The
more we are talking about taxing the rich to
subsidize the poor, the rich get richer and the poor are
rapidly getting poorer. The more we are discussing about increasing the
standard living of the poor, the cost of living are shooting up. The more we
are condemning the opposition, the more they
received support.
In the case of phased out gradually the petrol
subsidy, the more we talk, the longer period of time we needed. Can the cut in
petrol subsidy solve the financial problem facing by the government? Can it
solve the highlighted problem without affecting the poor? This is why the sound
governance policy is very much needed in
determining the degree of support.
Former
Finance Minister Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah argues that the best viable strategy that could solve the
problem related to cutting petrol subsidy is through the introduction of a
higher road tax for owners of cars with large engine capacities.
Describing
the petrol subsidy as a “drag on government finances” and also an obstacle to
the proper allocation of resources, Tengku Razaleigh said: “We cannot live on
cheap petrol forever. We can seek ways to transition into subsidy removal,” he
said.
He suggested
that owners of bigger cars should be made to pay a higher road tax to “proxy
subsidy removal” for their cars.
“In order to
protect the average consumer, perhaps we can begin by applying an implicit
subsidy cut on larger engine capacity vehicle owners via a higher road tax,” he
said.
“At the
appropriate time, the petrol subsidies themselves should gradually be removed,”
he said.
However,
without addressing the viability issue of the poor, can the poor benefit from phased
out gradually the petrol subsidy?
The question
remains: Can the applying an implicit
subsidy cut on larger engine capacity vehicle owners via a higher road tax strategy benefiting the poor?
No comments:
Post a Comment