While some drivers lament the inefficient use of cars as” status symbols ,” one scholar claimed that higher Department prices may also unintentionally result in increased vehicle usage. & nbsp,
Researchers from the National University of Singapore( NUS ) and NTU conducted a study in 2019 that revealed drivers who purchased cars when COEs were high tended to use their vehicles more frequently. & nbsp,
According to Distinguished Professor Ivan Png from the School of Business and Departments of Economics and Information Systems and Analytics at NUS, who was a participant in the study,” Our interpretation of the behavior is that( drivers ) felt that, having spent so much money, they ought to make full use of their cars.” & nbsp,
He stated TODAY that COEs are” a pretty crude way” of controlling pollution and congestion.
” Controlling usage is the correct way, controlling the number of vehicles is not the right way.”
Although the Electronic Road Pricing ( ERP ) system aims to regulate usage, Prof. Png said that it could be made better. He pointed out that although the government had intended to implement a satellite-based ERP system, it had been repeatedly postponed. & nbsp,
Due to the worsening worldwide shortage of computers, LTA had predicted in 2021 that the new ERP system may be delayed for at least one and a half years. & nbsp,
The MP, Mr. Lim, asserted that increasing the frequency of vehicle ownership is not always necessary in order to maximize the value of the COE.
In the end, LTA employs a variety of strategies to control traffic on the roads.
Vehicles also need to pay for their gasoline and driving, which is” still fairly cheap ,” in addition to the ERP system.
While most people believe that driving a car is the most efficient mode of transportation, LTA has taken steps to ensure that public transportation is still accessible and affordable, and it is urging more people to ride bikes or take public transit in order to lessen their carbon footprint. & nbsp,
” All of these policies will take time to take effect, so I believe we should permit them to have a greater mid – and long-term impact.”
People are eager to do their part to” saving the environment by not driving ,” he continued, even though some people may view their cars as a status symbol. & nbsp,
According to Mr. Lim, the stabilization measures put in place at the beginning of the year should cause COE charges to steadily decline over time.
As an MP, I may, however, ask LTA to evaluate the measures to control COE prices if they continue to be extremely high. & nbsp,
IMPROVEING SYSTEM’S PERFORMANCE
There hasn’t been a lack of recommendations from drivers and auto wholesalers on how to make the system better as COE prices have skyrocketed in recent months.
These include adding fees to those who purchase more than one vehicle and capping the number of private-hire engine fleets.
But given the report Department costs, how realistic are the proposals, some of which were put forth years ago and have since come to light?
First tip: Similar to the Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty for real estate, a new income should be imposed on those who purchase multiple vehicles.
This recommendation may be implemented, according to Associate Professor Raymond Ong of the NUS Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, but he questioned how it would affect COE prices. & nbsp,
With a tiered additional car fee for the( subsequent car purchase ), it would distinguish between people who can purchase the first car and those who own multiple cars.
He continued by saying that the number of quite owners in the market would determine how effective the plan would be. & nbsp,
It won’t significantly affect COE fees if this is the majority.
Ensure that each community has no more than one vehicle as a second suggestion.
This is not possible because, according to Assoc Prof Ong, the current vehicle ownership per family ratio is less than one, which means that on average, a household owns fewer cars.
According to him,” this will send the wrong message that one home may buy a car, which is against our car-lite policy.”
Suggestion # 3: COE rebates for specific groups that actually require a car, such as young families, families with the elderly, or people with disabilities ( PWDs )
According to Assoc Prof. Ong, putting such a plan into practice will be difficult because it would be difficult to distinguish between those who should receive the rebate and those not, as well as the actual rebate amount. & nbsp,
He continued by saying that rather than giving PWDs rebates, the original policy favors improving the public transportation system and shared flexibility network to assist young families. & nbsp,
This is partially due to the fact that, from a adoption standpoint, it is still unclear how many trips and how far they must come on average each week for families with young children, the elderly, and PWDs. & nbsp,
” We need more information to determine whether there is actually a demand to assess the viability of this method on an annual or annual basis.
Overall, according to Assoc Prof. Theseira of SUSS, suggestions & nbsp, # 1 to# 3 are ineffective because they depend on the buyer’s identity and are susceptible to abuse.
Cars, in contrast to real estate, can be moved, traded, and used by people who are not the authorized master, he said.
If suggestion # 3 is implemented, for example, a car buyer who wants to get the car for less money on the COE rate could just pay sane families with young kids to assist them in getting one with the help of the CoE discount.