• |
  • 極速報價
  • |
  • etnet專輯
    etnet專輯
  • 會員
  • 產品服務 / 串流版
  • 設定

29/06/2018

空置稅風雲

  • 汪敦敬

    汪敦敬

    汪敦敬先生從事地產代理業30年以上,創辦祥益地產,認為中小企不要模仿大公司的經營方針,應發展屬於自己獨有的策略去開發藍海市場。

    撰寫樓市評論文章20多年,於2009年金融海嘯後認為市場會出現新的秩序及邏輯,主力撰寫有關新常態(new normal)文章,更強調在機會成本的法則下「買不買樓也充滿風險」甚至「不買樓的風險更大」!

    近年汪氏提倡「平民財技」,認為在波譎雲詭的世道中一般市民也應該講究理財的技術,故撰寫普羅大眾也能掌握的財技分享。

    汪敦敬經營企業的格言是「上善若水」,認為營商要「追求增值不求奪財」,祥益地產高度參與社區公益及慈善活動,融為一體!


    樓市點評

    本欄隔周更新

  政府推出空置稅可能是一個地產史的轉捩點,發展商開始被政府在買賣成交上調控銷售,那麼可以說是第一次樓花辣招,在評論樓市上這一刻亦是一個分水嶺。以前的自由市場,政府是需要供應增加許多才可以影響到上升的價格的,因為發展商的應變和市場互動的能力都是比政府來得高,例如不少地盤的招標都是規定五、六年內發展商要建好樓宇的,那麼發展商遇上政府想調節樓價升幅的時候,往往就可以將招地之後的三、四年才開始建樓,所以我們發覺不少發展商買了的地皮都是在曬太陽的!加上改圖則竟日益普遍,單是2017年已有16000個單位是申請改則的,如此大量自然影響到市場的供應了,或者我們看看以下的數據,就可以解開近年樓價不倒的迷團!

 

1. 根據運房局私人住宅一手市場供應報告 (截至31/3/2018)「已批出但未動工單位」(即已賣出但未動工起樓的數量)達23000伙,等於年多兩年的全港樓花銷售量。

2. 2017年修改圖則數據:首次修改涉及16000伙,重大修改涉及14000伙,與香港全年的全港樓花銷售量相若。

3. 過去7年(2011-2017),平均每年賣地可建20750伙,平均每年動工量是14776伙,平均每年約少6000伙。

4. 近2年(2016-2017),動工量每年都比一手成交量多4000伙。

 

  基於「供應量多過能置業購買力等於價格受壓」!加減數大家都識計,大家可以想像到如果以上的耽誤回復正常,足以令樓價下跌!不要忘記,近2年(2016-2017),動工量每年都比一手成交量多4000伙!

 

  翻查有關數據,發覺要為前特首梁振英先生說回一些公道說話,梁先生任期是由2012年7月1日至2017年6月30日,期間一手潛在供應量由65,000個增加至98,000個,增幅達51%,但為何樓價仍然上升?我們看看有關數字內容:

 

已落成但未賣的單位:由4000個增加至 8000個,增幅為100%!

 

建築中但未賣的單位:由48000個增加至61000個,增幅為27%!

 

已批出但未動工單位:由13000個增加至29000個,增幅為123%!

 

  如果以上我們數據部同事做的數據是正確的話,梁先生已經製造了足夠的供應令樓價升勢放緩,但為何供應被拖延推出市場?是人為的造就,還是政府效率日益不濟?在真確數據及時間的洗滌下,必能公道自在人心!

 

  很多人低估了空置稅的潛在殺傷力,是因為大家也將注意力放在9000個取了入伙紙的所謂空置單位上,卻其實,真正的虛實在出入伙紙前的遠處。

 

  政府推出空置稅其實也可以是入市良機!如果政府HEA住做,稅項成本就會轉嫁給消費者,樓價反而會多了一個上升的基礎!但如果政府「動真格」,「空置稅」成為了針對樓花發展商的樓市辣招,有了第一次,以後可能每年每逢樓價向上就會被出招一次,難怪發展商這樣緊張,公平一點說,營商者面對有形之手的干預是否合理?但當然有些人認為既然二手市場已經有了很多辣招限制,如果一手樓沒有的話,也是一個不對等的競爭!

 

  當然事情令人想起電影「讓子彈飛」的劇情,講說中央與地主的利益矛盾,在「一地兩檢」通過了立法會之後,及動亂勇武開始式微之後,政府和發展商的關係又走進了另一個階段了!

