Monday, June 03, 2019

BWorld 333, The Public Service Act and provincial tourism

* This is my column in BusinessWorld last May 29, 2019.


One of the oldest laws in the Philippines yet having a huge and restrictive impact on the modern economy is Commonwealth Act 146 or the Public Service Act (PSA), which was approved on November 7, 1936, or nearly 83 years ago.

That law lists five sectors as “public utilities,” and hence, foreign capital is restricted, if not prohibited. These are (a) transmission of electricity, (b) distribution of electricity, (c) water works and sewerage system, (d) telecommunications, and (e) transportation (land, sea, air).

Where there is restriction, there is limited or no competition and thus, consumers are penalized with the limited choices. The solution is to expand competition, and one proposed legislation is amending the PSA and removing for now sectors (d) and (e), telecommunications and transportation. These are contained in HB 5828 (passed on third reading since September 2017) and SB 1754 (still a Senate Committee Report).

Two relevant news here and I quote portions of those stories:

1. “Public Service Act Amendments to open economy to more investments, generate more jobs – Poe”
(Senate Press Release, February 15, 2018).

“Poe, chairperson of the Senate committee on public services, said the proposed amendments seek to address the confusion in the definition of a public utility and public services, which, for several decades, hampered economic growth. ‘Foreign entities would be allowed to come in and invest. The goal is to increase competition, provide better quality services and also to create jobs,’ Poe said.”

2. “Senate eyes approval of Public Services Act amendments before 17th Congress ends in June” (BusinessWorld, April 3, 2019)

“‘Increasing FDI and promoting national security are not conflicting goals. The country can have both as long as proper safeguards are observed’” she (Sen. Poe) said, “Foreign competition can give consumers more genuine alternatives to existing services.”

These are good announcements and there are many numbers to prove this. One is about domestic tourism and domestic airports. In the ASEAN, there are three big archipelagic countries, with their estimated number of islands — Indonesia with 18,100 islands, Philippines with 7,500, and Thailand with 1,400 islands.

More islands mean more shipping lines and seaports needed, or better yet, more airlines and more airports needed. Indonesia and Thailand have expanded their number of airports over the last 10 years and their domestic passengers have nearly tripled. The Philippines did not expand its domestic airports and domestic passengers have only doubled. Vietnam has consolidated its domestic airports but it has expanded the number of domestic and foreign airlines into its soil and domestic passengers have expanded more than four times (see table). 


To further promote the Philippines’ domestic and international tourism, and in the process further expand our GDP size, we need further airlines liberalization, further expansion of existing provincial airports, and further improvement of roads, seaports, energy and other physical infrastructures to serve the many resorts and hotels in many provinces and islands of the country.

There is only one week left in the current Congress that will have sessions until June 7, 2019. The Senate and then the bicameral committee should pass the PSA Amendment bills into law. This should be among the important laws that the Duterte administration can do for the consumers, passengers, visitors and investors.
-----------------

See also:  

Lion Rock 27, Conduct and HK is not a corporation

Two nice articles last year by Nick Sallnow-Smith, former Chairman of the Lion Rock Institute. I like them, reposting but slightly clipped.
----------------

2018-07-24 / Nick Sallnow-Smith

For the high summer months of July and August I want to offer a pair of articles. The first entitled as above, the second will ask the question “Is Hong Kong a Commune?” (Spoiler alert – the answer in both cases is “no”!)

Now before you answer testily “of course not” to the question I pose, let me offer some thoughts on why I believe many people discuss our city as if it were a corporation. The first step in the erroneous chain of reasoning is to treat Hong Kong as a single entity. It is commonplace to read of Hong Kong’s “lack of competitiveness”; or that Hong Kong is “too expensive”. Some businesses may not be competitive in their segment, some items may be too expensive. Yet others may be very competitive and some very cheap. Hong Kong is not a singularity. But the metaphor of the corporation goes beyond this. Think of the many times you have read comments about Hong Kong’s “workforce”. A company has a “workforce” whereby people are contracted to provide a specific service for a salary. Hong Kong does not employ us. We have entered into no contract with the state. Yet the Administration regularly wrings its metaphorical hands about how to get more housewives/the elderly into the “workforce”, as if the city has a contract to fill and does not have the labour to complete it. The demographic debate is couched in the same terms. “We” need to boost fertility so that the “workforce” does not age too rapidly.

