We are not out of the woods yet.
Yet, already there are individuals wanting to shift attention away from the economy towards government finance. The latest of these individuals are Najib Razak, who has the guts to talk about new taxes in the next two years when he is not paying his, with amount that would rival some of the taxes he proposes:
“I propose a temporary Covid-19 recovery tax package for two years. This, for example, will include a windfall tax, luxury condominiums development tax, stamp duty on transactions, inheritance tax, stock market trading tax, and higher personal income tax on high-income individuals.
“After two years, we can end this temporary tax.”
He also suggested that the government tax tech giants that have a presence in Malaysia, such as Amazon, Netflix, YouTube, Google, and Facebook, which have raked in a lot of profit, but have never been taxed here.
He said this should not impact consumers, and instead be levied on the companies’ profit margin. [Azril Annuar. Tax the rich: Najib proposes 2-year temporary recovery tax. The Vibes. September 15 2021]
While taxes in general will have to come, we cannot impose it as soon as possible and then pretend it will not jeopardize recovery the Malaysian economy is experiencing. Recovery so far has been weak. It has been so bad that the government are now celebrating base effect. Such is the quality of our leaders today.
From the look of it, 2021 GDP will likely still be smaller than the one in 2019. This just shows the incompleteness of our ongoing recovery. Unemployment is another measure to worry about, with the latest rate (July 2021) remains stubbornly high at 4.8%, well above of the 3.2%-3.4% range recorded during the pre-pandemic year of 2019. The incoherent management of the pandemic has exerted additional costs to the economy.
Here, we still need to prioritize the overall economy over government finance. While both are important and both are linked, the government has more room to run a loose fiscal policy more than families as well as small and medium-sized businesses. As I have mentioned before, the only barriers to greater borrowing are legal restrictions and there is nothing ‘economics’ about those legal restrictions. Furthermore, borrowing costs are low, with yields on 10-year MGS at 3.30%.
For this reason, it is better for the government to keep their hands off those onerous tax levers and instead run higher deficit ratio (or stay at the current ratio). Allow the economy to grow first. Let the economy recover properly before pushing of any kind of taxes. Once the economy comes, the taxes will also come too.
Only once the economy has returned to its pre-crisis level and trend can we begin to introduce new taxes. In the meantime, while the economy is still below pre-crisis conditions, other non-punitive measures should be introduced first.
Tin identification number (TIN) is one of those measures that will improve transparency in the market without imposing new tax burden to the economy. TIN would require all persons and entities be assigned a unique identifier, which must be appended to any transaction (like the opening of account, transfer of money, purchase of large assets like homes and cars). This will allow the tracing of money better. A little bit like the VAT/GST, but without the tax. Once the system is stabilized, data from TIN could be used to better design new taxes that are needed, including some of the taxes Najib mentioned. Things like wealth tax for instance need data on data on wealth in Malaysia is horrible. TIN can improve data collection by leaps and bounds, which will assist in designing a good tax.
TIN was in the works under Pakatan Harapan as part of their reform program (unfortunately, it was opposed by Muhyiddin in 2019 over concern the opposition would attack the move as a new tax. That was not the only reform that was sabotage by multiple people, which hobbled the overall institution reform efforts). One good news is that there is a good chance the TIN would finally be instituted beginning next year, based on signals given out by the Ministry of Finance.
I would like to reiterate that sequencing is important, and Najib ignores that factor.
The timing and sequencing inappropriateness are not the only concerns here. The other is its temporary nature of the proposal. Najib wants those taxes to last only two years. This is detrimental to longer term attempt at reforming the taxation regime.
Unlike Najib, I am in favor of having a 10-year or 15-year tax reform program, which makes permanent some of the taxes Najib mentions. Easy measure like TIN would happen within 2-3 years. Making the income tax more progressive is another easy move that could happen within 5 years, for instance. This longer-term plan solves several problems (underfunding of public sector, the need for off-budget financing, low taxbase, unfair treatment between labor and capital income, the growing digital economy relative to brick-and-mortar model, etc) more permanently while taking into account the state of the economy.
Having temporary tax measures as soon as possible ignores the state of the economy, and does not address some of the fiscal (and economic) challenges faced by the government.