Singapore – A social media post by Ben Leong, an Associate Professor of Computer Science at the National University of Singapore (NUS), has ignited widespread criticism over its simplistic defence of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) hike.
Leong, who is currently embroiled in a high-profile defamation lawsuit with Iris Koh, the founder of the anti-vaccination group Healing the Divide, argued in his post that the GST increase had minimal economic impact and was sufficiently offset by government handouts.
Leong posted on Wednesday (26 Feb) in response to former Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Calvin Cheng, who had commented on Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh’s widely supported speech in Parliament on the same day.
Cheng wrote, “LOI Pritam made two points about GST today. One which I agree, and the other which I disagree. With a super-aged society, we are looking at higher expenditure with a smaller income tax paying population (non-working old people)/”
“Tax increases are necessary… So I think it’s wrong to argue that there is no need for GST increase. It’s smart electioneering, since everyone wants to hear that taxes shouldn’t increase. BUT, I agree that GST should not have been increased during a time of record global inflation. It makes the tax increase a more bitter pill to swallow. All the vouchers and handouts are not going to change this. LOO Pritam has swung a heavy-blow at the Government. It’s up to the PAP to now persuade the electorate otherwise.”
Leong, in an attempt to counter this argument, stated, “Suppose there was no Ukraine war, no inflation, no nothing. What would happen if the government increases GST by 1%? Will our $1 coffee become $1.01? Won’t happen. It will become $1.10. Why? Because the stallholders don’t want to pay for the increase but they cannot collect 1 cent, so they might as well increase more than 1% because they actually end up making more money.”
Critics were quick to rebut this claim, pointing out that price increases are not just a matter of minor adjustments but involve a compounding effect across the entire supply chain.
One importer highlighted how each layer of the supply chain adds its own markup, saying, “Each time GST goes up, my suppliers raise prices by at least 15%, not 1%. Small businesses end up absorbing some of these costs to stay competitive, but with rising utilities, rental, and manpower costs, margins are getting razor-thin. Many local businesses have already folded.”
Leong also downplayed the impact of the GST hike by arguing that government assistance effectively neutralized its effects.
“Do people know how much each household would have to spend to pay $800 because of the GST increase? Well, it’s $80K. How many households spend $80K a year? If not, this means that whatever extra GST was taken from you last year, Lawrence has given you back (and more).”
However, multiple rebuttals pointed out that this calculation was deeply flawed.
One commenter noted, “A household just needs to spend $8,889 annually to incur $800 GST at 9%. That works out to be a mere $247 per person per month or $8.12 per day spent based on an average household size of three. Also, Minister Indranee just said CDC vouchers’ continuation will depend on needs of the time, so the voucher is not something that will continue eternally. Can we expect GST to be discontinued at some point in the future as well?”
Another business owner pushed back against Leong’s assumption that price increases were solely due to profiteering: “With each increase in GST, it increases everything as a whole—the coffee bean, milk, and sugar. The entire supply chain absorbs these costs and passes them down to retailers and customers.”
Minister K Shanmugam Faces Criticism for Endorsing Leong’s Post
When Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam shared Leong’s post, describing it as an “excellent post on GST and Budget,” it only fueled further backlash.
Many questioned why a government minister was endorsing a post that ignored real economic struggles faced by ordinary Singaporeans.
“With all due respect to the professor’s mathematical analysis, actual concerns about cost of living can only be understood by those who go to the ground, talk to people, and listen with unbiased ears,” wrote one critic in response to the Minister’s post.
“Sitting in front of mathematical models and making assumptions does not reflect the fears and struggles of average Singaporeans.”
The controversy highlights a broader issue in Singaporean governance—the growing disconnect between top-level policymakers and ordinary citizens.
Government ministers, with their world-class salaries, appear increasingly detached from the struggles of everyday Singaporeans facing escalating costs of living.
While academics like Ben Leong may argue that the impact of GST is minimal, the lived experiences of business owners and consumers tell a different story—one of rising costs, squeezed margins, and growing financial anxiety.
The post Ben Leong’s GST post sparks backlash for superficial analysis appeared first on The Online Citizen.
