The central bank on Thursday further tightened restrictions on mortgage loans to curb housing speculation, as domestic banks’ real-estate financing has continued to increase. It capped the loan-to-value ratio at 40 percent for corporate entities, 55 percent for individuals buying their third home and 50 percent for those buying their fourth home. The goal is to stem a deluge of loans into the real-estate sector and rein in credit risks.
The central bank also capped the loan-to-value ratio at 55 percent for idle industrial land, and said it would monitor the developments in the nation’s housing market and local banks’ management of credit risks related to real-estate financing.
The new measures took effect on Friday and the central bank said it would make adjustments if necessary.
The move is clearly aimed at property speculators, primarily those who flip presale housing units. The bank said individuals and businesses that own more than four properties are the main targets of its new measures, while market watchers said investment firms that buy and sell properties rapidly are especially targeted.
About 54.51 percent of non-real-estate corporate entities sold their properties within a year of purchase, data compiled by the Ministry of the Interior show.
The central bank’s latest credit controls came a week after the Executive Yuan approved a draft amendment to the Income Tax Act (所得稅法) to impose heavier taxes on properties sold within certain periods after purchase to rein in speculation in the market. For instance, individuals and businesses would face a 45 percent tax on property transaction gains involving homes or land sold within two years of purchase, and a 35 percent tax on homes or land sold within two to five years of purchase. The bill was on Friday sent to the legislature’s Finance Committee for review.
The government’s measures have so far been aimed at raising the cost of short-term property transactions, while it has stopped short of imposing higher taxes on house hoarding. As long as owners are in no hurry to sell their properties — especially wealthy people who own multiple houses as well as developers and financial consortiums that have a lot of properties — they can avoid the increase in the capital gains tax.
On the other hand, imposing higher housing and land value taxes could raise costs for wealthy people and companies, dampening their appetite for hoarding houses on a long-term basis.
However, the real issue is not whether raising housing taxes would curb property hoarding, but whether a higher tax rate would encourage owners of multiple houses to put some of them back on the market or whether it would keep housing prices from rising.
There is already a provision for a hoarding tax for people who own more than one property, with rates for owner-occupied or self-use properties set at an annual rate of 1.2 percent and those for non-owner-occupied residential properties ranging from 1.5 percent to 3.6 percent, subject to the local government’s judgement, according to the House Tax Act (房屋稅條例). Unfortunately, the tax is only levied in Taipei, and Yilan and Lienchiang counties.
There is still a long way to go before the nation implements a higher housing tax nationwide, as this would require cooperation between central and local governments.
The housing market varies regionally, according to socioeconomic conditions. Levying a universal house hoarding tax might solve the problem of vacant houses in big cities, but create new problems in smaller localities. It could help curb property speculation, but it might also make the problem more complicated across the nation.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations