Budget Highlights 2010

BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
Financial Year 2010
Distributed on Budget Day: 22nd February 2010

__________________
EXPLANATORY NOTES
This document summarises and provides relevant

highlights of the FY2010 Revenue and Expenditure
Estimates presented to Parliament on 22nd February
2010 as Cmd No. 1 of 2010. Feature articles
providing background information on selected
government measures and policies are also
included.
CONTENTS
[I] BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS 1
1 FISCAL UPDATE ON FINANCIAL YEAR 2009 3
2 FISCAL OUTLOOK FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2010 7
[II] FEATURE ARTICLES 11
3 SHIFTING FISCAL STRATEGY FROM CRISIS CONTAINMENT TO

INVESTING IN SKILLS, INNOVATION AND PRODUCTIVITY 12
4 THE ECONOMICS OF CLIMATE CHANGE 15
5 GOVERNMENT SPENDING ON HIGHER EDUCATION 20
6 PLANNING FOR LONG TERM CARE 24
7 LEVERAGING NETWORKS FOR PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY 27
[III] STATISTICAL ANNEX 33
[IV] GLOSSARY 43
8 GLOSSARY OF TERMS 45
i
[I] BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
 FISCAL UPDATE ON FY2009
 FISCAL OUTLOOK FOR FY2010
FISCAL UPDATE ON FINANCIAL YEAR 2009
1 Fiscal Update on Financial Year 2009
1.1 Economic Performance in 2009
The Singapore economy is estimated to have contracted by 2.0%1 in 2009. This is at

the top end of the -2.0% to -5.0% contraction projected at the beginning of 2009.
The contraction came on the back of a deep worldwide recession, and impacted
many sectors in Singapore including manufacturing, trade, and financial services.
The manufacturing sector declined by 4.1% in 2009 compared to 2008, with all
manufacturing clusters contracting except for the biomedical manufacturing cluster.
The services producing industries similarly declined by 2.2% in 2009 although growth
began to pick up late in the year. The construction sector however continued to post
strong growth of 16.0% in 2009.
The weak economy moderated employment in 2009. Total employment increased by

38,800, as job gains in the second half of the year more than offset the losses in the
first half. However, the overall unemployment rate rose from 2.2% in 2008 to 3.0% in
2009. Inflation was mild in 2009, with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rising by 0.6%2.
1.2 Expected Budget Outturn for FY2009
After taking into account Special Transfers excluding Top-Ups to Endowment and
Trust Funds and before Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC), the revised
FY2009 position is a basic deficit of $8.5 billion (or 3.3% of GDP). This is $6.4 billion
smaller than the $14.9 billion basic deficit estimated at Budget 2009. After factoring in
NIRC of $7.0 billion and Top-Ups to Endowment and Trust Funds of $1.4 billion, the
overall budget deficit for FY2009 is $2.9 billion (or 1.1% of GDP). The revised
FY2009 revenue and expenditure estimates are summarised in Table 1.1.
1.3 Operating Revenue
FY2009 Operating Revenue has been revised upwards by $5.1 billion (or 15.4%) to
$38.6 billion. This is largely due to higher-than-expected wages and profits that
resulted in higher collections in both Personal and Corporate Income Taxes. Assets
taxes and stamp duty are also expected to substantially exceed the budgeted
estimates.
1
Based on preliminary GDP and sectoral performance, released by MTI on 4 January 2010.
2
Based on 2009 = 100 base year.
3
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
Table 1.1: Fiscal Position in FY2008 and FY2009

Revised FY2009
Actual Estimated Revised Compared to
FY2008 FY2009 FY2009 Actual Estimated
FY2008 FY2009
$billion $billion $billion % change % change
OPERATING REVENUE 41.09 33.43 38.57 (6.1) 15.4
Corporate Income Tax 10.55 8.21 9.26 (12.3) 12.8
Personal Income Tax 5.41 5.22 6.20 14.5 18.7
Withholding Tax 1.18 0.83 1.16 (1.4) 39.3
Statutory Boards‘ Contributions 2.14 0.31 0.41 (80.9) 31.4
Assets Taxes 2.90 1.03 1.98 (32.0) 91.9
Customs and Excise Tax 2.07 2.00 2.10 1.6 4.9
Goods and Services Tax 6.49 6.56 6.66 2.7 1.5
Motor Vehicle Related Taxes 1.83 1.59 1.80 (1.9) 12.8
Vehicle Quota Premiums 0.37 0.32 0.61 66.4 91.6
Betting Taxes 1.77 1.86 1.74 (1.9) (6.6)
Stamp Duty 1.43 0.99 2.29 60.2 131.9
Other Taxes 1.93 2.37 2.12 9.9 (10.4)
Other Fees and Charges 2.85 2.02 2.09 (26.4) 3.5
Others 0.17 0.11 0.15 (7.6) 33.1
Less:
TOTAL EXPENDITURE 38.09 43.62 42.88 12.6 (1.7)
Operating Expenditure 28.73 32.16 31.75 10.5 (1.3)
Development Expenditure 9.36 11.46 11.14 19.0 (2.9)
PRIMARY SURPLUS / (DEFICIT)* 3.00 (10.20) (4.31)

Less:
SPECIAL TRANSFERS¶ 7.10 6.15 5.60 (21.2) (9.0)
Special Transfers Excluding Top-Ups to Endowment and 4.09 4.74 4.19
Trust Funds
Jobs Credit Scheme 0.92 3.38 3.19
Special Risk-Sharing Initiative (SRI) - 0.39 0.01
Growth Dividends 1.01 - 0.01
GST Credits 0.88 0.46 0.46
Senior Citizens‘ Bonus 0.24 0.12 0.12
Workfare Income Supplement Scheme Special Payment 0.05 0.10 0.12
U-Save Scheme 0.20 0.12 0.12
Service and Conservancy Charges and Rental Rebate 0.06 0.07 0.07
Top-Up to CPF Medisave Accounts 0.22 - -
Top-Up to Post-Secondary Education Account 0.48 0.00 0.00
Other measures for Elderly and Lower Income# 0.01 0.03 0.02
Assistance to Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) 0.02 0.02 0.02
R&D Incentive for Start-Up Enterprises - 0.05 0.05
BASIC SURPLUS / (DEFICIT)^ (1.09) (14.94) (8.50)
Top-Ups to Endowment and Trust Funds 3.01 1.41 1.41

Top-Up to Endowment Funds@ 1.60 0.30 0.30
National Research Fund 0.80 0.40 0.40
CPF Deferment and Voluntary Deferment Bonus 0.35 0.45 0.45
LIFElong Income (LIFE) Bonus 0.26 0.26 0.26
Add:
NET INVESTMENT INCOME / RETURNS CONTRIBUTION 4.34 7.67 7.03 62.0 (8.3)
OVERALL BUDGET SURPLUS / (DEFICIT) 0.24 (8.67) (2.88)
Note: Due to rounding, figures may not add up.
*
Surplus / (Deficit) before Special Transfers and Net Investment Income / Returns Contribution (NIRC).
¶
Special Transfers include Top-Ups to Endowment Funds and Trust Funds.
#
Consist of public transport vouchers and assistance through Citizens‘ Consultative Committees, self-help groups, and
voluntary welfare organisations.
^ Surplus / (Deficit) before Top-Ups to Endowment and Trust Funds and Net Investment Income / Returns Contribution.
@
Consist of ComCare Fund, Medifund, ElderCare Fund, and Lifelong Learning Fund.
4
FISCAL UPDATE ON FINANCIAL YEAR 2009
Corporate Income Tax (CIT)
CIT collections are estimated at $9.3 billion, or 12.8% higher than the budgeted
FY2009 estimate. This is largely due to the better-than-expected economic
performance, which led to lower claims for losses, such as losses on sale of assets
or provisions for bad debts, and provisions for diminution in value of properties held
as trading stocks.
Personal Income Tax (PIT)
PIT collections are projected at $6.2 billion, or 18.7% higher than the budgeted
FY2009 estimate. This is driven by higher than anticipated wages for high income-
earners in the fourth quarter of 2008 and a larger taxpayer base.
Withholding Tax 3
Withholding Tax collections are estimated at $1.2 billion, or 39.3% higher than the
budgeted FY2009 estimate. This was largely because royalties paid out by the
volatile pharmaceuticals sector was higher than anticipated.
Assets Taxes
Assets Taxes collections are expected to be $2.0 billion, or 91.9% higher than the
budgeted FY2009 estimate. This is driven by the recovery in the property market,
leading to higher rentals, as well as more taxable properties and more properties
being rented out.
Goods and Services Tax (GST)
GST collections are estimated at $6.7 billion, marginally higher that the earlier
estimate of $6.6 billion.
Motor Vehicle Related Revenues
Motor Vehicle Related Taxes are projected at $1.8 billion. This is $0.2 billion (or
12.8%) more than the budgeted FY2009 estimate because of higher open market
values of cars. Vehicle Quota Premiums, i.e. receipts from Certificate of Entitlement
(COE), are similarly expected to be higher than the budgeted FY2009 estimate ($0.6
billion, or 91.6% higher than earlier estimated). This is primarily due to higher COE
prices and fewer vehicle de-registrations.
Stamp Duty
Stamp Duty collections are estimated at $2.3 billion, or 131.9% higher than the
budgeted FY2008 estimate. This is due to a greater volume of transactions and
higher property prices.
3
Collections under Section 45 of the Income Tax Act, which is a withholding tax on locally-sourced income earned by
non-residents was previously included in the figures reported under Personal Income Tax.
5
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
1.4 Total Expenditure
Total Expenditure for FY2009 is expected to be $42.9 billion (or 16.7% of GDP),
1.7% below the budgeted FY2009 estimate. The decrease is largely attributed to
lower operational manpower expenditure due to reduced year-end bonuses and
lower development expenditure due to reduced construction costs and deferral of
several development projects.
1.5 Special Transfers
Special transfers are expected to total $5.6 billion in FY2009 (including $1.4 billion in
Top-Ups to Endowment Funds and Trust Funds). This is $0.6 billion (or 9.0%) lower
than the $6.2 billion initially budgeted.
1.6 Net Investment Returns Contribution
Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC) for FY2009 is projected to be $7.0 billion,
or $0.6 billion lower than the budgeted FY2009 estimate.
6
FISCAL OUTLOOK FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2010
2 Fiscal Outlook for Financial Year 2010
2.1 Budget for FY2010
The FY2010 Budget is summarised in Table 2.1.
2.2 Operating Revenue
GDP growth is projected to range between 4.5% and 6.5% in 2010, with the CPI
expected to be between 2% to 3%. Based on these forecasts, Operating Revenue for
FY2010 is estimated at $40.7 billion, an increase of $2.2 billion (or 5.6%) over the
revised FY2009 estimate. However, as a percentage of GDP, FY2010 Operating
Revenue will be lower at 14.7%, compared to 15.0% of GDP in FY2009.
Corporate Income Tax (CIT)
CIT collections are expected to decline by $1.6 billion (or 17.8%) from the revised
FY2009 estimate to $7.6 billion in FY2010. This decrease is largely attributed to a
decline in the gross operating surpluses of companies in 2009, the reduction of the
corporate income tax rate to 17% for YA2010, as well as other tax measures
announced in Budget 2009.
Personal Income Tax (PIT)
PIT collections are expected to increase by $0.8 billion (or 12.3%) from the revised
FY2009 estimate to $7.0 billion in FY2010. This is due to higher expected
compensations in 2009 and the cessation of one-off rebates and deductions
announced in Budget 2009.
Assets Taxes
Assets Taxes collections are projected to increase to $2.7 billion in FY2010, an

increase of $0.7 billion (or 37.4%) from the revised FY2009 estimate. This is largely
due to the expiry of rebates for landlords of commercial and industrial properties, and
for owner-occupied residential properties announced in Budget 2009.
Motor Vehicle Related Revenues
Motor Vehicle Related Taxes are estimated to fall by $0.3 billion (or 16.5%) from the
revised FY2009 estimate to $1.5 billion in FY2010, due to lower Additional
Registration Fee collections following the planned reduction in the COE quota for
2010. This lower quota would however lead to higher average COE prices—Vehicle
Quota Premium collections are expected to increase by $0.3 billion (or 47.2%) from
the revised FY2009 estimate to $0.9 billion in FY2010.
Stamp Duty
Stamp Duty collections are projected to increase by $0.4 billion (or 16.7%) from the
revised FY2009 estimate to $2.7 billion in FY2010. This is largely attributed to higher
expected property prices in 2010 and increased stamp duty collections from the
Government Land Sales programme.
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
Table 2.1: Budget for FY2010

