# Corrections and clarifications regarding falsehoods in Facebook posts and articles published on 4 and 5 Oct - **Source:** Ministry of National Development - **Published:** 2022-10-14T11:50:00.000Z - **Author:** Ministry of National Development - **Original:** https://www.mnd.gov.sg/newsroom/press-releases/view/corrections-and-clarifications-regarding-falsehoods-in-facebook-posts-and-articles-published-on-4-and-5-oct - **Topics:** HDB & Public Housing, Commercial & Industrial, Government & Policy ## Featured rationale The figures signal substantial public support for affordability, potentially sustaining owner-occupier access despite land costs while limiting direct cost recovery through BTO selling prices. ## AI summary HDB estimated Central Weave @ AMK’s development loss at about $250 million, rising to about $270 million after housing grants, despite $500 million land costs. ## Original article The Facebook posts published by Mr Yeoh Lam Keong (“Yeoh”) on 4 Oct 2022, as well as the social media posts and articles published by The Online Citizen (TOC) on 4 and 5 Oct 2022, contain false and misleading statements regarding HDB’s deficits and Singapore’s Past Reserves. The Minister for National Development has instructed the POFMA Office to issue Correction Directions [1] to Yeoh and TOC. Both parties will be required to insert a notice against their original posts or articles, with a link to the Government’s clarification. Clarifications regarding falsehoods On 4 Oct 2022, Yeoh published two Facebook posts referring to the reply made by the Minister for National Development to Mr Leong Mun Wai’s Parliamentary Question. The Online Citizen (TOC) subsequently carried an article on the same day echoing the points raised in Yeoh’s Facebook posts. Yeoh’s Facebook posts falsely convey the following: a. HDB will not incur a loss of about $270 million from the Central Weave @ AMK Build-To-Order (BTO) Project; and b. The Government is free to sell State land at nominal or much lower cost than its fair market value. On 5 Oct 2022, TOC published a second article headlined “Singapore’s reserves substantially profits from $500m land sales in AMK BTO”. The article claimed that Minister (ND)’s reply alluded to “profits being made from the land sale by the government” and that “such profits would go to the reserves”. The headline falsely conveys that the Government’s sale of land to HDB for the AMK BTO project will lead to an increase in Singapore’s reserves. The losses incurred by HDB, as stated by Minister (ND) in Parliament, are accurate and real. a. For the Central Weave @ AMK project, HDB will incur an estimated development loss of about $250 million, or about $270 million after taking into account housing grants. b. HDB’s deficits are covered using funding from the annual Budget, which is raised from taxes and other revenue streams. c. Real money is involved, and this is certainly not an “accounting sleight of hand”. State Land is part of the Past Reserves. It is not part of the assets that the Government can use as it wishes. When HDB requires land to develop flats, the land has to be taken out of the Past Reserves. HDB has to purchase the land by paying fair market value for the land, and the money goes into the Past Reserves. The estimated land cost for Central Weave @ AMK is about $500 million. The Government cannot sell State land at nominal or much lower cost than its fair market value without the President’s approval, as doing so would constitute a draw on Past Reserves. a. Past Reserves are protected by the Constitution for the benefit of current and future generations. The President’s concurrence is needed before the Government can draw on Past Reserves. b. Past Reserves are invested, and the Government can use part of the investment income to meet Singapore’s needs. This income is currently our biggest single source of revenue, exceeding the revenue from personal income taxes, corporate income taxes, or GST. Past Reserves are also an emergency fund for use during crises, for example in managing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. c. If the Government arbitrarily prices the land below its fair market value, such as at the historical price that past Governments had paid to acquire the land, or at just a nominal $1, then it is not putting back fully what it has taken out from Past Reserves. This is equivalent to drawing down the Reserves and short-changing future generations, depriving them of their nest-egg. d. To consume Past Reserves at the expense of Singapore’s