The subsidy retargeting paper that has split the economic council
Two competing models for targeted fuel assistance are circulating inside the council, and they imply very different fiscal outcomes.
A working paper prepared for the national economic council has become the focus of an unusually open disagreement between two blocs of officials.
The paper sets out two routes to targeted fuel assistance. The first is income-tested, drawing on consolidated tax and welfare records. The second is vehicle-based, keying entitlement to engine capacity and registration class.
The income-tested route promises tighter targeting and larger savings. It also requires data-sharing arrangements between agencies that do not currently exist, and a legal basis that has not been drafted.
The vehicle-based route can be implemented on existing registries within a single fiscal year. It is also blunter: officials estimate a materially higher leakage rate to households that do not need support.
The fiscal gap between the two is not marginal. Modelling attached to the paper puts the difference in annual outlay in the billions of ringgit, before administrative cost.
What has divided the council is less the arithmetic than the sequencing. One bloc argues for the implementable option now and refinement later. The other argues that a blunt scheme, once launched, is politically impossible to tighten.
Neither position has prevailed. The paper has been returned for further work, which in the language of the council means the decision has been deferred rather than resolved.
Filed under