Revised Estimated Change over
FY2009 FY2010@ Revised FY2009
$ billion $ billion $ billion %
OPERATING REVENUE 38.57 40.73 2.16 5.6
Corporate Income Tax 9.26 7.61 (1.65) (17.8)
Personal Income Tax 6.20 6.96 0.76 12.3
Withholding Tax 1.16 1.25 0.09 7.5
Statutory Boards‘ Contributions 0.41 1.19 0.78 191.0
Assets Taxes 1.98 2.72 0.74 37.4
Customs and Excise Tax 2.10 2.24 0.15 6.9
Goods and Services Tax 6.66 6.98 0.32 4.7
Motor Vehicle Related Taxes 1.80 1.50 (0.30) (16.5)
Vehicle Quota Premiums 0.61 0.90 0.29 47.2
Betting Taxes 1.74 2.08 0.34 19.4
Stamp Duty 2.29 2.68 0.38 16.7
Other Taxes 2.12 2.37 0.25 11.8
Other Fees and Charges 2.09 2.15 0.05 2.6
Others 0.15 0.11 (0.04) (25.7)
Less:
TOTAL EXPENDITURE 42.88 46.37 3.49 8.1
Operating Expenditure 31.75 33.90 2.15 6.8
Development Expenditure 11.14 12.47 1.34 12.0
PRIMARY SURPLUS / (DEFICIT)* (4.31) (5.64)
Less:
SPECIAL TRANSFERS¶ 5.60 5.15 (0.45) (8.0)
Special Transfers Excluding Top-Ups to Endowment and Trust
4.19 1.56
Funds
Jobs Credit Scheme 3.19 0.25
Special Risk-Sharing Initiative (SRI) 0.01 -
Growth Dividends 0.01 -
GST Credits 0.46 0.47
Senior Citizens‘ Bonus 0.12 0.13
Workfare Income Supplement Scheme Special Payment 0.12 0.02
U-Save Scheme 0.12 0.10
Service and Conservancy Charges and Rental Rebate 0.07 0.04
Top-Up to CPF Medisave Accounts - 0.31
Top-Up to Post-Secondary Education Account 0.00 0.23
Other measures for Elderly and Lower Income# 0.02 0.02
Assistance to Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) 0.02 -
R&D Incentive for Start-up Enterprises 0.05 0.01
BASIC SURPLUS / (DEFICIT)^ (8.50) (7.20)
Top-Ups to Endowment and Trust Funds 1.41 3.59

Top-Up to Endowment Funds 0.30 0.40
National Research Fund 0.40 1.50
National Productivity Fund - 1.00
CPF Deferment and Voluntary Deferment Bonus 0.45 0.44
LIFElong Income (LIFE) Bonus 0.26 0.25
Add:
NET INVESTMENT RETURNS CONTRIBUTION 7.03 7.83 0.80 11.4
OVERALL BUDGET SURPLUS / (DEFICIT) (2.88) (2.96)
Note: Due to rounding, figures may not add up.
@
Incorporates measures announced in FY2009 Budget Statement.
*
Surplus / (Deficit) before Special Transfers and Net Investment Returns Contribution.
¶
Special Transfers include Top-Ups to Endowment Funds and Trust Funds.
#
Consist of public transport vouchers and assistance through Citizens‘ Consultative Committees, self-help groups
and voluntary welfare organisations.
^ Surplus / (Deficit) before Top-Ups to Endowment and Trust Funds and Net Investment Returns Contribution.
8
FISCAL OUTLOOK FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2010
2.3 Total Expenditure
FY2010 Total Expenditure is estimated to be $46.4 billion (16.7% of GDP). This is an

increase of $3.5 billion (or 8.1%) from the revised FY2009 estimate of $42.9 billion.
This largely reflects the Government‘s long term commitments to boost investments
in education, healthcare, and transport infrastructure. Other significant contributions
to the increase in total expenditure in FY2010 include projects like the Next
Generation National Broadband Network, the Youth Olympic Games, and new
programmes such as the Science & Technology Plan 2010 and the Tourism
Development Fund 2015.
Operating Expenditure is projected to rise by $2.2 billion (or 6.8%) from the revised
FY2009 estimate to $33.9 billion in FY2010. Development Expenditure is expected to
increase significantly by $1.3 billion (or 12.0%) to $12.5 billion in FY2010.
2.4 Special Transfers
Budget 2010 will provide $5.2 billion worth of special transfers in FY2010. This
largely consists of the following top-ups to endowment and trust funds:
(a) $1.0 billion to a new National Productivity Fund to underscore a commitment

to uplift productivity through the provision of grants to support industry, cluster
and enterprise-level initiatives;
(b) $1.5 billion to the National Research Fund;
(c) $0.4 billion to the Medifund and Eldercare funds ($0.2 billion each) as part of
the Government‘s ongoing efforts to set aside funds to meet our long term
healthcare needs; and
(d) $0.7 billion to provide for the Deferment Bonus, Voluntary Deferment Bonus,
and Life Bonus schemes.
In addition, the Government will provide $0.2 billion in top-ups to the Post-Secondary
Education Accounts of younger Singaporeans. For older Singaporeans, the
Government will also make top-ups into CPF Medisave Accounts costing $0.3 billion.
Lastly, Singaporean households will continue to receive significant benefits totalling

$0.8 billion in 2010 as part of previously committed special transfers. These include
the fourth and final tranche of GST Credits and Senior Citizens‘ Bonuses, as well as
U-Save rebates, Service and Conservancy Charges and HDB rental rebates which
expire in FY2011. Businesses will also benefit from the extension of the Jobs Credit
scheme, costing $0.2 billion in FY2010.
2.5 Budget Position
Before taking into account Top-Ups to Endowment Funds and Trust Funds, and
before NIRC, the Budgeted FY2010 position is a basic deficit of $7.2 billion (or 2.6%
of GDP).
After factoring in the Top-Ups to Endowment Funds and Trust Funds, and NIRC of
$7.8 billion, the estimated outturn for FY2010 is an overall deficit of $3.0 billion (1.1%
of GDP).
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
Box 2.1: Macroeconomic Impact of Recent Fiscal Policy

The macroeconomic impact of the Budget may be assessed through fiscal impulse,
which estimates the first-order stimulus to aggregate demand arising from fiscal
policy during a given period. It focuses on the change in fiscal stance from year to
year. A positive fiscal impulse indicates a more expansionary fiscal stance compared
to the previous year, while a negative fiscal impulse indicates a less expansionary (or
more contractionary) stance than the year before. A budget deficit position can thus
still be contractionary (i.e. a negative fiscal impulse) if it is smaller than the deficit
position in the previous year.
The appropriateness of the fiscal impulse is often assessed against the prevailing
state of the economy. The latter can be measured by the output gap, which is the
difference between the actual level of activity in an economy (as measured by GDP)
versus the sustainable amount of activity given the capacity of the economy (i.e. the
maximum level of GDP that can be sustained without creating inflationary pressures).
Chart 2.1: Near neutral fiscal impulse in a recovering economy
The fiscal impulse for 2009 is expected to be smaller than what was estimated at the
start of FY2009. Singapore‘s economic performance in 2009 turned out to be better
than expected due to the global economy rebound resulting from the simultaneous
fiscal and monetary policies adopted by governments worldwide and the global
rebuilding of inventories. Asset markets also rallied strongly. The higher-than-
expected corporate and personal income tax and stamp duty collections thus
moderated the fiscal impulse expected from the Resilience Package. Ex-post, the
smaller fiscal impulse for 2009 is nonetheless appropriate given that the output gap
was also less severe than predicted.
In 2010, government revenue is expected to continue recovering on the back of

positive GDP growth and the winding down of tax measures introduced in Budget
2009. Spending on education, healthcare and transport infrastructure will increase,
reflecting the Government‘s continued commitment to these areas. Though the Jobs
Credit and Special Risk Initiative schemes will be gradually phased out over the
year, the fiscal impulse in 2010 is estimated to be mildly negative and close to zero.
With the positive economic outlook, Singapore‘s output gap is expected to close to
around 0.6% of potential GDP in 2010. Given the nascent recovery, the near neutral
fiscal stance, accompanied by the shift towards longer term measures aimed at
sustaining growth, is an appropriate one.
10
[II] FEATURE ARTICLES
 SHIFTING FISCAL STR ATEGY
FROM CRISIS CONTAINMENT TO
INVESTING IN SKILLS,
INNOV ATION AND PRODUCTIVITY
 THE ECONOMICS OF CLIM ATE

