Before, passports cost $60 for 10 years, now it’s $70 for 5 years. It’s more than 100 per cent increase.
Ng Beng Choo, Straits Times forum.
As with most other public services, the passport fee is determined based on a cost-recovery model. The cost of producing a passport cannot simply be linked to frequency or duration of use.
The Immigrations and Checkpoint Authority, in reply to Mrs Ng.
The model suggests that the more they spend they more they collect. Is there any incentive to keep the cost down. Wonder if the cost recovery includes 8-month bonus.
Public services are based on cost recovery model
Then why the heck do we have to pay so much taxes?
Will expensive passports become part of the barrier to discourage poor people to expand their horizon?
the cost and short tenure of a new passport is annoying, but i think it’s justifiable. the increase in cost is likely due to the new biometric features, and the short tenure is probably a regulatory change imposed to cope with ever more onerous security requirements.
passport should be cheaper.
saf reply 2 times to family of dead doctor. what about david case.
Is our HDB properties price based on cost recovery model? Why is it that some gov bodies price their goods and services based on cost recovery , and others benchmarked to market? Are they cherry picking? Is this a country or a business?
Why is our Minister’s sacrifices priced based on benchmark to private sectors, but the sacrifices of our NSmen not?
Why?
Oh… Singapore citizens, you all are so lucky. We have to pay $300 for 3 years for passport extension and another $300 for new passport if the passport does not have extra page for stamp. In addition, even we pay $600 full amount we are not entitle to extend our passport if we don’t pay income tax to Myanmar embassy in Singapore. Our income tax range is $40 to $150 per month according to our residential status in Singapore. One of my friends is paying $150 per month to Myanmar embassy in Singapore. He has been in Singapore 13 years already. So you calculate, how much he paid to Myanmar embassy in Singapore.
I am very very proud. I am paying income tax to Myanmar and Singapore. Even there is double tax avoidment agreement between Singapore and Myanmar.
Please mercy us Buddha…
“The cost of producing a passport cannot simply be linked to frequency or duration of use.”
What a nice reply…somehow the feeling its gives me is the same as when they say that increase in public transport fares has no link to oil…
Ng Beng Choo can always stay in Singapore.
I like the ICA reply ….I am sure when they tendered for the production of the passports, they never tell the supplier that they can do a cost recovery model….
How much does our neighbours pay for the same biometric-able passports. (tsk tsk)
Cost recovery pre-supposes a period to wrie-off investment cost. The shorter the period the higher the rate. So is the Immigration Dept. set a short period to recover faster, shorter than the economic life of the new system? What’s the basis. On a prorated basis, the new charge represents 2.33 times the old rate. Sounds like profiteering to me
Of coz all recovery costs must be increased ! In fact, I suggest increase in taxation too !
Otherwise how else do you think we can afford to pay the higher mortals the MILLION DOLLARS salaries despite the downturn ?!
6) Roy,
“Why is our Minister’s sacrifices priced based on benchmark to private sectors, but the sacrifices of our NSmen not?”
Good one.
My father also sacrifices his pride to work as a janitor cleaning the toilets of the coporate CEOs, and why was his salary not benchmarked to these pte sectors CEOs who dirtied the toilets he cleaned ?
Interesting gahmen double forked strategy :
1. Cost Centers : everything is based on “cost-based recovery model”.
2. Profit Centers : privatise them. Profits will go to shareholders, of which Temasek Holdings ‘happens’ to be majority shareholder. Since TH claims to be a non-gahment entity, the profits transferred there are not accountable to the public. So profits (from profitable public utilities like transport, powerstations, telecoms and land/factory space rent, etc) ingeniously become off budget and transferred into an obscure entity.
With such an arrangement, the real income would be understated, and a ‘balanced budget’ is reported every year in parliament. So there is little room for the citizens to ask for subsidies on cost centers.
It makes one wonder what is the true surplus that Sg runs every year and whether that surplus can be used to reduce the cost burden on other gahmen cost centers so that citizens are not ‘taxed’ unduly.
Roy,
“Why is our Minister’s sacrifices priced based on benchmark to private sectors, but the sacrifices of our NSmen not?”
because, In theory, Ministers also served NS, at which time, their NS pay was also not linked to private sectors.
The main reason for having biometric passports is to keep Singapore’s visa free status for travel to U.S. But how many of us actually travel to the U.S?
So are we paying more for our passports in order to facilitate our elites travel to the U.S?
Actually its only $1.16 per month. Should know that biometric passports are not cheap as the old type.
It is a US requirement to push for all linked countries to change to biometric, not a choice for us.
