space program on inconsequential purposes...wats the big deal with the petrol subsidy??? i rather have cheaper petrol than having to say we sent a simian up to space...
 
Ade;262295 said:
I guess the only way is to go diesel as a way forward...

I think its better to slowly take away the cost of subsidy for petrol...and scrap the tax for cars. They really need to improve public transportation...

However, commercial vehicles would still enjoy subsidies to keep prices checked.


I agree with your suggestion. But sad, not many are keen or interested to use the LRT or BUS or even TAXI
 
Bro, I have used Komuter, LRT, MonoRail and also buses.

First of all, Msia should have built a Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) system instead of Light Rapid Transit (LRT). There aren't enough coaches at peak periods. Monorail is even worse, 2 coaches only. Then the Komuter is super packed in the morning and the frequency is inadequate to serve the whole line from Rawang to Port Klang.
 
Top Bottom