CH ANGE
 EDUC ATION SPENDING
 PL ANNING FOR LONG TERM

CARE
 LEVERAGING NETWORKS FOR

PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY
SHIFTING FISCAL STRATEGY
3 Shifting Fiscal Strategy from Crisis Containment

to Investing In Skills, Innovation and Productivity
3.1 Budget 2009: Responding to the Crisis
The primary focus of the 2009 Budget was to respond to the global economic crisis
and put in place a set of robust, timely and temporary fiscal measures to support
aggregate demand, increase the incomes of households and businesses, and bolster
business and consumer confidence.
The Government introduced the Resilience Package, which included schemes such
as the Jobs Credit Scheme (JCS) and the Skills Programme for Upgrading and
Resilience (SPUR) to help companies save jobs and continue investing in their
workers. The Government also addressed the credit crunch following the global
financial crisis by taking on a significant share of the risks of bank lending through the
Special Risk-Sharing Initiative (SRI). Assistance was provided to our households
through measures such as additional GST credits and income tax rebates. These
measures were designed to be implemented quickly and front-loaded to bring
immediate and timely support for the economy.
The Resilience Package contributed to an $8.5b deficit in Singapore‘s basic balance

in FY2009, amounting to 3.3% of GDP. This reflected a strongly expansionary fiscal
impulse for FY2009 that was appropriate given the recession and the resulting
negative output gap in the economy4.
3.2 Ensuring Fiscal Sustainability
The Singapore Government entered the crisis in 2009 with a strong balance sheet
with adequate fiscal resources for the Resilience Package, without the need to
borrow. With the permission of the President, the Government funded the Jobs Credit
and SRI using Past Reserves. These were extraordinary measures put in place to
provide broad-based support to businesses and keep employment up during the
recession.
However, the Government cannot continue to fund such measures using past
reserves and must start taking efforts to move away from a deficit position in the
overall budget balance over the medium term. To continue with such measures when
the economy is recovering would also risk keeping non-viable companies in business
when these should be encouraged to restructure. The Government will therefore
need to consider a scale back of stimulus measures as Singapore emerges gradually
from the crisis.
4
Refer to Box 2.1: ―Macroeconomic Impact of Recent Fiscal Policy‖ in Budget Highlights
12
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
3.3 Phasing Out the Resilience Package
Although a 4.5% to 6.5% growth in 2010 is expected for Singapore, the growth is
coming off a low base after the sharp economic contraction experience in 2008 and
2009. There are also potential downside risks to the growth forecasts as
governments in developed countries start taking steps to withdraw their fiscal and
monetary measures to bring high debt levels under control. Taking into account the
nascent economic recovery and uncertainty, the Government has announced a
gradual schedule of withdrawal from the extraordinary crisis measures introduced in
Budget 2009.
Thus, the Jobs Credit Scheme will remain in place for only another six months in the
first half of 2010 at stepped down rates of 6% in the first quarter, and 3% in the
second quarter, compared to 12% in 20095. The SRI will be phased out gradually
over 2010 as well, with reductions in loan quantum limits and lower the share of
lending risk borne by the Government, before being fully withdrawn by the end of
January 2011.
3.4 Budget 2010: Investing in Skills, Innovation and Productivity
Budget 2010 introduces new measures to enhance Singapore‘s growth potential by

increasing productivity and enabling our companies to take advantage of the
opportunities in the new landscape after the economic crisis.
The Government will be devoting significant resources to implement the strategies

recommended by the Economic Strategies Committee (ESC) (See Box 3.1), and
push ahead with our longer term infrastructural and social investments. The key
thrusts of FY2010 Budget are: i) growing our incomes through skills and innovation; ii)
growing globally competitive companies; and iii) including everyone in growth.
With these new measures, the fiscal impulse for FY2010 will still be broadly neutral6,
even though the Jobs Credit Scheme and SRI are being phased out. The overall
budget deficit is projected to remain at 1.1% of GDP in FY2010, similar to what it was
in FY2009. This reflects our continued investments for growth and is appropriate
given the nascent economic recovery.
5
The extension of both Jobs Credit and SRI will be funded from the budget of the Government rather than from past
reserves.
6
Refer to Box 2.1: ―Macroeconomic Impact of Recent Fiscal Policy‖ in Budget Highlights
SHIFTING FISCAL STRATEGY
Box 3.1: ESC Priorities - Sustaining Singapore’s Growth
The Prime Minister established the Economic Strategies Committee (ESC) in May 2009
to develop strategies for Singapore to maximise our opportunities in this new world
environment, build our capabilities and make the best use of our resources, so as to
achieve inclusive growth. The ESC released its key recommendations on 1 February
2010 after having engaged widely with business changes and associations, universities
and think-tanks and members of the public.
The ESC has identified three key strategic priorities to make skills, innovation and
productivity the basis of Singapore‘s economic growth and for a broad-based increase in
the incomes of our people. These priorities are: i) boosting skills in every job; ii)
deepening corporate capabilities to seize opportunities in Asia; and iii) making
Singapore a distinctive global city and an endearing home.
Detailed recommendations of the ESC can be found in the ESC‘s official publication,
titled ―Report of the Economic Strategies Committee‖, available at www.esc.gov.sg.
14
THE ECONOMICS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
4 The Economics of Climate Change
4.1 Climate Change – A Case for Action
In recent years, global climate change has been increasingly recognised as one of
the most critical and daunting challenges that policymakers face in this century. It is
an issue that the world will have to grapple with for many decades to come.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has concluded that climate
change can be largely attributed to emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) from
human activities, particularly carbon dioxide from the combustion of fossil fuels. An
increase in GHG concentrations could lead to profound and widespread global
impacts, such as a rise in sea levels, an increase in extreme weather events, stress
on water resources and food supplies, and increased risks of disease.
The Stern Review, a report released by a team of economists led by Sir Nicholas
Stern in 2006 for the British Government, argues that the benefits of strong, early
action on climate change will considerably outweigh the costs. The report estimates
that annual costs of achieving stabilization between 500-550ppm CO27 are around
1% of global GDP if action is taken now, but the costs will increase significantly with
delay.
While there is no agreement among economists and policymakers on the specific

conclusions of this report, there is growing consensus that rapid, sustained and
effective mitigation is required to avoid severe impacts of climate change. Mitigation
actions and policies range from development and deployment of renewable energy
technologies, improvements in energy efficiency in various sectors, carbon capture
and storage, to reforestation.
4.2 Dealing with Market Imperfections
Carbon emissions constitute a negative externality that is not factored into private
cost-benefit decisions8. There is a gap between private and social costs as the price
paid by the carbon emitter often does not fully compensate for the adverse effects to
society. Such a disparity results in an over production of emissions relative to the
benefits from consumption or production.
Climate change is particularly unique as an externality in a few respects. Firstly,

carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas, is still not regulated or viewed as a pollutant
in most countries. Secondly, the costs of undertaking carbon mitigation are
immediately felt and highly visible, while benefits of early mitigation are less clear and
accrue to future generations. Furthermore, scientists, economists and policymakers
are still grappling with uncertainties over direct and indirect impacts of climate
change. Lastly, and most critically, climate change crosses political borders. Hence, it
necessitates an internationally coordinated response, which has thus far proven to be
extremely difficult to achieve.
7
The concentration of 500-550 parts per million of CO2 (or equivalent) corresponds to mid-range of IPCC scenarios,
which is estimated to cause an increase in global average temperature of 3-40C
8
An externality arises when the actions of the producers or consumers affect people other than themselves, i.e.
spillover impact. In such a case, the market will not lead to social efficiency as the price does not reflect the full
costs/benefits of production/consumption of a good.
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
Price-Based Mechanisms for Carbon Mitigation
The figure below shows that there is a gap between the marginal social cost of
carbon emissions (horizontal blue line) and the marginal private cost of carbon
emissions (horizontal red line), which is equal to zero in the absence of a carbon
pricing regime. Hence, firms produce Q0 of emissions, where the marginal benefit
(downward sloping line) and marginal private cost intersect. A price signal can shift
the marginal private cost of producing carbon upwards to bridge the externality, i.e.,
difference between private and social costs. This provides the right incentives for
polluters to cut back on emissions to the socially optimum level, Q‘.
Price instruments for carbon abatement generally fall into two categories:
 Emission Tax. Theoretically, an economy-wide Pigouvian 9 tax can fix the

price at the marginal social externality of emitting one unit of carbon. This
provides incentives for polluters to cut back on emissions to a point where
marginal cost of abatement is equal to level of tax. In this manner, market
forces help to efficiently allocate abatement across different sectors of the
economy.
 Emissions Trading Scheme. An emissions trading scheme sets a limit on

total emissions by awarding or auctioning emissions permits to firms.
Participants can buy and sell permits in the event of excess/shortage. This
leads to a carbon price, which incentivises polluters with the lowest cost of
abatement to cut emissions in place of those that face high costs of
abatement. This is also known as a ‗cap-and-trade‘ system and is the basis of
international emissions trading markets under the Kyoto Protocol10.
9
A Pigouvian tax in general refers to a tax levied on activities that generate negative externalities. It is named after
economist Arthur Pigou who also developed the concept of economic externalities.
10
The Kyoto Protocol is a protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), an
international environmental treaty aimed at combating global warming. The Kyoto Protocol was initially adopted on
Dec 1997 in Kyoto, Japan, and entered into force in Feb 2005. As of 2009, 187 states have signed and ratified the
16
The figure below shows the effects of tax and emissions trading scheme on carbon
abatement. In the absence of either a tax or emissions trading scheme, no carbon is
abated (Q0). A tax (horizontal blue line) can intersect the marginal cost curve
horizontally at the same point where an emissions cap (vertical red line) intersects
the curve. In theory, both mechanisms are able to achieve the same market
equilibrium and reduction in carbon emissions, Q‘.
In practice, however, they perform differently under uncertain conditions. It is debated

among economists which is preferable and some have advocated hybrid
mechanisms that combine elements of both instruments.
 An emission tax is a price instrument because it fixes the price per unit of
carbon, while allowing the emissions level (quantity) to vary according to the
marginal cost of abatement for the economy. A common criticism of the tax
instrument is that the regulator bears the responsibility of setting the right
price levels at the marginal cost of emissions, which is difficult to do
accurately and can vary in a volatile market. Another drawback is that a tax
may not provide certainty on the amount of emission reductions.
 In comparison, an emission trading system is a quantity instrument because it

fixes the overall emission level (quantity), while allowing the price of carbon to
vary through auctions. However, such a system would not provide any
certainty on the price of carbon.
For a small domestic market like Singapore, a carbon tax would be more practical to
implement than cap-and-trade. Firstly, the latter could lead to price uncertainty, and
may deter or delay carbon reduction investments. Furthermore, it requires a new
carbon trading infrastructure, and could pose substantial transaction and monitoring
costs on both the Government and firms. With a relatively small market that has only
Protocol. The major feature of the Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for industrialised countries and the
European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
a few large energy consumers, a tax can provide greater price certainty and stability
that will incentivise investments in energy efficiency and low carbon solutions.
Non-Price-Based Interventions to Address Market Failures
On top of price signals, there may be a need for non-market policy interventions and
regulation to address market failures in specific sectors. Market failures are
obstructions that prevent agents from reacting to price signals, and undertaking
welfare-increasing actions. Table 4.1 below displays some examples of market
failures that impede energy efficiency improvements, even when they are cost-
effective to undertake.
Table 4.1: Examples of Market Failures
Market Failure/Barrier Examples