Don’t ask a barber whether you need haircut. Similarly don’t ask a monopoly like ICA to cut passport fees
“As with most other public services, the passport fee is determined based on a cost-recovery model.”
So is this simple-to-understand concept also extended to other public services like HDB housing (pure cost recovery), transportation, utilities, etc, strictly no profit element. anyone here to enlighten please.
So ICA just confirmed that we have a mega service provider, not a true government.
No wonder got TV license fee, ERP, water-borne fee, etc.
“So ICA just confirmed that we have a mega service provider, not a true government.”
One can have layers, layers and layers of clothes covering himself. After peeling off the layers of clothing, you may well finally see a midget inside.
Still afforadable mah…sigh
If length of time is not a factor, as the ICA spokesperson claim, then why shorten the validity period?
Should the increase in cost not have offset the cost of production of a single passport?
it is a pay and pay syndrom in this unique country. just too expensive!!!!!!
If ICA already recovered the cost of the passport, why can’t ICA extend the passport validity to 10 years.
It makes no difference to ICA whether the passport is valid for 5 or 10 years because the cost has been recovered. Unless ICA is not telling the truth and is making money from the passport. Can MPs asked this question (What is the actual cost of passport?) in parliment.
But it makes a big difference to consumers. We have to pay another $70 or more to account for inflation, to apply for a new passport after 5 years.
Every 5 years, we Singaporeans/PR pay 3 million Singaporeans/PR x $70 per passport (not inclusive of photos) $210 million for passports.
they always have some reasons to increase this and that. look, the thing is: no one is gonna believe a single bloody word.
If PAP government wants to get more money, they should increase personal income tax to 40% for those earning $500,000 annually. Instead the S’pore tax system favours the very rich. GST keeps rising to 7%, and perhaps higher when economy improve.
The reason personal income tax is low is that the ministers take home at least $2 million annually including bonus.
Is there a need for TV licence when programs are so bad and of poor quality? No of course not. The most ridiculous thing is having to pay for car radio licence.
This is the result of 50% walkovers, 66% mandate and 98% seats at every election.
i think if not rich dnt travel stay in singapore to be slave can liao
poor get poorer like me
rich get richer like them
they change it to biometric because they say it is more secure. So shouldn’t the validity be longer since it is more secure and only the holder can use it?
Sometimes i find the illogical reasoning of our elites is so out of touch with the real world.
14) woodpecker
Your points on cost center and profit center very refreshing. Now I really know I have been ripped off…
My Identity card is cracked and they wanted to charge me $60 to get a new one even though it is cracked due to wear and tear for so many decades. Does it cost $60 to replace a new card? Never mind, if they have no pride to issue a new IC at cost, then I have no pride to have a new Identity card.
I quote part of Chia Hui Keng (Ms), Head, Public & Internal Communications Branch, Corporate Communications Division, Immigration & Checkpoints Authority’s letter:
“The cost, and hence the fee, for a biometric passport is higher than that of a non-biometric passport, as it comes with added features to ensure its integrity and sturdiness. The shorter validity period for the biometric passport allows for new technologies to be incorporated more rapidly, thus deterring passport forgery and abuse.
In this way, we can ensure that the passports held by Singaporeans are protected by up-to-date security features. ”
IMHO, we can still achieve all the requirements of a shorter validity of 5 years and keep the passport up-to-date by extending the validity a further 5 years without charge.
There is no need to issue a new passport if there are empty pages left and so save on the cost of issuing a new passport.
Has this been considered and if so what the reason for not taking this approach?
Anyone got lobang to get to australia?
Rata there are many lobang to get to UK though. I used that to get myself here. There are all legal but you need some cash. If interested let me know by your return blog.
George.
All pricings of government departments are now based on affordability of Singaporeans, not actual cost. Just like the price of HDB flat is based on affordability, the price of passports too. If they go overboard in pricing then they will lose too many votes for a small further increase in passport price. Similarly the price of Ministers’s salaries are based on affordability, which in turn will be translated into votes they can afford to lose. They know their current salary is their optimum level beyond which they will begin to lose too much votes for a small further increase in their salary. At their present salary based on public affordability they know they are still comfortable to win most of the parliamentary seats in the next GE, because people can still afford it and would not react too negatively. Sometimes I wish we have not progressed to first world because in the old days we were able to get ministers who risked their lives to serve the country without asking for too much for themselves. Life for us was so much less stressful and our happiness index was much higher. We enjoyed free medical services, low bus fares, low water and electricity rates, low road tax, no ERP, no GST, no foreigners to snatch our jobs, and so on.
.