Bumiputra Discount On Houses should Be abolished.

When policies formulated and implemented
many years ago becomes no longer relevant in today's
society, the govt should take steps to abolish or
adjust it to suit the current circumstances.When the
policy of mandatory requirement that developers should
give a 5% to 10% discount for bumiputra house buyers
was introduced it was intended to increase house
ownership of bumiputras.This was especially directed
at ownership of houses in the lower and medium
bracket.
However, today we see the policy extended to
cover and include high end, sophisticated
condominiums, apartments and bungalows.If bumiputras
can afford to buy such expensive properties what then
is the rationale for giving them a discount when
inevitably the cost would be borne by non-bumi buyers.
Instead, the govt should put a ceiling of
house prices which would qualify for a discount.For
example, all houses below $100,000 should be given a
5% or 10% discount for bumiputras.This way the benefit
of lower priced houses would be given to those who are
in need of help and not those who are rich and not
deserving.
On many occassion local authorities have been
guilty of delaying the release of bumiputra unsold
units when it was quite apparent that bumiputras were
not interested in the property.This has undoubtedly
caused alot of hardships to developers and has
contributed to alot of abandon projects.This is
especially true with DBKL where developers after
having satisfied the condition of advertising in the
papers for sale of Bumi units were further told to
hold road show at Mid-valley .The whole exercise was
really a futile one because most of the properties
were located in predominantly chinese areas and no
amount of publicity could persuade bumiputras to buy
the unsold units.
If the govt is so insistent on selling those
units to bumiputras then perhaps the option is to set
up an agency to purchase all units allocated to bumis
and gradually sell at a price they feel would be fair.
That way housing developers would not be caught with
the holding cost which undoubtedly would be pass on to
the consumers.