Split incentives or Transactions where Landlords do not make capital
principal-agent economic benefits (of investments in energy-efficient
problems energy conservation) appliances because they do not
do not accrue to the reap savings from utility bills, which
party that makes the are borne by tenants
investment
Imperfect Information about Lack of consumer awareness of

information energy efficiency energy consumption of household
options can be appliances, vehicles
incomplete, unavailable
or expensive to obtain
Government intervention can help resolve market failures, and enable higher
responsiveness to price signals. This can be done through a mix of policy
instruments such as financing and loans, capability building and technology
development programmes, as well as regulation. As such interventions may cause
economic distortions, they should be carefully designed and tailored to the type of
market failure that is present.
18
Box 4.1: Singapore’s climate change mitigation strategy
 Singapore has an important stake in a successful global deal. As a small and

low-lying island state, we are vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Hence,
we will do our part in a global agreement on climate change even though we
have no historical responsibility for climate change, and our absolute greenhouse
gas emissions are very low.
 Singapore is constrained as an alternative energy disadvantaged country. There

are inherent limitations to what we can do to reduce emissions and we face
constraints in switching to alternative energies.
 Despite these constraints, we have taken significant steps to ensure our

development is sustainable. Under the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint (SSB)
announced last year, $1b was committed over 5 years to improve the energy
efficiency of our economy in industry, transport, households and buildings.
Measures outlined under the SSB will help us reduce our carbon emissions by 7-
11% from the business-as-usual (BAU) scenario by 2020. Thus far, more than
$400m has been committed to these measures.
 The Government had earlier announced that we will undertake voluntary actions
to further reduce our emissions growth by 16% below 2020 BAU, contingent on a
global agreement being reached. This represents a substantial commitment that
will require a major effort by all sectors of the economy.
 To achieve this reduction in emissions, we will have to rely on a combination of

price signals, fiscal measures and other policy interventions. We are currently
studying all the options, and specific measures will be announced at a future date
after we have worked out the details, and when the outcome of climate change
negotiations is clearer.
GOVERNMENT SPENDING ON HIGHER EDUCATION
5 Government Spending on Higher Education
5.1 Education Spending: Why focus on higher education?
Education serves many key social and private objectives. The benefits of education
accrue not only to individuals, in the form of greater employability and higher wages;
but also to society at large. Better educated workers are more productive. Societies
that have better educated populations tend to have lower crime rates, and enjoy
greater social cohesion.
Since independence, we have invested a significant amount in making sure that

Singapore‘s general education system is both accessible and high-quality. However,
in recent years, we have been investing increasingly in post-secondary education –
including our Institutes of Technical Education (ITE), Polytechnics, and Universities.
Several economic and strategic considerations are at stake in this shift in focus.
5.2 Singapore’s Education Spending
The Singapore Government invests heavily in education. In the past five years alone,
our expenditure on education has increased by over 40%, from about $6.1b in
FY2005 to $8.7b in FY2009. The higher education share of the overall education
budget has also been increasing steadily over the same period, from about 36% in
FY2005, to about 42% in FY2009. We expect education spending to continue to rise
over the next five years, in particular in higher education.
5.3 Increasing Investments in Higher Education
A Global Shift In Focus
Singapore is not the only country to increase its investment in higher education.
Tertiary education systems have been expanding worldwide, with total enrolment
increasing at an estimated 5% annually over the period 1991-2004. Asia, especially
China and India, has seen the fastest growth in higher education enrolment, along
with an increase in demand for private provision and financing.11 This rise in demand
is a result of the recognition that a well-educated labour force is needed for long-term
economic development.
In countries where the higher education sector is more developed, there has also
been a growing awareness of the need for close links between higher education
institutions and industry, and a simultaneous diversification in the range of
occupational qualifications provided by these institutions. Several national
governments, including France, Japan, and the United Kingdom have supported the
development of regional centres of innovation, where small and medium-sized
enterprises (SMEs) work closely with higher education institutions on innovation and
research ventures.
11
OECD publication, ―Higher Education to 2030: Globalisation.‖ Executive summary online at
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/55/17/44101074.pdf
20
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
Singapore‘s higher education sector is already recognised as one of the best in the
region. Nonetheless, as the emphasis on higher education grows worldwide, we will
need to constantly improve our universities, polytechnics, and ITE, to ensure that our
higher education sector remains world-class. At the same time, we must move into
more complex areas of study and collaboration with Industry, to reap maximum
returns from our investment in higher education.
5.4 Cultivating our Human Capital Resources
Higher education is a major driver of economic competitiveness in a knowledge-

based economy. This is especially so in Singapore, where people are our greatest
resource. Government plans to increase the higher education participation rate over
the next few years, raising the University Cohort Participation Rate (CPR) from 25%
currently to 30% by 2015. Polytechnic CPR is projected to rise to 45% from the
current 42%, as the polytechnic sector grows and updates their offerings to ensure
that graduates are work-ready and valued by industry. As a result, the educational
profile of our resident workforce will improve significantly over time, with 50% of our
resident workforce projected to possess at least a diploma by 2020, including 35%
holding degrees.
More options will also be provided for our school graduates, who now have higher
and more diverse aspirations. The two upcoming additions to the higher education
sector in Singapore will provide more pathways to a university degree. The
Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD), established in close
collaboration with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Zhejiang
University, is envisioned to be a world-class, research-intensive university offering
design-focused interdisciplinary programmes anchored in science and technology.
SUTD will work closely with the economic agencies, such as the Economic
Development Board (EDB), as well as the private sector, to ensure that its graduates
will be ready to contribute in areas critical to Singapore‘s economic and social
development.
The creation of a second institution, the Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT), will
expand the range of degree programmes available to Singaporeans, by partnering
overseas universities and working in concert with the five local polytechnics. SIT will
leverage on the polytechnic education model to provide an alternative upgrading
pathway for polytechnic students and mid-career upgraders alike.
GOVERNMENT SPENDING ON HIGHER EDUCATION
Box 5.1: Why should Government subsidise Higher Education?
People who invest in higher education tend to receive greater private returns in
the form of higher wages and higher employability. Unlike primary education,
higher education provides individuals with concrete skills and capabilities, which in
turn allow them to command a nontrivial wage premium when they enter the
labour market.
Nonetheless, there are compelling reasons to heavily subsidize higher education:
1) Efficiency. There are social returns to higher education. ―Private‖ returns –

such as higher employability and wages – have positive social effects as well, in
terms of lowering poverty and crime rates. Many studies have suggested that
numerous productivity externalities arise from higher education. For instance,
economists hypothesise that a city with more human capital would be able to
generate more knowledge capital, and the productivity gains from that would then
spill over and raise wages among the rest of society. These effects create a
compelling case for higher education subsidies.
2) Equity. Even if the returns to higher education were completely private, there is
a case for Government to intervene to ensure that there are equal opportunities.
While it is generally feasible for individuals to fund their own tertiary education
through loan schemes, the lower-income may face credit constraints because of
their lack of collateral. Others may have heavy financial responsibilities that
compel them to enter the labour market as soon as possible, rather than
contemplate further education. Evidence from abroad also suggests that the
lower-income tend to underestimate the returns to education, due to lack of
information and poor community role models. To encourage this group to take up
higher education, the Government provides financial assistance for higher
education, as well as student and tuition fee loan schemes for the middle income
at low interest rates.
Hence, a key component of Government expenditure on higher education is

channelled towards ensuring that higher education remains affordable for the
population at large. Currently the Government subsidises up to 75% of the cost of
university education, and 85% of the cost of Polytechnic Diploma courses. At the
same time, these subsidy ratios are still lower than that provided for primary and
secondary education, to reflect the greater private returns to higher education.
5.5 Building Singapore as a Hub for Innovation and Enterprise
Moving ahead, Singapore must be able to compete on the frontier of innovation,

rather than on the basis of cost or location. To do so, Singapore requires a strong
base of research capabilities to give Singapore an economic edge, and allow it to
respond nimbly to national imperatives. Our higher education institutions play an
expanded role in this vision.
Our Universities and Polytechnics, together with public research institutions play a
central role in new innovations and technologies. We have been building up new
research capability in recent years. For instance, NUS‘ collaboration with Duke
University on the Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School allows advanced clinical
research to be conducted and taught in Singapore, thus jumpstarting our capabilities
22
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
in this area more quickly than we would otherwise have. The Polytechnics also work
closely with industry players on business innovation and product development
through the Centres of Innovation that are hosted at the Polytechnics. The upcoming
SUTD will have a strong emphasis on research as well, with the establishment of the
International Design Centre (IDC) that will gather the best minds to seek solutions
around modern-day challenges.
5.6 Conclusion
The Singapore government has always invested heavily in education, and will
continue to do so in future, with greater emphasis on developing higher education.
This requires a careful balancing between strategic considerations, equity, and
efficiency.
PLANNING FOR LONG TERM CARE
6 Planning for Long Term Care

With an ageing population, longer life expectancies, and higher incidence of chronic
disease, the demand for long term care will increase in the coming years. Our
resident population aged 65 and above is projected to triple from 300,000 today to
900,000 by 203012. Coupled with our declining birth rate, one in five residents will be
aged 65 and above by 2030, as compared to one in eleven residents today13.
As the incidence of chronic disease and disability What is long term care?
among the elderly increases, the cost burden on Long term care refers to care
individuals and families will rise. Currently, many which is required by
families who have an elderly member at home individuals with chronic
depend on informal care provided by a spouse or medical conditions or
daughter. However, reliance on such informal care permanent disabilities. Long
arrangements will be unsustainable as declining term care encompasses
fertility rates result in fewer children and as more medical and social services
which support the needs of
women enter the workforce. Foreign domestic
those who cannot take care of
workers are a possible, though costly alternative.
themselves. This ranges from
institutional care in nursing
Likewise, the cost of institutional care can be homes and hospices, to home
expensive. For example, un-subsidised nursing medical, home nursing and
home care typically costs about $1,600 per month, home help services such as
depending on the type of facility and intensity of provision of meals, upkeep of
care required. Moreover, the need for long term personal hygiene and
care is often protracted14, resulting in higher cost of housekeeping.
care.
6.1 Need for Increased Focus on Long Term Care
Our public healthcare sector has historically focused on providing top quality and
affordable acute care, as it met the needs of a young nation. This approach has
shifted gradually in recent years as we begin to plan for an ageing population.
However, more work needs to be done so that the structure and capability of our
healthcare sector are able to respond to our changing demographics and care needs.
Our healthcare financing structure will need to be significantly strengthened to meet

long term care needs. Currently, we spend approximately 0.1% of GDP, or 3% of
National Health Expenditure, on long term care. In comparison, developed countries
with ageing populations spend significantly more on long term care. On average,
OECD countries spend 1-2% of GDP on long term care. Finland, with 16% of its
population aged 65 and above, is already spending close to 2.1% of its GDP on long
term care15. We are likely to have to spend more to meet future long term care needs.
12
Committee on Ageing Issues: Report on the Ageing Population, Ministry of Community Development, Youth and
Sports (2006).
13
Department of Statistics, Population Trends 2009.
14
Yap et al (2003), ―Who are the Residents of a Nursing Home in Singapore?‖ Singapore Medical Journal, 44(2): 65-
75. The median duration of stay in nursing homes before passing on is 59 months, with a range of 3-204 months.
15
Data obtained from OECD Health Data 2008
24
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
6.2 Delivering Long Term Care That Is Affordable to Singaporeans
In order to adequately provide long term care that is affordable to all Singaporeans,
we need to focus on the following system and policy design issues.
Encourage Right-Siting. We must optimise the use of resources within the care
sector. The cost of acute care at tertiary hospitals is high, and relying on acute care
infrastructure to provide long term care creates a strain on the already limited
capacity. Adequate provision in various long term care settings can channel patients
from acute facilities into care settings appropriate to their needs. This is known as
―right-siting‖. To this end, we have established the Agency for Integrated Care and
the Centre for Enabled Living to provide assistance to patients in navigating the
healthcare and long term care system, and to ensure that patients receive the care
and support they need within the home and the community, after being discharged
from hospital.
Increase Capacity and Boost Capabilities. We need to ensure that there is sufficient
capacity in our long term care sector to provide for growing demand as our
population ages. In the coming years, we plan to increase capacity in long term care
institutions such as nursing homes. In addition, home and community care can be a
viable option for the elderly who do not need institutional care. To enable the elderly
to age in place, training opportunities are now being offered to caregivers and foreign
domestic workers who care for the elderly.
Promote Healthy and Active Ageing and Preventive Care. Upstream efforts to keep
our population healthy can help to prevent chronic illnesses, and thus reduce the
need for protracted medical care. Our current efforts in healthy and active ageing and
preventive care include initiatives such as the National Wellness Programme. This
includes community health screenings to help seniors aged 50 and above to better
manage their health, as well as brisk-walking clubs to encourage physical activity
among the elderly.
Ensure Adequate Financing. Our healthcare financing philosophy is structured on the