Education policy is framed in the same way. Are our universities producing the right graduates for “Hong Kong’s” purposes? But what are those purposes? The unspoken assumption is that the city’s purposes are somehow unitary and reflect a consensus. This is an error. In a free society, each citizen can have purposes but the city cannot. If the Administration attempts to impose unitary purposes on the rest of us, this is tantamount to a totalitarian society. What each child wishes to study, what direction they wish to follow in life, whether at my age I wish to work or not, whether a mother wishes to take a paid job or not: these are all free choices (or should be). Their aggregate effect should be what characterises Hong Kong, not a top down imposed blueprint.

It grieves me when I see business chambers routinely pleading with Government to come up with a “vision” for the future, with a better “plan” for Hong Kong to make it “competitive”, to give it a “purpose”. Perhaps because in their own businesses these questions make complete sense, they are tempted to project onto public policy the same way of thinking. What they miss is that if a monolithic top down “vision” is imposed on the city, many businesses’ own visions will become much more difficult to achieve. If you are in the IT sector and fail to win a subsidy while you competitor does, for example….

The political consequence of this is that, rather than making their own decisions about their lives, many citizens spend their time and energy fighting over what the top down policy should be. How the Board of Directors is selected becomes a huge issue, as it should be in a true corporation. Questions of where the minimum wage should be set; how much the MPF deduction should be; whether bus fares should rise; whether Uber/AirB&B should be “permitted” , what should be taught in government schools and so on? Political division and dissension about any top down policies of this sort is inevitable.

In a real corporation, if you as shareholder do not like the direction taken by the appointed Board, you can sell your shares and invest elsewhere. In a city you cannot do so. You have no exit (unless you have money and a foreign passport).

The metaphor of a corporation for a city is not only wrong but dangerous. Instead of COHK (the Corporation of Hong Kong), let’s please think of ourselves as COHK (the Community of Hong Kong).
---------------

2018-06-26 / Nick Sallnow-Smith

You will have to be patient for a couple of paragraphs before I arrive at explaining the title for my thoughts this month. My route to it begins with a quick reprise of the difference between “natural law” and what I will term “code law”, for the purposes of this piece.

By natural law, I mean those restrictions which have arisen in virtually every human society, and without which a community could not survive in the longer term: prohibitions against murder, theft and fraud. At root, these rules are based on every free human being able to do with his own body and personal possessions what he feels is in his best interests, without interference from others. It is the root of freedom. Therefore the only restriction on you as a free citizen is not to coerce others. In the words of Leonard Reed: “anything peaceful”.

It would be a rare human being who would feel such natural laws were “unjust”. Indeed that is why they are called, and feel, “natural”. By contrast, many laws invented by legislators will regularly be regarded as “unjust” by some, yet not by others (take for example those laws here that make Uber illegal). Code law like this usually involves the state coercing at least some in the community (in my example, Uber drivers) to favour other groups. All taxes do this as well.

From a libertarian viewpoint, this is not acceptable and indeed not “just”. However, at least this type of law can be clearly defined (though it often is not) and therefore predictable. One can regret it but at least manage one’s life around it. This typically applies to all regulations as well as statutes (although in many sectors in Hong Kong interpreting the meaning of the multitude of regulations can involve turning to expert consultants to find out what you are permitted to do or not). They may be regrettable but are at least predictable. Our daily lives as citizens are constrained as to what we are “permitted to do” by our government but at least if we stay within those boundaries we can relax. Or at least we could; no longer I fear….