 

 

 《經濟通》所刊的署名及/或不署名文章,相關內容屬作者個人意見,並不代表《經濟通》立場,《經濟通》所扮演的角色是提供一個自由言論平台。

【香港好去處】2025去邊最好玩?etnet為你提供全港最齊盛事活動,所有資訊盡在掌握!► 即睇

我要回應33

你可能感興趣

版主留言

我要回應

登入

發表回應

登記

成為新會員

回應只代表會員個人觀點,不代表經濟通立場

  • 只看作者回應
  • 查看全部回應
  • 順序
  • 倒序
  • Harmony發表於 2018-12-10 02:58 PM
  • #34
  • 梁生方向係正確,而且已經對財閥做出一定退讓,可惜還是如董老一樣被暗算寞然退場。
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • 汪敦敬(作者)發表於 2018-8-24 03:58 PM
  • #33
  • 回覆 #3 吡吡


    多謝你的持續支持!

    吡吡過獎了,不過時局的確在結構性改變,如果我們有能力看到的,我們應該盡量分享的,何況在經濟通的專欄中,還有好的知音呢!感恩!
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • hongkonger發表於 2018-7-22 11:19 PM
  • #32
  • 回覆 #4 吡吡


    Thanks for introducing this off-the-track artist, I have an enjoyable evening with her songs playing at the background whilst doing my reading.
    Thanks again, it is always a pleasure when one is overwhelmed by an unexpected serendipity---playing songs from early 20th century coincided with reading the materials of American history around this period.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • youthhk發表於 2018-7-20 09:15 PM
  • #31
  • I would have bet that you have never read the court transcripts of the trial, or else you will know that Mr. Loyd Jowers was only a very small part of the trial. You will know that government agencies including, the FBI, the Military, the Memphis Police Department were involved in the conspiracy and were found responsible in the verdict. More sinister was the evidence of an 8-men team of military snipers with the mission to kill Dr. King on the spot.

    The 2000 investigation by the Department of Justice was limited to the claims by Loyd Jowes and nothing else. They never examine the gun which was alleged to have killed Dr. King which can be easily carried out if they really wanted to.

  • 引用 #30 Greyting 發表於 2018-7-19 07:39 PM

    Yeah, more fairy tales. “In 2000, the U.S. Department of Justice completed the investigation ...
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • Greyting發表於 2018-7-19 07:39 PM
  • #30
  • Yeah, more fairy tales.


    “In 2000, the U.S. Department of Justice completed the investigation into Jowers' claims but did not find evidence to support allegations about conspiracy. The investigation report recommended no further investigation unless some new reliable facts are presented.[207] A sister of Jowers admitted that he had fabricated the story so he could make $300,000 from selling the story, and she in turn corroborated his story in order to get some money to pay her income tax.[208][209]” - Wikipedia.

  • 引用 #25 youthhk 發表於 2018-7-19 05:43 PM

    The Washington Post Report by Tom Jackman has these to say: For the King family and others in the c ...
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • Greyting發表於 2018-7-19 07:30 PM
  • #29
  • Yeah, no proof by diverting attention.

    Again, wrong assertions. Eg. Group of students come forward for anti-gun. Are they neutralized? No. You are selectively blind for reading/watching US materials. Very prejudiced.

  • 引用 #26 hongkonger 發表於 2018-7-19 06:19 PM

    "US govt neutralized all recent dissidents? Because your bible told you so?" Is it not funny our ...
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • Greyting發表於 2018-7-19 07:25 PM
  • #28
  • There is no queue for those politically prosecuted by own govt. Seems like you are totally ignorant about humanitarianism.

    Lucky that CCP can trade Lau Har for German concessions, even after bullying the couple for years. What kind of equality!

    have you tried you luck by having your spouse dead in prison and yourself losing personal freedom for years- in order to get a German visa? I wish you good luck.

  • 引用 #27 hongkonger 發表於 2018-7-19 06:51 PM

    回覆 Greyting "Lau Har is lucky? Getting German residency after losing husband, losing freedom fo ...
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • hongkonger發表於 2018-7-19 06:51 PM
  • #27
  • 回覆 #24 Greyting


    "Lau Har is lucky? Getting German residency after losing husband, losing freedom for many years is lucky? ...."