notion of individual responsibility. This means that healthcare should not be provided
free of charge (see Box 6.1).
Box 6.1: Should Healthcare be provided free of charge?
Proponents of free universal healthcare suggest that free care provision increases
uptake. Individuals will thereby be encouraged to seek care when they need it,
instead of deferring medical needs due to prohibitive costs.
However, free care provision often leads to overconsumption of services. In Japan,

for example, medical care was made virtually free for persons age 70 and older in
1973. This led to many elderly people staying in hospitals for extended periods,
occupying nearly half of all hospital beds.
A system of patient co-payment can help curb unnecessary consumption of

healthcare services. Co-payments can include a deductible, which is the initial
amount an individual pays before healthcare coverage kicks in, and co-insurance,
which is the percentage of a medical bill an individual has to pay above the
deductible.
PLANNING FOR LONG TERM CARE
Nonetheless, co-payments should not prevent individuals from seeking treatment.

The Government‘s objective is to ensure that all Singaporeans have access to
affordable healthcare. We aim to achieve this by providing assistance to those who
need it most. Our subsidy framework provides tiered subsidies to individuals up to
the bottom 50th percentile of income for care at long term care facilities such as
community hospitals, nursing homes, chronic sick facilities, and inpatient hospices.
The 3Ms framework – Medisave, MediShield, and Medifund – has served

Singaporeans well in financing their acute medical needs. It is not however fully
geared up to meet future healthcare demands, especially chronic and long-term care.
We need to find a way to build upon the 3Ms framework to provide Singaporeans
with adequate coverage, and to complement personal cash savings and family
support.
Some steps have already been taken to build on the 3Ms framework for better
coverage of long term care needs. Just as we have MediShield for the risk-pooling of
catastrophic illness, ElderShield was introduced in 2002 as a severe disability
insurance for Singaporeans to risk-pool against the financial risks of suffering a
severe disability. Today, about half of Singaporeans above age 40 are enrolled in
basic ElderShield. Medifund-Silver has been also been specifically set up as a safety
net for the elderly low income who have difficulty paying for their long term care
needs. Medifund Silver was carved out of Medifund in 2007 and provides targeted
help for Singaporeans above age 65.
Medisave on the other hand can be used for some sub-acute and long term care
services, such as community hospital and hospice bills, as well as ElderShield
premiums. However, it will not be adequate to fully meet other forms of long term
care such as nursing homes and home care. We will need to consider how best to
enhance Medisave to cover additional areas in long term care.
6.3 Conclusion
It is imperative for us to focus our efforts on planning for long term care needs today,
to be in time to meet the demographic challenges in the future. This will require us to
restructure our care delivery model to meet long term care needs. Finally, our
financing structure which has served our population well in providing for acute care
can be extended to long term care needs. This will ensure that individuals who
require long term care will have adequate means to seek the care they need.
26
LEVERAGING NETWORKS FOR PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY
7 Leveraging Networks for Public Service Delivery

Transforming Public Service Delivery: 30 Years of E-Government
Advancement in information and communications technology (ICT) has transformed

public service delivery over the past three decades, delivering unprecedented levels
of convenience and cost savings for the public. This is brought about primarily
through two key transformations – automation and round-the-clock access.
Automation enables government agencies to speedily process submissions while
minimising human errors. Round-the-clock access to government e-services affords
citizens 24/7 convenience from the comfort of their homes.
As recent as 10 years ago, a citizen would fill in stacks of paper forms to file his
personal income tax returns. A restaurateur would need to make multiple visits to
different government agencies to obtain the requisite permits to open a restaurant. All
library-goers would stand in long queues at the library to borrow or return a book.
Today, the same citizen would file his personal income tax returns online – a virtually
hassle-free task with the pre-population of data fields. The restaurateur would apply
for the necessary licences to open a restaurant through the one-stop Online
Business Licensing Service (OBLS) without having to step out of his house. And
library-goers would drop off books at the library drop-box at any time without having
to stand in long queues.
Government services have indeed come a long way since the first foray into the ‗e‘
platform almost 30 years ago.
7.1 Pre-Year 2000: Laying the basic IT infrastructure
Back in 1980, the Government was pre-dominantly operating on paper documents

and physical files. There were only 100 computer terminals deployed in three
ministries, with no network infrastructure to speak of.
Recognising that technology could be a key driver of economic competitiveness, the

Government launched the Civil Service Computerisation Programme in 1981 to
transform public administration. Internal work processes were automated and the
volume of paperwork was reduced for greater operational efficiencies. Basic network
infrastructure (such as the civil service-wide email system and government data
centre) was developed to facilitate cross-agency work and consolidate computing
resources. These efforts laid the foundation to transform public service delivery in the
21st century.
7.2 Year 2000 & Beyond: Transforming the Public Service Delivery
Network
The proliferation of the Internet in the 1990s heralded the digital age of the 21st
century and a new era of e-Government. Singapore‘s efforts in improving public
service delivery can be depicted as a progression up the network maturity model as
illustrated in Box 7.1.
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
Box 7.1: Evolution of Public Service Delivery Network – A Model
This model shows how networks within a government mature from the Age of
Agencies (Stage I), when there are no or very few networks, to the Golden Age of
Networks (Stage IV), when the public and private sectors are all inter-linked in a well-
connected network. By leveraging the built-up networks, a government can
potentially tap on the resources, expertise and collective knowledge of all parties to
achieve greater innovation in service delivery.
7.3 The Age of Agencies (2000-2003): Putting Public Services Online
With the proliferation of the Internet, the Government was able to deliver public
services anytime, anywhere. Over 1,600 public services (or all of the e-feasible public
services) were made available online, significantly reducing the need for counter
visits and paper forms. This translated into greater convenience, shorter processing
time and lower handling costs for both the public and the government agencies. One
such e-service was the BizFile service (www.bizfile.gov.sg) which facilitated the filing
of documents by businesses (see Box 7.2).
Box 7.2: BizFile

Fully launched in January 2003, BizFile is a one-stop portal for businesses to file all
legally prescribed business/company forms for the purpose of registration and
fulfilling statutory disclosure requirements. Prior to BizFile, applicants had to go
personally to the Registry of Companies and Businesses (currently known as the
Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority) to hand in handwritten forms for
processing. Incorporating a new company used to take 5 days and cost between
$1,200 and $35,000, depending on company size. Today, it takes only 15 minutes
online and costs $300, regardless of company size.
BizFile is the first fully electronic-filing government project in the Asia Pacific. It was
also a finalist in the e-Government category of the 2004 Stockholm Challenge which
recognised excellence in public ICT implementation to promote administrative
efficiency.
28
To enable the digitally-disadvantaged to also enjoy the convenience of public e-

services, a network of Citizen-Connect Centres (formerly known as eCitizen Help
Centres) was set up across Singapore (see Box 7.3).
Box 7.3: Citizen-Connect Centres

Citizens who do not have an internet connection at home, or who need help to get
online can visit the Citizen-Connect Centres. Computer terminals are available for
free usage, and dedicated service officers are present to help citizens who need
assistance to transact with the Government online. There are currently 27 Citizen-
Connect Centres sited at convenient locations (e.g. community centres) across
Singapore.
Notwithstanding these developments, the Government remained in the Age of

Agencies whereby many public services continued to be offered in silos by individual
government agencies, with limited coordination across agencies.
7.4 The Age of Transition (2003-2006): Integrating Services
In the early 2000s, there was growing recognition that ICT frees government
agencies from physical constraints, and can enable agencies to deliver services in an
integrated and coordinated manner. A concerted push for more coordinated service
delivery was made, enabling the Government to make some progress towards the
Age of Transition. A number of critical enabling infrastructures were developed,
including SingPass, a common password that individuals can use to transact with
different government agencies, thereby eliminating the need to remember multiple
passwords (see Box 7.4).
Box 7.4: SingPass
Launched in 2003, SingPass is a common password that individuals can use to

carry out secured transactions with different government agencies. SingPass
supports 270 e-services offered by 79 agencies, or almost all government
transactions requiring authentication. There are 2.6 million SingPass users today,
and the number of SingPass transactions has grown from 7.9 million in 2004 to
over 30 million in 2009.
Agencies also started to work together to streamline and consolidate their business
requirements so as to provide a seamless, one-stop service to citizens and
businesses. A number of cross-agency, integrated e-services were developed, such
as the Online Business Licensing Service which allows businesses to apply for some
80 different business licences from 16 agencies through a single application form
(see Box 7.5).
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
Box 7.5: The Online Business Licensing Service
The Online Business Licensing Service (OBLS) provides a one-stop service for
new businesses to register and apply for licences. Applicants need only complete
one integrated form and make a single payment for the multiple licences online,
instead of a series of forms and separate payments to different agencies. This is
the result of business process streamlining and re-engineering to aggregate
related licenses and remove redundant ones. Today, 80% of businesses' start-up
licensing needs are met by OBLS. The service has reduced businesses‘ average
application time from five hours to less than an hour, and agencies‘ processing
time from 21 days to 8 days. To date, OBLS has garnered several international
recognitions, including the United Nations Public Service Award that recognises
excellence in public service.
7.5 The Age of Integration (2006-2010): Integrating Government
Integration efforts within the public sector gained momentum through the 2000s,
strengthening the Whole-of-Government (WOG) approach towards service delivery.
Initiatives such as the Unique Entity Number (see Box 7.6) paved our way into the
Age of Integration.
Box 7.6: The Unique Entity Number
In the past, private entities (businesses, companies, societies and trade unions)
had to use different identifiers when they interact with various government
agencies. At least 20 identifiers were issued by 17 government agencies for more
than 30 entity-types. With the Unique Entity Number (UEN) implemented in 2009,
all 420,000 entities registered in Singapore only need to remember one number -
their UEN - when dealing with any of the 84 government agencies.
Singapore is the first country in the world to implement a common identification