Life is made productive and enjoyable by making our own contributions, not by spending time and energy blaming others for any social outcomes that do not please us. My hope is that more of us might “conduct” ourselves by focussing on the freedoms of the former rather than on limitations of the latter.
------------

See also: 

Sunday, June 02, 2019

BWorld 332, The global taxpayers conference

* This is my article in BusinessWorld last May 27, 2019.


Many economists along with other social scientists and social philosophers, enjoy playing God, by which I mean laying out in detail their own private versions of the “good society” without being required to suggest ways and means of implementing their precepts or even defend these precepts with democratic political processes.
— James Buchanan

SYDNEY — That quote I borrowed from one of the slides of Prof. Sinclair Davidson of RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia. He was among the many speakers in the recently concluded 7th ALS Friedman Conference and 17th World Taxpayers Association (WTA) Conference on May 23 to 26 in this city.

That big event, with 500+ participants and speakers from many countries across the world, was jointly sponsored by the Australian Libertarian Society (ALS), Australian Taxpayers Alliance (ATA), Tax & Super Australia, and WTA. The Americans for Tax Reforms (ATR) was among the major sponsors.

Sinclair is a quantitative, facts-based researcher so I attended his two panel lectures, one on “Money and Macro” where he showed the above quote, and one on “Plain Packaging & Tobacco Harm Reduction.” He observed that with the plain packaging policy in force in Australia since December 2012, “premium pricing models were undermined, smokers trade down on branding, effectively smoking cheaper, a failure to meet its stated objectives.”

Many participants were leaders of national taxpayers groups, like the Canadian Taxpayers Association headed by departing WTA Chairman Troy Lanigan, UK’s Taxpayers Alliance headed by incoming WTA Chairman John O’Connell, HK’s Momentum 107, India Taxpayers, Korea Taxpayers Association, Taxpayers Association from Germany, Sweden, Finland, and many more.

I got curious about the tax rates for personal and corporate income, and sales tax — the major pocket-boring policies of many governments — so I searched the numbers, which are in the table. 

European countries are notorious for having very high rates in all three taxes. Australia has high Personal income tax (PIT) and Corporate income tax (CIT) but modest Value Added tax (VAT).

In Asia, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan’s high PIT and CIT may be understandable because of their high level of development and industrialization. But India, Indonesia, and Philippines have high PIT and CIT yet they remain less developed.

Several countries and jurisdictions do not impose these taxes:

• Zero both PIT and CIT: Bahamas, Bahrain, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, United Arab Emirates

• Zero PIT: Brunei, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia

• Zero CIT:, Isle of Man, Maldives, Vanuatu

• Zero VAT or Gross sales tax (GST): HK, Oman, USA

ALS founder and President John Humphreys, and ATA Executive Director Tim Andrews, are very explicit about their organizations’ goals — less government regulations, taxes, size, and waste.

I met Joh for the first time at a Heartland Institute’s climate conference in Chicago in 2010, Tim in a WTA conference in Bangkok in 2017. Both are young, cool, dynamic, and frank. Aside from leading their dynamic organizations, they successfully put up that fantastic conference and really fun-filled networking cocktails, gala dinner, and harbor cruise for three nights.

The torch of the free market, less government movement is alive and fiery in Australia and other parts of the world. There is more hope for a world of more individual freedom, more personal responsibility, and less state nannyism.
-----------------

See also:  

Energy 125, Falling world oil prices

Last year, June 02, 2018, I posted this in fb:

Rising US oil output, declining world oil prices despite OPEC-Russia production cut, Venezuela socialist flop and oil production cut. Do we hear people saying "thank you US/Trump for your pro-fossil fuels policy"? :-)


So WTI oil prices, end-May 2018 of $65.8 per barrel to end-May 2019 of only $56.6 (and down to $53.5 in June 01). US oil production, end-May 2018 of 10.8 million barrels per day (mbpd) to end-May 2019 of 12.3 mbpd. 

OPEC-Russia collusion to have high world oil prices via joint oil output cut vs Trump/US plan to have lower world oil prices via higher US oil output. And Trump/US wins.