    I read the utopian-like Charter 08 by Lau Har's husband, who called EQUALITY is one of the universal common values, and "....every citizen (has) the same constitutional rights and the same freedom to choose where to live."
    Then I read about Lau Har's lightning-speed permanent citizen status and wonder about those poor Middel-East and Africian refugees strained in the high seas and refugee camps, begging the German for entry into the new homeland of Lau Har.
    I fail to see that "equality and freedom to choose where to live" advocated so passionately by her husband have been practised by her in reality.
    Surely she, likes millions of other refugees, should wait in line for the permanent citizen status and not jump the queue.
    Thus I have to conclude that her new status must be attributed to LUCK!
    We have seen enough preaching, now let's see some practise, please.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • hongkonger發表於 2018-7-19 06:19 PM
  • #26
  • "US govt neutralized all recent dissidents? Because your bible told you so?"

    Is it not funny our local umbrella riot produced a host of "leaders" who became famous in and outside Hong Kong?
    They got praise from former Colonial Master thousands of miles away, and even got a nomination for the prestigious Nobel Prize/Pri$e for Peace/Piss from a stable of US congressmen, who lived tens of thousands miles away and probably never seen these "leaders" before the riot.
    Even if these congressmen had seen them, they would probably not know them that well to warrant to put their precious reputation forward to nominate these "leaders".

    On the other hand, the more famous and longer lasting Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter, Anti-gun movements had sadly seen a scarcity of "leaders" coming forward, much less in the nomination of ANY prize of peace. In fact we had seen in the news that hundreds of activists were handcuffed and charged in courts and landed in jail.

  • 引用 #24 Greyting 發表於 2018-7-19 04:42 PM

    Zzzzz. Again, None of the questions being answered. You now recognize the world is complex. Wh ...
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • youthhk發表於 2018-7-19 05:43 PM
  • #25
  • The Washington Post Report by Tom Jackman has these to say:
    For the King family and others in the civil rights movement, the FBI’s obsession with King in the years leading up to his slaying in Memphis on April 4, 1968 — pervasive surveillance, a malicious disinformation campaign and open denunciations by FBI director J. Edgar Hoover
    Coretta Scott King, who endured the FBI’s campaign to discredit her husband, was open in her belief that a conspiracy led to the assassination. Her family filed a civil suit in 1999 to force more information into the public eye, and a Memphis jury ruled that the local, state and federal governments were liable for King’s death. The full transcript of the trial remains posted on the King Center’s website.
    “There is abundant evidence,” Coretta King said after the verdict, “of a major, high-level conspiracy in the assassination of my husband.” The jury found the mafia and various government agencies “were deeply involved in the assassination. …
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • Greyting發表於 2018-7-19 04:42 PM
  • #24
  • Zzzzz. Again, None of the questions being answered.

    You now recognize the world is complex. Why making those groundless assertions at the first place? -

    US govt neutralized all recent dissidents? Because your bible told you so?

    US govt neutralized ML King and Malcolm X ? If not because they were speaking against the govt, it does not fulfill your goal to bad mouth other govt. shooting blanks lah!

    Chinese dissidents don’t enjoy quick deaths? How quick do you want, explosive bullets used by CCP did a very good job.

    Lau Har is lucky? Getting German residency after losing husband, losing freedom for many years is lucky? Why don’t you go for it?
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • hongkonger發表於 2018-7-19 04:33 PM
  • #23
  • "When one is incapable of debate, he simply quotes his bible - articles by Chris Hedges. As if reading critics of US govt is a gateway to qualify himself as intellectual. He does not know that this way of thinking exactly qualifies him to be a shallow and prejudiced person."
    ---I have never considered myself as an intellectual, merely a humble student, who is keen to find out the Truth of this world, or if I am lucky, catch a glimpse of it.
    By reading Chris Hedges's work, I find out some of the unwritten and unspoken parts of the history of US, which is hard to come by in the popular press.
    If someone thinks that by reading or quoting the works of one critic to the US government qualifies me as "a shallow and prejudiced person", then I am willing to be GUILTY AS CHARGED!

  • 引用 #20 Greyting 發表於 2018-7-19 03:41 PM

    When one is incapable of debate, he simply quotes his bible - articles by Chris Hedges. As if readi ...
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • hongkonger發表於 2018-7-19 04:18 PM
  • #22
  • My post #15 --"By comparison, those Chinese opposition are not "neutralized" and instead their names are mentioned time and time again by the Western media, one of whom has just granted a permanent resident status in Germany, lucky her."

    Your incredible post#17--"Weren’t you born yesterday? Lau Har is lucky to be hareassed by CCP for many years just for being her husband’s wife?"

    If someone here has difficulty of understanding my sentence, I am more than willing to help.
    But if someone only seeks pleasure from self-gratification, I am afraid that I won't be of much help.