number format for all entities registered in the country. UEN won the ―Connected
Government‖ category of the 2009 Government Technology Awards which
recognises excellence in inter-agency workflow.
Nonetheless, to fully elevate Singapore‘s public service delivery into the Age of
Integration, more needs to be done to develop a holistic understanding of the needs
of different constituents and bring about closer collaboration among public agencies.
The key success factor does not lie on technology alone, but rather, people and
mindset. The Age of Integration requires public agencies to adopt fundamental
mindset shifts and move away from the traditional, silo-ed way of delivering public
services. Agencies need to work towards to achieve better collective outcomes, even
if it means a little more inconvenience to them, e.g. changing their internal systems
and processes.
7.6 The Golden Age (2011 and beyond): The Next Era of e-Government?
There are several emerging trends which are likely to shape the development of e-
Government. The advent of Web 2.0 tools such as Facebook and YouTube has
brought about unprecedented levels of communication, sharing and collaboration
within loosely connected communities. At the same time, the issues that the
30
Government faces are becoming increasingly multi-faceted and dynamic. The current
model in which the Government decides which services to deploy and how to deploy
them, has an inherent limit on the extent to which the Government can improve
public service delivery.
To catalyse and sustain the next wave of innovation in public service delivery, one
way may be to harness the power of the masses, by involving the private and people
sectors in identifying, developing and delivering services to meet their needs. The
next phase of e-Government in the Golden Age of public service delivery networks
could well centre on mass collaboration, where the resources, expertise and
collective knowledge of individuals and communities are harnessed to create greater
value for all parties. The Government, instead of being a sole provider of public
services, is likely to evolve into a platform provider which sets and referees the rules
in an ecosystem to allow the participants, whether private sector or individuals, to
freely innovate and create value-added services on top of or even superseding
existing public services. By tapping on the wider community, new approaches to
solving public issues and delivering public services may emerge (see Box 7.7).
Box 7.7: Comparing Present and Future e-Government - Approaches to Public

Service Delivery
PRESENT FUTURE
Government’s Role Service Provider Facilitator
Citizens’ Role Passive Consumers Active Participants

