【明報專訊】ON THE MAINLAND, a number of banks have successively announced cutting the interest rates of mortgage loans, with some providing special rates below 3 percent. The authorities have adopted an array of measures to resuscitate the property sector, but the policy goal has been ambiguous. Is the government intending to rescue the housing market or is it just trying to ensure the delivery of presold properties? Or is it that as long as the government's revenue from land sale and property tax can go up, it does not mind which kind of real estate is involved?
It is reasonable and fair to ensure the delivery of presold properties to safeguard the legal rights and interests of homebuyers. However, whether a real estate bailout matches the reform direction of "supporting both housing rentals and purchases" decided at the third plenary session of the 20th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, remains debatable. In terms of finances, local governments should break away from their over-reliance on property tax income. They should get over the "old glory days" and speed up reform measures in other areas.
At a national meeting on ensuring the delivery of presold properties in mid-May, the State Council set a clear target of getting 3.96 million presold homes delivered nationwide by the end of this year. To this end, the central bank has announced supporting policies like providing more funds for real estate loans and lowering the down payment ratios for some eligible homebuyers. One after another, local governments have also rolled out measures "adapted to local conditions" to implement the policy. However, some of these local measures have apparently gone out of shape.
A common measure implemented by local governments is cutting interest rates and taxes (deed tax and stamp duty). Many provide housing trade-in subsidies, offering households a cash allowance if they buy bigger new homes while requiring developers or the government to acquire their original properties. Some local governments exclude units for rent from the number of properties owned by homebuyers so that they can continue to enjoy discounted interest rates for self-occupied properties. Some even combine housing incentives with the policy on encouraging childbearing, offering subsidies to home-buying parents with two or three children.
But the biggest governmental action of all is spending public funds to acquire unsold commercial housing in the backlog for use as compensation for relocated households, social housing for low-income groups, housing for talent or temporary resettlement housing. Alternatively, these local authorities order state-owned enterprises to buy these commercial housing and use them as staff quarters or re-sell them to staff at subsidised prices.
It is reasonable and fair for buyers to demand, and for governments to ensure, through intervention, the timely delivery of presold homes. However, many other measures rolled out by local governments have obviously gone beyond the target of ensuring the delivery of presold homes and reached the "grey area" of bailing out the property market. As encouraging childbearing is also a national policy, there is nothing wrong with giving cash subsidies to two- or three-child families. However, when the subsidies are designated for buying homes, the policy essentially becomes a real estate bailout. The policy goal of spending public funds to buy properties for use as social housing or housing for talent is not clear either. These raise doubts about why the property market should be rescued.
Homebuying is not a must for quality living. One of the reform measures stated at the third plenary session of the Party's 20th Central Committee was reconfirming "the dual support for housing rentals and purchases" and the function of real estate as "only for living, not speculation". Now it seems that some local governments are refusing the reforms of the real estate market and local public finances in the name of ensuring the delivery of presold properties.
明報社評2024.09.02：保交房有必要救樓市不必 加快配套改革保政府財政
內地多間銀行陸續宣布降低房貸按揭利率，一些銀行給出的優惠已經低於3厘。官方採取多種措施促進房地產業復蘇，但政策目標含混不清，究竟政府想「救樓市」，抑或只是為了「保交房」，還是不論何種房地產，只要能增加政府的賣地收入與賣房稅收即可。
保交房是為了保障購房人的合法權益，合情合理，但救樓市是否符合三中全會有關「租購並舉」的改革方向，則可以商榷。地方政府財政要擺脫過分依賴房地產業稅費收入，不應戀棧「王謝堂前燕」，而是要加快其他改革措施步伐。
國務院5月中召開全國保交房會議，明確目標是今年年底前，在全國範圍要保交房396萬套。央行推出配套政策支持，包括提供更多資金用於房地產貸款，並放寬部分合資格人士的購房首付比例。各地方政府紛紛推出「因地制宜」的政策去落實執行，然而，一些土政策似乎有走樣變形之嫌。
觀乎各地方政府政策，普遍執行的是降利率和減稅（契稅、印花稅），相當多的地方有以舊換新補貼，即購買更大面積的新房可以享受現金補貼，並且要求開發商或者政府收購其原來的房產；也有將出租房排除在擁有房產數量之外，自住的房子可以繼續享受購房利率優惠；還有結合鼓勵生育政策給予生二胎或者三胎的父母購房補貼。
最大的政府行為，則是由政府動用公帑，收購積壓的商品房，作為拆遷戶補償、低收入人士保障性住房、人才房、周轉房用途，或者責令國企收購商品房作為員工宿舍或者以補貼價出售給員工。
買家要求保交房，政府協調保交房，都是合情合理。然而，很多地方政府出台的其他措施，顯然是超出保交房目標，進而觸及救樓市的「灰色地帶」。鼓勵生育政策也是國策，現金補貼第二胎、第三胎也無可厚非，但將補貼指定用於購房，變相成為救樓市政策。動用公帑去買房產，用於保障房或者人才房，政策目標不明確，可能會引人懷疑，為什麼要救樓市。
安居未必一定是要買房子，三中全會一個改革措施就是再次肯定「租房購房並舉」，房子「只住不炒」。現在看來，有些地方政府是藉保交房而拒絕房地產市場和地方政府財政改革。
■ Glossary 生字 /
bailout : an act of giving money to a company, a foreign country, etc. that has very serious financial problems
resuscitate : to make sb or sth start breathing again or become conscious again after they have almost died
ambiguous : having different meanings