  • 引用 #17 Greyting 發表於 2018-7-18 01:16 AM

    Weren’t you born yesterday? Are you suggesting US neutralized all the recent dissidents? Where is ...
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • hongkonger發表於 2018-7-19 04:08 PM
  • #21
  • "Weren’t you born yesterday? Who killed M.L King and Malcolm X? Are you suggesting US government again? Would you like to become a detective in the states? Then, you will be very efficient in pointing out US government has committed every crime."

    I love watching bungee jumping, but I love even more your fantastic assertion and jumping into conclusion from my one liner----"By the way, we all know what had .....MJ King and Malcolm X...gunned down and voiced no more."

    Indeed detective work involves lots of conjecture and presumption, both should be based on reason and rationale. I am afraid that your conjecture turns out to be more of a hot-tempered wild accusation than logical deduction, and your presumption turns out to be more of a self-answering monologue than reasonable deliberation.

    Of course, I do not blame you either, as this is too the age of wanting fast answer and even faster solution to the perplexities of the world, and it has found another self-absorbed recruit.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • Greyting發表於 2018-7-19 03:41 PM
  • #20
  • When one is incapable of debate, he simply quotes his bible - articles by Chris Hedges. As if reading critics of US govt is a gateway to qualify himself as intellectual. He does not know that this way of thinking exactly qualifies him to be a shallow and prejudiced person.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • Greyting發表於 2018-7-19 03:21 PM
  • #19
  • What a wishy-washy reply without answering any question.

    US govt neutralized all recent dissidents? Should I trust your words for It? Never.

    US govt neutralized ML King and Malcolm X ? Joke of the century.

    Chinese dissidents don’t enjoy quick deaths? Shame on CCP.

    Lau Har is lucky? Shame on you.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • hongkonger發表於 2018-7-19 02:35 PM
  • #18
  • "Weren’t you born yesterday? Are you suggesting US neutralized all the recent dissidents? Where is your proof? "
    In your excellent post #10, which referred to my post #9, I was given the impression that you have read some, if not all of Chris Hedges's articles and feeds. For if you did, you would have seen/read the proof of "neutralized recent dissidents".
    Apparently my assumption turns out to be just wishful thinking on my part, for it seems that your excellent post #10 is nothing but an immediate knee-jerk reaction to my post #9, without bothering reading some of the articles by Chris Hedges.
    I am truly dissappointed in you, for I have high hopes that you are not one of those trolls who seek cheap thrills and attention but instead do seek a serious intellectual discourse.
    Of course, I do not blame you, as this is the age of very short attention span, which has just claimed one more victim.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • Greyting發表於 2018-7-18 01:16 AM
  • #17
  • Weren’t you born yesterday? Are you suggesting US neutralized all the recent dissidents? Where is your proof?

    Weren’t you born yesterday? Who killed M.L King and Malcolm X? Are you suggesting US government again? Would you like to become a detective in the states? Then, you will be very efficient in pointing out US government has committed every crime.

    Weren’ you born yesterday? many Chinese dissidents “enjoyed” quick deaths e.g. 6/4 massacres.

    Weren’t you born yesterday? Lau Har is lucky to be hareassed by CCP for many years just for being her husband’s wife?
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • hongkonger發表於 2018-7-17 10:37 PM
  • #16
  • typo: ML King
    typo: a quick death
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • hongkonger發表於 2018-7-17 10:29 PM
  • #15
  • 回覆 #10 Greyting


    Is it because the dissenters had been "neutralized" before they can pursue their movements any further?
    Whatever happened to these voices of dissent---not found in the popular press, not found in the mass media, it is as if they did not exist on these earth?
    Whatever happened to tens of thousdands of these activists---found in the mug-shots of the local police, found in the roll-calls of privatised prisons, it is as if they had vanished from the free society of USA?

    By comparison, those Chinese opposition are not "neutralized" and instead their names are mentioned time and time again by the Western media, one of whom has just granted a permanent resident status in Germany, lucky her.

    By the way, we all know what had happened to the dissenters of USA---MJ King and Malcolm X---gunned down and voiced no more.

    By comparison, those Chinese opposition do not enjoy the luxury of a quick dead, lucky them.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • 只看作者回應
  • 查看全部回應
  • 順序
  • 倒序
最緊要健康
精選文章
  • 生活
  • DIVA
  • 健康好人生
專業版
HV2
精裝版
SV2
串流版
IQ 登入
強化版
TQ
強化版
MQ