Government-Citizen
―Me-to-You‖ ―Me-with-You‖
Relationship
7.7 Concluding Remarks
Singapore‘s e-Government efforts in the past 30 years have been well-received. 88%
of users expressed satisfaction with the overall quality of e-services while 90% of
users would recommend online government services. Singapore has also been
consistently ranked among the top three in international e-Government
benchmarking studies.
The journey ahead is filled with new opportunities, but also some challenges. It
represents a shift from ―mandate‖ to ―collaborate‖, from ―my turf, my responsibility‖ to
―let‘s work together‖, and from ―service delivery‖ to ―value creation‖. Nevertheless,
with strong leadership and a persistent call for change, this new paradigm of public
service delivery can happen, with benefits and opportunities for all.
[III] STATISTICAL ANNEX
Table 8.1: Overall Fiscal Position for FY2001 to FY2010 ($ million)
FY2009 FY2010
FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008
(Revised) (Budgeted)
Operating Revenue 28,496 25,469 25,315 27,469 28,171 31,289 40,375 41,086 38,566 40,726
Tax Revenue 24,172 21,502 21,501 23,799 25,687 28,827 36,630 37,709 35,710 37,567
Fees and Charges 4,134 3,805 3,492 3,366 2,246 2,203 3,630 3,212 2,704 3,046
Others 190 162 321 305 238 259 115 165 152 113
Total Expenditure 27,305 27,152 28,499 28,957 28,634 29,905 32,982 38,091 42,881 46,371
Operating Expenditure 18,536 19,359 19,991 20,355 21,445 23,925 25,952 28,734 31,745 33,899
Development Expenditure 1 8,769 7,793 8,508 8,602 7,189 5,980 7,030 9,357 11,136 12,472
Primary Surplus/(Deficit) 1,190 -1,683 -3,184 -1,487 -463 1,384 7,393 2,996 -4,315 -5,645
Special Transfers: 5,264 1,802 603 1,661 829 3,570 2,142 7,099 5,595 5,150
Special Transfers Excluding Top-Ups to Endowment and Trust
3,464 1,202 603 961 579 2,622 1,342 4,089 4,185 1,560
Funds:
Jobs Credit Scheme - - - - - - - 918 3,190 245
Enhancements to Loan Schemes 2 - - - - - - - - 5 -
New Singapore Shares 2,450 - - - - - - - - -
Growth Dividends - - - - - 1,362 0 1,015 5 -
Economic Restructuring Shares - 1,201 600 854 - 80 - - - -
GST Credits - - - - - - 533 880 460 465
Senior Citizens‘ Bonus - - - - - - 109 237 122 129
Workfare Bonus Scheme Fund and Workfare Income Supplement - - - - - 400 297 - - -
Scheme
Workfare Income Supplement Scheme Special Payment - - - - - - - 49 117 16
Utilities-Save Scheme - - - 8 63 64 148 200 118 96
Service and Conservancy Charges/Rental Rebates 3 - - - - 59 36 64 64 74 41
40th Anniversary NS Bonus - - - - - 201 0 - - -
CPF Top-Up 4 1,010 0 4 99 412 479 0 221 - 310
Edusave Account and PSEA - - - - 45 - 188 478 1 230
MediShield Scheme for the Elderly 4 - - - - - - - - -
Other measures for elderly and lower income5 - - - - 0 - 2 7 22 17
Assistance to SMEs - - - - - - 0 21 21 -
R&D Incentive for Start-up Enterprises - - - - - - - - 50 10
Basic Surplus/(Deficit)6 -2,273 -2,885 -3,788 -2,448 -1,041 -1,238 6,051 -1,093 -8,500 -7,204
Top-Ups to Endowment and Trust Funds: 1,800 600 - 700 250 948 800 3,010 1,410 3,590
Top-Up to Endowment Funds7/ Skills Development Fund 1,800 600 - 700 250 448 300 1,600 300 400
STATISTICAL ANNEX
National Research Fund - - - - - 500 500 800 400 1,500
National Productivity Fund - - - - - - - - - 1,000
CPF Deferment and Voluntary Deferment Bonus - - - - - - - 350 450 440
LIFE Bonus - - - - - - - 260 260 250
NII/NIR Contribution8 1,375 3,675 1,900 3,043 2,777 2,131 2,405 4,343 7,033 7,835
Overall Budget Surplus/ (Deficit) -2,698 191 -1,887 -105 1,486 -55 7,656 239 -2,877 -2,960
*
Figures may not add up due to rounding.
1
Development Expenditure excludes land-related expenditure.
2
Schemes include the Bridging Loan Programme, Trade Credit Insurance Programme, and Loan-Insurance Scheme-Plus
3
Prior to FY2005, Service and Conservancy Charges and rental rebates were subsumed under Ministry of National Development‘s Operating Expenditure.
4
Consist of CPF Ordinary Account, Pre-Medisave, Medisave and CPF Share Ownership Top-Up Schemes.
5
Consist of Senior Pensioners Grant Scheme, public transport vouchers and assistance through Citizens‘ Consultative Committees (CCCs), Self-Help Groups (SHGs) and Voluntary Welfare Organisations (VWOs).
6
Surplus/(Deficit) before Top-ups to Endowment and Trust Funds and Net Investment Income/Returns Contribution.
7
Consist of top-ups to Edusave, Medical, Lifelong Learning, Community Care (formerly known as Community Assistance Funds
8
Prior to FY2009, up to 50% of Net Investment Income (NII) could be taken into the annual budget for spending. With effect from FY2009, under the Net Investment Returns (NIR) framework, up to 50% of the expected long term
real returns on relevant assets specified the Constitution could be taken for spending. For the other assets, up to 50% of investment income could continue to be used for spending in the annual budget.
35
Table 8.2: Revenue Collections for FY2001 to FY2010 ($ million)
36
S
STATISTICAL ANNEX
FY2009 FY2010
Operating Revenue 28,496 25,469 25,315 27,469 28,171 31,289 40,375 41,086 38,566 40,726
Corporate Income Tax 7,821 6,822 5,921 6,107 7,340 8,474 9,250 10,554 9,256 7,610
Personal Income Tax 3,732 3,423 3,133 3,132 3,425 3,743 4,537 5,414 6,200 6,960
Withholding Tax 815 626 729 824 898 964 1,150 1,176 1,160 1,247
Statutory Boards‘ Contributions 862 625 488 1,405 1,249 955 1,683 2,143 410 1,192
Assets Taxes 1,517 1,308 1,512 2,058 1,910 2,112 2,582 2,904 1,976 2,715
Customs and Excise Taxes 1,803 1,730 1,901 1,924 1,973 1,887 1,985 2,065 2,098 2,244
Goods and Services Tax 2,134 2,165 2,957 3,470 3,815 3,978 6,165 6,487 6,660 6,975
Motor Vehicle Taxes 1,972 1,446 1,486 1,392 1,432 1,745 2,189 1,835 1,800 1,503
Vehicle Quota Premiums 2,089 1,778 1,543 1,257 321 93 673 367 611 899
Betting Taxes 1,575 1,550 1,524 1,534 1,501 1,571 1,713 1,771 1,738 2,075
Other Taxes 1 1,939 1,809 1,851 1,952 2,143 3,399 5,375 3,361 4,413 5,046
Other Fees and Charges 2,045 2,027 1,949 2,109 1,925 2,109 2,956 2,845 2,093 2,147
Others 2 190 162 321 305 238 259 115 165 152 113
Table 8.2b: Revenue Collections for FY2001 to FY2010 (% of GDP)
FY2009 FY2010
Operating Revenue 18.7% 16.0% 15.1% 14.6% 13.7% 13.8% 15.6% 16.3% 15.0% 14.7%
Corporate Income Tax FY2009 FY2010 5.1% 4.3% 3.5% 3.2% 3.6% 3.7% 3.6% 4.2% 3.6% 2.7%
FY2007 FY2008
Personal Income (Revised)
Tax (Budgeted) 2.4% 2.1% 1.9% 1.7% 1.7% 1.6% 1.8% 2.2% 2.4% 2.5%
40,375 Withholding
41,086 Tax 38,566 40,726 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4%
Statutory Boards‘ Contributions 0.6% 0.4% 0.3% 0.7% 0.6% 0.4% 0.7% 0.9% 0.2% 0.4%
9,250 Assets
10,554Taxes 9,256 7,610 1.0% 0.8% 0.9% 1.1% 0.9% 0.9% 1.0% 1.2% 0.8% 1.0%
4,537 Customs
5,414 and Excise Taxes
6,200 6,960 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1.0% 1.0% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8%
1,150 Goods
1,176and Services Tax
1,160 1,247 1.4% 1.4% 1.8% 1.8% 1.9% 1.8% 2.4% 2.6% 2.6% 2.5%
1,683 Motor Vehicle Taxes 410
2,143 1,192 1.3% 0.9% 0.9% 0.7% 0.7% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.5%
2,582 Vehicle
2,904 Quota Premiums
1,976 2,715 1.4% 1.1% 0.9% 0.7% 0.2% 0.0% 0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3%
1,985 Betting
2,065Taxes 2,098 2,244 1.0% 1.0% 0.9% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7%
6,165 Other Taxes 1
6,487 6,660 6,975 1.3% 1.1% 1.1% 1.0% 1.0% 1.5% 2.1% 1.3% 1.7% 1.8%
2,189 Other Fees and Charges
1,835 1,800 1,503 1.3% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 0.9% 0.9% 1.1% 1.1% 0.8% 0.8%
2
673 Others
367 611 899 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0%
1,713 1,771 1,738 2,075
5,375 3,361 4,413 5,046
* Figures may not add up due to rounding.
2,956 1 2,845
Prior 2,093 Tax was 2,147
to FY10, Withholding classified under Personal Income Tax
115 2 165 of Stamp Duty,152 113
Consist Foreign Worker Levy and Development Charges (DC). With effect from FY2008, DC is reclassified from "Other Fees and Charges" to "Other Taxes". This change is to more
accurately reflect the nature of DC as a tax under section 35 of the Planning Act
Table 8.3: Operating Expenditure by Sector for FY2001 to FY2010 ($ million)
FY2009 FY2010
Total 18,536 19,359 19,991 20,355 21,445 23,925 25,952 28,734 31,745 33,899
Social Development 7,770 7,946 8,615 8,500 8,778 10,520 11,473 12,860 14,602 16,245
Education 4,767 4,824 4,997 4,975 5,215 6,352 6,786 7,477 7,851 8,599
National Development 398 409 414 377 336 671 900 805 974 1,066
Health 1,445 1,451 1,904 1,604 1,680 1,840 2,019 2,379 3,009 3,538
Environment and Water Resources 414 448 453 479 408 414 453 606 671 770
Community Development, Youth and Sports 513 572 619 814 844 903 962 1,182 1,668 1,825
Information, Communications and the Arts 234 241 228 251 294 341 352 412 429 447
Security and External Relations 8,865 9,468 9,634 10,228 10,981 11,540 12,400 13,219 13,973 14,231
Defence 7,089 7,694 7,714 8,243 8,889 9,273 9,660 10,397 11,007 11,015
Home Affairs 1,580 1,563 1,708 1,752 1,825 2,010 2,428 2,478 2,599 2,824
Foreign Affairs 196 211 212 233 267 257 311 344 367 392
Economic Development 1,113 1,133 995 884 919 984 1,112 1,623 2,024 2,189
Transport 406 385 292 289 277 285 321 367 389 467
Trade and Industry 553 564 497 392 436 473 528 660 718 654
Manpower 130 156 158 161 166 188 227 564 839 956
FY2009 FY2010
FY2007 FY2008
Info-Communications
(Revised) and Media Development
(Budgeted) 24 28 47 42 39 38 37 33 77 112
40,375 41,086 38,566 40,726
Government Administration 788 812 747 743 768 880 967 1,030 1,147 1,233
9,250 Finance
10,554 9,256 7,610 352 379 333 318 345 428 438 484 538 557
4,537 Law
5,414 6,200 6,960 112 103 96 97 100 106 107 118 130 135
1,150 Organs of State1,160
1,176 1,247 173 186 182 187 186 195 247 235 264 294
1,683 Prime Minister's Office
2,143 410 1,192 151 143 135 141 136 151 176 194 215 247
2,582 2,904
* Figures may not1,976
add up due to 2,715
rounding.
1,985 2,065 2,098 2,244
6,165 6,487 6,660 6,975
STATISTICAL ANNEX
2,189 1,835 1,800 1,503
673 367 611 899
1,713 1,771 1,738 2,075
5,375 3,361 4,413 5,046
2,956 2,845 2,093 2,147
115 165 152 113
37
Table 8.4: Development Expenditure by Sector for FY2001 to FY2010 ($ million)
38
STATISTICAL ANNEX
FY2009 FY2010
1
Total 8,769 7,793 8,508 8,602 7,189 5,980 7,030 9,357 11,136 12,472
Education 1,473 1,774 1,218 1,239 867 608 742 753 847 1,065
National Development 1,770 1,089 1,865 1,153 1,010 675 1,187 1,095 1,311 1,427
Health 145 82 103 114 85 96 185 336 733 644
Environment and Water Resources 502 771 952 1,101 775 570 381 325 326 321
Community Development, Youth and Sports 118 112 90 97 97 103 234 96 120 142
Security and External Relations 1,362 1,068 1,020 899 869 840 829 777 870 836
Defence 730 509 524 377 363 355 349 328 440 440
Home Affairs 570 478 439 473 460 399 396 387 350 351
Foreign Affairs 62 81 57 49 46 86 83 61 80 45
Economic Development 2,906 2,255 2,615 3,016 2,746 2,786 3,189 5,644 6,551 7,586
Transport 1,508 1,203 1,115 1,776 1,617 1,518 1,621 3,379 4,070 4,498
Trade and Industry 1,293 1,009 1,421 1,154 1,055 1,207 1,516 2,183 2,357 2,707
Manpower 82 38 54 52 36 15 24 35 24 46
Info-Communications and Media Development 23 5 25 33 39 46 28 48 100 336
Government Administration 331 499 486 828 630 213 187 198 227 340
Finance 70 100 214 308 350 10 44 25 25 127
Law 213 325 184 329 218 167 123 153 172 155
Organs of State 30 33 47 151 31 11 6 10 18 15
Prime Minister's Office 18 41 42 40 32 25 14 9 12 44
* Figures may not add up due to rounding. Expenditure on research and development has been reclassified as part of ministries‘ expenditure for FY1998 to FY2000.
1
Table 8.5: Total Expenditure by Sector for FY2001 to FY2010 ($ million)
FY2009 FY2010
1
Total 27,305 27,152 28,499 28,957 28,634 29,905 32,982 38,091 42,881 46,371
Education 6,240 6,598 6,214 6,214 6,082 6,959 7,528 8,230 8,699 9,664
National Development 2,167 1,498 2,278 1,529 1,346 1,347 2,087 1,900 2,284 2,493
Health 1,591 1,533 2,007 1,718 1,765 1,936 2,205 2,715 3,741 4,181
Environment and Water Resources 916 1,219 1,405 1,579 1,183 984 834 931 998 1,091
Community Development, Youth and Sports 631 684 709 912 941 1,006 1,196 1,278 1,788 1,967
Security and External Relations 10,228 10,536 10,654 11,127 11,850 12,380 13,228 13,996 14,843 15,067
Defence 7,819 8,203 8,238 8,620 9,252 9,628 10,009 10,726 11,447 11,455
Home Affairs 2,150 2,040 2,147 2,225 2,285 2,409 2,824 2,865 2,949 3,175
Foreign Affairs 258 293 270 282 313 343 394 406 447 437
Economic Development 4,020 3,389 3,610 3,900 3,665 3,770 4,301 7,268 8,574 9,776
Transport 1,914 1,588 1,408 2,066 1,894 1,803 1,942 3,746 4,459 4,965
Manpower 212 194 212 213 202 204 251 599 863 1,002
Info-Communications and Media Development 47 33 73 75 78 83 65 81 177 448
Government Administration 1,118 1,310 1,233 1,571 1,398 1,094 1,155 1,228 1,374 1,574
Finance 422 479 547 626 696 438 482 509 562 684
Law 325 427 280 426 318 273 229 271 302 290
Organs of State 202 219 229 338 217 206 253 245 282 309
1
STATISTICAL ANNEX
39
Table 8.5b: Total Expenditure by Sector for FY2001 to FY2010 (% of GDP)
40
STATISTICAL ANNEX
FY2009 FY2010
1
Total 17.9% 17.0% 17.0% 15.4% 13.9% 13.2% 12.8% 15.1% 16.7% 16.7%
Social Development 7.8% 7.5% 7.8% 6.6% 5.7% 5.6% 5.5% 6.2% 7.0% 7.2%
Education 4.1% 4.1% 3.7% 3.3% 2.9% 3.1% 2.9% 3.3% 3.4% 3.5%
National Development 1.4% 0.9% 1.4% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.8% 0.8% 0.9% 0.9%
Health 1.0% 1.0% 1.2% 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 1.1% 1.5% 1.5%
Environment and Water Resources 0.6% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.6% 0.4% 0.3% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4%
Community Development, Youth and Sports 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.5% 0.5% 0.7% 0.7%
Information, Communications and the Arts 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2%
Security and External Relations 6.7% 6.6% 6.4% 5.9% 5.7% 5.5% 5.1% 5.6% 5.8% 5.4%
Defence 5.1% 5.1% 4.9% 4.6% 4.5% 4.2% 3.9% 4.3% 4.4% 4.1%
Home Affairs 1.4% 1.3% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1%
Foreign Affairs 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2%
Economic Development 2.6% 2.1% 2.2% 2.1% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 2.9% 3.3% 3.5%
Transport 1.3% 1.0% 0.8% 1.1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 1.5% 1.7% 1.8%
Trade and Industry 1.2% 1.0% 1.1% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.8% 1.1% 1.2% 1.2%
Manpower 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4%
Info-Communications and Media Development 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.2%
Government Administration 0.7% 0.8% 0.7% 0.8% 0.7% 0.5% 0.4% 0.5% 0.5% 0.6%
Finance 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2%
Law 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%
Organs of State 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%
Prime Minister's Office 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%
1
Table 8.6: Total Expenditure by Expenditure Type for FY2001 to FY2010 ($ million)
FY2009 FY2010
Total Expenditure 27,305 27,152 28,499 28,957 28,634 29,905 32,982 38,091 42,881 46,371
Operating Expenditure 18,536 19,359 19,991 20,355 21,445 23,925 25,952 28,734 31,745 33,899
Running Costs 16,387 17,051 17,295 17,797 18,874 19,666 21,710 23,082 24,901 26,228
Expenditure on Manpower 3,351 3,370 3,375 3,535 3,629 3,914 4,736 4,677 4,894 5,351
Operating Grant 3,735 3,858 4,042 4,039 4,244 3,918 4,211 4,849 5,470 5,993
Other Operating Expenditure 9,302 9,824 9,878 10,222 11,001 11,835 12,763 13,537 14,521 14,884
Capital Injections 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 16 -
Transfers 2,149 2,308 2,696 2,558 2,570 4,259 4,242 5,651 6,845 7,671
Social Transfers 394 491 457 485 546 611 665 1,134 1,550 1,629
Subventions 1,754 1,817 2,240 2,073 2,024 3,648 3,577 4,517 5,295 6,042
Development Expenditure1 8,769 7,793 8,508 8,602 7,189 5,980 7,030 9,357 11,136 12,472
Direct Development 4,503 3,962 4,221 4,349 3,522 2,760 3,086 3,285 4,246 5,035
Capital Grant 4,266 3,831 4,287 4,150 3,663 3,162 3,797 5,896 6,730 7,106
Capital Injections - - 1 103 4 58 146 176 160 332
* Figures may not add up due to rounding.