future generations and security is populist and irresponsible. Our Constitution is designed to try to stop any Government from this kind of behaviour. There is an established process to determine the fair market value of land. a. The Chief Valuer, a public officer whose appointment requires the President’s concurrence, determines independently the fair market value using well-accepted and established valuation principles. b. These are the same valuation principles adopted by professional valuers in the private sector. c. The current fair market value of land is not the same as the historical cost incurred to acquire the land, as the market value of land is influenced by factors such as the current planned land use. Neither the Government nor the Past Reserves profit from land sales. When State land is disposed of at fair market value, there is no addition to the Past Reserves but a conversion of one type of asset (land) to another (cash). For the Central Weave @ AMK BTO project, HDB will pay the Government fair market value for the land, estimated to be about $500 million. This money will be paid into the Past Reserves, but does not result in a net increase in the Past Reserves. Delivering good, affordable homes for Singaporeans HDB does not price new flats to recover the cost of land and construction. Instead, it prices flats significantly below market value using generous subsidies to ensure that they are affordable to Singaporeans. a. We can see this from resale transactions, where many flat-owners sell their flats on the open market at prices higher than those of comparable BTO flats. b. HDB also provides housing grants to help specific groups of buyers with their first flat purchase. c. With generous subsidies and housing grants, most first-timer households use less than a quarter of their monthly income to service their HDB loans. HDB will continue to use its allocated resources judiciously to provide good, affordable homes for Singaporeans. For the facts of the case, please refer to the Factually article “Corrections regarding HDB’s deficits and Singapore’s Past Reserves” (https://www.gov.sg/article/141022-b). [1] A Correction Direction is a Direction issued to a person who has communicated a falsehood (i.e. the recipient) that affects the public interest. It requires the recipient to publish a correction notice, providing access to the correct facts. The Direction does not require the recipient to take down their post or make edits to their content and does not impose criminal sanctions. ## Chinese translation > Translation model: grok_cli ### 关于10月4日及5日脸书帖文与文章中不实内容的更正与澄清 杨南强先生（Yeoh Lam Keong，“杨”）于2022年10月4日发布的脸书帖文，以及《网络公民》（The Online Citizen，TOC）于2022年10月4日及5日发布的社交媒体帖文与文章，就建屋发展局（HDB）的赤字及新加坡过去储备金作出虚假及误导性陈述。 国家发展部部长已指示《防止网络假信息和网络操纵法令》（POFMA）办公室向杨及TOC发出更正指示[1]。双方须在其原帖文或文章旁加入通知，并附上政府澄清说明的链接。 关于不实内容的澄清 2022年10月4日，杨发布两则脸书帖文，提及国家发展部部长就梁文辉先生国会质询所作的答复。《网络公民》（TOC）随后于同日刊载文章，呼应杨脸书帖文中提出的论点。 杨的脸书帖文错误传达了以下内容： a. 建屋发展局不会因Central Weave @ AMK预购组屋（BTO）项目蒙受约2.7亿新元的亏损；以及 b. 政府可自由以名义价格或以远低于公平市值的价格出售国有土地。 2022年10月5日，TOC刊载第二篇文章，标题为“新加坡储备金从宏茂桥预购组屋项目5亿新元土地售卖中大幅获利”。该文声称国家发展部部长的答复暗示“政府从土地售卖中获利”，且“此类利润将进入储备金”。该标题错误传达政府向建屋发展局出售宏茂桥预购组屋项目用地将导致新加坡储备金增加。 国家发展部部长在国会中所述建屋发展局所蒙受的亏损是准确且真实的。 a. 就Central Weave @ AMK项目而言，建屋发展局将蒙受估计约2.5亿新元的开发亏损，若计入房屋津贴后约为2.7亿新元。 b. 建屋发展局的赤字由年度财政预算拨款填补，而该预算来自税收及其他收入来源。 c. 所涉为实实在在的资金，绝非“会计上的障眼法”。 国有土地属过去储备金的一部分。它不属于政府可随意动用的资产。当建屋发展局需要土地以发展组屋时，该土地须从过去储备金中拨出。建屋发展局须按公平市值购地，相关款项则拨入过去储备金。Central Weave @ AMK的估计土地成本约为5亿新元。 未经总统批准，政府不得以名义价格或以远低于公平市值的价格出售国有土地，否则将构成动用过去储备金。 a. 过去储备金受宪法保障，惠及当代与后代。政府动用过去储备金前须取得总统同意。 b. 过去储备金用于投资，政府可动用部分投资收益以满足新加坡的需要。该收益目前是我国最大的单一收入来源，超过个人所得税、公司所得税或消费税的收入。过去储备金也是危机时期的应急基金，例如用于应对冠病疫情的影响。 c. 若政府任意以低于公平市值的价格为土地定价，例如按过往政府征收土地时的历史价格，或以区区1新元的名义价格，则等于未能将从过去储备金中取出的部分足额回补。这等同于减损储备金，亏待后代，剥夺其“老本”。 d. 以牺牲新加坡后代与安全为代价消耗过去储备金，属民粹且不负责任的行为。我国宪法的设计正是为了尽量阻止任何政府作出此类行为。 确定土地公平市值有既定程序。 a. 总估价师为公职人员，其任命须取得总统同意，其依据广为接受且既定的估价原则独立厘定公平市值。 b. 这些估价原则与私营领域专业估价师所采用的原则相同。 c. 土地当前的公平市值并不等同于征收该土地时的历史成本，因为土地市值受当前规划土地用途等因素影响。 无论是政府还是过去储备金，都不会从土地售卖中获利。当国有土地按公平市值处置时，过去储备金并不会增加，而只是将一种资产（土地）转换为另一种资产（现金）。就Central Weave @ AMK预购组屋项目而言，建屋发展局将按公平市值向政府支付土地价款，估计约为5亿新元。该款项将拨入过去储备金，但不会导致过去储备金净额增加。 为新加坡人提供优质、可负担的住屋 建屋发展局并不会以收回土地与建筑成本为目标为新组屋定价。相反，它通过丰厚补贴使组屋价格显著低于市值，以确保新加坡人负担得起。 a. 从转售交易可见，许多组屋业主在公开市场上出售组屋的价格，高于同类预购组屋的价格。 b. 建屋发展局亦提供房屋津贴，协助特定买家群体购买首间组屋。 c. 在丰厚补贴与房屋津贴下，大多数首次购屋家庭用于偿还建屋发展局贷款的金额，不到其月收入的四分之一。 建屋发展局将继续审慎运用所获分配资源，为新加坡人提供优质、可负担的住屋。 有关本案事实，请参阅Factually文章《关于建屋发展局赤字及新加坡过去储备金的更正》（https://www.gov.sg/article/141022-b）。 [1] 更正指示是向传播影响公众利益的虚假信息者（即接收方）发出的指示。它要求接收方发布更正通知，以便公众获取正确事实。该指示不要求接收方删除帖文或修改内容，亦不施加刑事制裁。