Projections of US oil production, average for: 2019, 12.45 mbpd;  2020, 13.38 mbpd. Story here,
EIA raises forecast for 2019, 2020 U.S. crude output growth
May 8, 2019

Russia and Putin are unhappy/angry with low oil-gas prices (oil-gas-coal exports constitute about 48% of Russia total exports) while Trump is happy. That is why the 'Trump-is-Putin-puppet' aka 'Trump-Russia collusion' is a lousy-idiotic proposition at the onset.

We should have cheap energy. More energy production and competition is good. Energy collusion and price cut is bad. And by extension, high energy taxes, carbon taxes, other watermelon taxes and subsidies are wrong.
----------------

See also:

Friday, May 31, 2019

BWorld 331, How governments expand

* This is my article in BusinessWorld last May 24, 2019.


SYDNEY — This will be one of the topics at the 7th Australian Libertarian Society (ALS) Friedman Liberty Conference + World Taxpayers Association (WTA) Conference from May 23-26 in this city. The event is mainly sponsored by the Australia Taxpayers Alliance and co-sponsored by other free market institutes like the Property Rights Alliance (PRA, USA).

On Days 3 and 4, May 25-26, there will be four simultaneous panel discussions to accommodate many topics and speakers from many countries. I will be one of the four speakers in the panel on “Growth of Government” on Day 3 and I want to explore sub-topics like (1) Are all governments expanding endlessly? (2) If Yes, how fast and if No, since when? And (3) Are government debts rising endlessly?

To help me answer these and related questions, I checked some data from the IMF’s World Economic Outlook (WEO) database. The numbers show that for question #1, the answer is No. Of the 19 countries selected, those with (a) rising government spending as share of GDP are France, UK, Australia, US. In Asia, the socialist economies of China and Vietnam, India, and S. Korea. Those with (b) declining percentages are Germany, Canada, New Zealand; in Asia are Japan, Thailand, Taiwan and Singapore. The rest have fluctuating percentages, like the Philippines.

With this mixed result, I checked another set of numbers, government debt as share of GDP. The numbers here refer only to actual debt and do not include contingent debt and liabilities. With a few exceptions — like Germany, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Philippines and Thailand — all other governments have rising public debts. Meaning their governments keep expanding somehow.

The outstanding numbers here are those of Hong Kong with near-zero debt, and Indonesia which drastically cut their debt by one third in the last decade. The Philippines’ big decline in debt/GDP ratio was registered in the previous administration. By 2017 and 2018, the decline has stopped as the Duterte administration was borrowing big time to finance lots of freebies and expanded welfare programs like free tuition in all state universities, free irrigation, free PhilHealth for many sectors and expanded conditional cash transfer (CCT).

Governments expand by creating various types of alarmism and the public is convinced that more government, more taxes are the answer. Like ‘oil crisis’, ‘food crisis’, ‘climate crisis’, ‘inequality crisis’ — so more government interventions like oil subsidy, food subsidy, expanding climate bureaucracies and junkets, or oil tax hikes to fund new welfarism with no timetable (TRAIN law in the Philippines).

It is a slippery slope, one welfarism leads to another; one tax hike leads to another; one new bureaucracy created leads to another.

Most if not all of those ‘crisis’ and alarmism are false and government-invented. More facts-based research and assertion of more individual liberty, more personal and civil society responsibility, will help counter this trend. 
-----------------

See also:  

ALS-ATA-WTA Sydney Conference, some photos

Some pictures here during the ALS-ATA-WTA Conference in Sydney last week, May 23-26, at UTS.
General membership meeting of the World Taxpayers Association (WTA), day 1.



International coalition meeting, headed by the Americans for Tax Reforms (ATR), Grover Norquist.


Welcome reception cocktails, at Dockside Darling Harbour. From left: me, Michiel, Grover, Dan Mitchiel, and the bar guy.


Gala dinner, day 2. Among the huuuge international free market gala dinner I have attended.