1
STATISTICAL ANNEX
41
Table 8.7: Headcount by Ministry for FY2001 to FY2010
42
FY2009 FY2010
STATISTICAL ANNEX
(Revised)2 (Budgeted) 3
Civil List 50 47 51 53 52 48 53 55 61 61
Attorney-General's Chambers 255 276 282 274 270 254 253 267 353 396
Auditor-General's Office 163 157 146 127 112 103 104 114 170 170
Cabinet Office 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 12 12
Judicature 707 678 716 571 540 513 537 566 807 809
Parliament 53 55 54 48 52 50 46 44 55 57
Presidential Councils 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 10 6
Public Service Commission 8 9 8 9 9 9 10 9 12 13
Community Development, Youth and Sports 4,054 4,194 4,009 3,719 3,709 3,708 3,760 4,190 4,538 4,809
Defence 1,526 1,527 1,524 1,525 1,524 1,525 1,525 1,524 1,525 1,525
Education 49,370 51,128 51,099 51,462 52,844 45,745 46,666 47,737 56,352 56,700
Environment and Water Resources 4,751 4,757 4,500 4,501 3,817 3,350 3,485 3,711 3,974 4,086
Finance 3,900 3,614 3,044 2,649 2,529 2,750 2,906 3,074 3,311 3,444
Foreign Affairs 1,081 1,082 1,111 1,074 1,121 1,138 1,149 1,178 1,335 1,370
Health 948 939 1,038 1,125 1,097 1,115 1,162 1,175 1,259 1,364
Home Affairs 18,928 19,373 20,173 20,965 20,899 20,510 20,994 20,808 23,827 24,115
Information, Communications and the Arts 2,002 2,058 2,063 2,547 2,530 2,592 2,684 2,869 3,450 3,521
Law 787 853 741 709 677 734 733 760 837 858
Manpower 1,069 1,208 1,277 1,327 1,397 1,606 1,701 1,797 2,319 2,343
National Development 10,596 10,259 7,391 7,136 6,666 6,679 6,673 6,910 7,685 7,715
Transport 3,822 3,756 3,776 3,623 3,534 3,520 3,547 3,753 4,577 4,810
Total 106,995 108,958 105,945 106,368 106,391 98,981 101,082 103,708 120,079 121,994
1
Numbers for FY2001 to FY2008 are for actual headcount.
2
Numbers for FY2009 are for revised establishments.
3
Numbers for FY2010 are for budgeted establishments.
Note:
Establishments reflect the number of officers that ministries could hire, but is not reflective of actual headcount, as establishments may not be filled by ministries even though they may be kept in anticipation of a
future need. E.g. the revised establishments for FY2008, as reported in Budget Highlights 2009, was 110,321, but the actual headcount for FY2008, reported here, was only 103,708.
[IV] GLOSSARY
GLOSSARY
provisions of the tax system, and not just

8 Glossary of Terms focusing on a single characteristic such as
the headline corporate tax rate.
Automatic Stabilisers
In macroeconomics, automatic stabilisers Estate Duty
work as a tool to dampen fluctuations in Duty charged on the assets of a deceased
real GDP without any explicit policy action person.
by the Government.
Excise Tax
Central Provident Fund (CPF) A tax on goods whether manufactured in
A fully-funded compulsory defined Singapore or elsewhere. In Singapore,
contribution scheme in which workers and excise tax is imposed principally on
employers set aside a portion of wages in tobacco, petroleum products, motor
individualised accounts for retirement. vehicles and liquor to achieve social and
transport policy objectives.
Chargeable Income
The portion of income assessable to tax Fiscal Impulse (FI)
after accounting for exemptions, A measure of the first-order impact of the
deductions and allowances. Government‘s net injection or withdrawal
from the economy arising from its fiscal
Continuing Education and Training policy. If the Government extracts more
(CET) revenue than it spends as compared to a
CET refers to the education and training previous year, it is subtracting from the
activities for adults who have left the aggregate demand pressures inherent in
formal school system. This fulfils the the economy, fiscal impulse would be
social and economic objectives of keeping deemed as contractionary. Conversely, if
our people employed in the changing the Government extracts less revenue
economy. than it spends as compared to a previous
year, this would be deemed as an
Countercyclical expansionary fiscal impulse.
Moving in the opposite direction compared
to the overall economic cycle: rising when Financial Year (FY)
the economy is weakening, and falling Singapore Government‘s Financial Year
when the economy is strengthening. See 2009 is from 1 April 2009 to 31 March
also Procyclical. 2010.
Customs Duty Goods and Services Tax (GST)

A tax on goods imported into Singapore. Goods and Services Tax (GST) is a tax on
In Singapore, customs duty is principally domestic consumption of almost all goods
imposed on stout and porter, beer and ale, and services in Singapore. The tax is paid
medicated samsu and other samsu. when money is spent on goods or
services, including imports. It is a multi-
Development Expenditure stage tax which is collected at every stage
Generally refers to expenses that of the production and distribution chain.
represent a longer-term investment and GST is often used inter-changeably with
results in the formation of a capitalisable the Value Added Tax (VAT).
asset of the Government. Examples of
spending areas are the acquisition of Government Endowment Fund
heavy equipments, as well as capitalisable A fund established with an injection of
assets, e.g. buildings and roads. Government monies as principal on which
the income generated will be used to
Effective Tax Burden finance specific programmes on an
The amount of tax suffered by a taxpayer ongoing basis. The 5 government
after accounting for the all relevant endowment funds include the Lifelong
Learning Fund, the Eldercare Fund,
45
GLOSSARY
Medifund, Edusave Fund and ComCare (inflationary gap), it indicates that the
Fund. economy is operating over-capacity,
resources are stretched and inflation
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) pressures are strong.
A measure of the total flow of goods and
services produced by the economy over a Past Reserves
specified time period, normally a year. It is Refers to the reserves not accumulated by
obtained by valuing outputs of goods and the Government during its current term of
services at market prices. Real GDP office, with reserves being the excess of
refers to GDP figures adjusted for inflation. assets over liabilities.
Operating Revenue Primary Budget Position

Refers to Government receipts credited to The Primary Budget Position, defined as
the Consolidated Revenue Account and Operating Revenue less Total Expenditure,
Development Fund Account excluding measures the ability of the Government to
investment and interest income, capital meet its annual expenditures through its
receipts (lumpy and less regular in timing) regular collection of revenue (taxes, fees
and investment adjustments. The main and charges).
components are Corporate Income Tax,
Personal Income Tax and Goods and Procyclical
Services Tax. Moving in the same direction as the
overall economic cycle: falling when the
Operating Expenditure economy is weakening, and rising when
Generally refers to expenses incurred to the economy is strengthening. See also
maintain the operations and other regular Countercyclical.
activities of the Government. Components
include expenditure on manpower (EOM) Stamp Duty
– for wages of public service officers, A tax imposed on commercial and legal
other operating expenditure (OOE) – for documents relating to unlisted stock and
all other forms of expenditure incurred in shares and immovable property.
the running of the Government, and
operating grants to statutory boards and Workfare Income Supplement (WIS)
aided educational institutions, which Scheme
support the day-to-day running of these Targeted at older low wage workers, it
agencies. complements the changes to CPF
employer and employee contribution rates
Output Gap that came into effect on 1st July 2007. It
The difference between the actual level of provides incentives for older low wage
activity in an economy (as measured by workers to find work and stay in work,
GDP) versus the sustainable amount of while at the same time helping them to
activity given the capacity of the economy save for their longer term needs.
(i.e. the level of GDP that the economy
could potentially achieve without creating Total (Government) Expenditure
unhealthy inflationary pressures). It Sum of Operating and Development
measures the degree of resource Expenditure. It excludes Special Transfers
utilisation of the economy. The output gap unless otherwise mentioned.
is typically reported as a percentage of
GDP to give a sense of the proportion with Year of Assessment (YA)
which the economy is over or under Refers to the year in which tax on the
capacity. Where the output gap is income earned in the preceding year is
negative (deflationary gap), the economy assessed.
is not operating at full capacity, and may
well be in danger of sliding into a
recession if demand is not boosted.
Where the output gap is positive
46

Budget Highlights 2010

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Budget Highlights 2010

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS

Financial Year 2010

Distributed on Budget Day: 22nd February 2010

This document summarises and provides relevant

[I] BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS 1

1 FISCAL UPDATE ON FINANCIAL YEAR 2009 3

2 FISCAL OUTLOOK FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2010 7

[II] FEATURE ARTICLES 11

3 SHIFTING FISCAL STRATEGY FROM CRISIS CONTAINMENT TO

4 THE ECONOMICS OF CLIMATE CHANGE 15

5 GOVERNMENT SPENDING ON HIGHER EDUCATION 20

6 PLANNING FOR LONG TERM CARE 24

7 LEVERAGING NETWORKS FOR PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY 27

[III] STATISTICAL ANNEX 33

1 Fiscal Update on Financial Year 2009

1.1 Economic Performance in 2009

The Singapore economy is estimated to have contracted by 2.0%1 in 2009. This is at

The weak economy moderated employment in 2009. Total employment increased by

1.2 Expected Budget Outturn for FY2009

1.3 Operating Revenue

Table 1.1: Fiscal Position in FY2008 and FY2009

PRIMARY SURPLUS / (DEFICIT)* 3.00 (10.20) (4.31)

BASIC SURPLUS / (DEFICIT)^ (1.09) (14.94) (8.50)

Top-Ups to Endowment and Trust Funds 3.01 1.41 1.41

Note: Due to rounding, figures may not add up.

Corporate Income Tax (CIT)

Personal Income Tax (PIT)

Goods and Services Tax (GST)

Motor Vehicle Related Revenues

1.4 Total Expenditure

1.5 Special Transfers

1.6 Net Investment Returns Contribution

2 Fiscal Outlook for Financial Year 2010

2.1 Budget for FY2010

The FY2010 Budget is summarised in Table 2.1.

2.2 Operating Revenue

Corporate Income Tax (CIT)

Personal Income Tax (PIT)

Assets Taxes collections are projected to increase to $2.7 billion in FY2010, an

Motor Vehicle Related Revenues

Table 2.1: Budget for FY2010

BASIC SURPLUS / (DEFICIT)^ (8.50) (7.20)

Top-Ups to Endowment and Trust Funds 1.41 3.59

Note: Due to rounding, figures may not add up.

2.3 Total Expenditure

FY2010 Total Expenditure is estimated to be $46.4 billion (16.7% of GDP). This is an

2.4 Special Transfers

(a) $1.0 billion to a new National Productivity Fund to underscore a commitment

(b) $1.5 billion to the National Research Fund;

Lastly, Singaporean households will continue to receive significant benefits totalling

2.5 Budget Position

Box 2.1: Macroeconomic Impact of Recent Fiscal Policy

Chart 2.1: Near neutral fiscal impulse in a recovering economy

In 2010, government revenue is expected to continue recovering on the back of

 THE ECONOMICS OF CLIM ATE

 EDUC ATION SPENDING

 PL ANNING FOR LONG TERM

 LEVERAGING NETWORKS FOR

3 Shifting Fiscal Strategy from Crisis Containment

3.1 Budget 2009: Responding to the Crisis

The Resilience Package contributed to an $8.5b deficit in Singapore‘s basic balance

3.2 Ensuring Fiscal Sustainability

3.3 Phasing Out the Resilience Package