Tim Andrews of Australian Taxpayers Alliance (ATA) delivering a fiery, inspiring and fantastic speech on more freedom, more liberty, less government, less coercion, less taxes.


With Tim Wilson, then Lorenzo Montanari of ATR, Barbara Kolm of Hayek Institute in Austria.


More photos later...

Friday, May 24, 2019

BWorld 330, Energy and elections: The Philippines and Australia

* My column in BusinessWorld last Wednesday, May 22, 2019.


Sydney – The Philippines held its mid-terms elections last May 13, and “man-made” climate change, “more renewables” were marginal if not non-issues altogether for many of the national and local candidates. The energy issue was whether there would be any blackout because of the series of yellow and red alerts (insufficient power supply and reserves) many weeks before Election Day.

On May 18, Australia also held its federal elections, and for the Labor Party, among their big issues were climate alarmism, reducing carbon emission by 45% by 2030, and closing the Adani mine, with various surveys showing they would win. The Liberal Party campaigned for energy realism, and cheaper and stable electricity for a stronger economy. They won and PM Scott Morrison is reelected.

PM Morrison once brandished a lump of coal in parliament, saying, “This is coal – don’t be afraid!” True. There is nothing scary about coal but there is something to thank for it – because among the world’s biggest and industrialized economies are heavy coal users. The Philippines, having more coal plants recently and demonized by many anti-coal activists and climate alarmists, is actually a “midget” or small-time coal player in the world, even in Asia (see table). 



Two recent reports in BusinessWorld show that the problem of power inadequacy continues and I quote portion of the reports:

1. ERC reviewing norms for allowable levels of power plant outages (May 13):

“’Those that exceeded the outage allowance under the contract should not be charged on consumers, but on the generating company that failed to deliver.’ At present, the obligation to provide replacement power depends on the provisions of the PSA between a distribution utility and a generation company.”

2. DoE may limit power contracts to 70% of plant capacity (May 16):

“’We have to encourage the plants to be well-maintained…. a 70% cap of their contracting with distribution utilities so that they can have more power available for replacement power, for power available for ancillary services and more power available in the spot market,’ said Energy Undersecretary Felix William B. Fuentebella”

Both reports 1 and 2 would tend to restrict leeway for existing gencos and power plants when the bigger issue is how to have more power capacity, more gigawatts of new, stable electricity to be added into the system, something like 1.5 GW a year or more. When there is more power available, some DUs may contract just half of their needs and get the other half from the wholesale electricity spot market (WESM), even without new DOE or ERC regulation.

Meanwhile, I am here in Sydney to attend two big events, the ALS Friedman Liberty Conference by the Australia Taxpayers Alliance, and the biennial World Taxpayers Association (WTA) conference, May 23 to 26, 2019. Energy security and more power competition is among the topics to be discussed in some panels.
--------------------

See also:  

Wednesday, May 22, 2019

The 7th ALS Friedman Liberty and WTA Conferences

Tomorrow, the 7th Australian Libertarian Society (ALS) Friedman Liberty Conference + World Taxpayers Association (WTA) Conference will start. Mainly sponsored by the Australia Taxpayers Alliance, headed by Tim Andrews. Very dynamic guy and team. Here's the program, from http://www.alsfc.com.au/program.



Friday 24th of May

Welcome
Keynote - "Selling the Centre-Right" with Ron Nehring
Keynote Panel - "Increasing Competition Between Governments" with Dan Mitchell, Benjamin Gussen & Tamara Winter
MORNING TEA

11:20     Breakout Session   

How to make a difference (activism)

Andrew Meleta
Lyall Swim
Gerard Benedet
Alex Cordell
Environment & Outdoors

Marc Hendrickx
Tim Quilty
Bridgette Poulton
Christopher Field
    
LUNCH
13:30     Breakout Session
Tools for Tax Reform

Tax Foundation's Daniel Bunn,
Followed by Case Studies From Around The World
IPA Podcast: "Looking Forward: What does freedom look like in 2050"

John Roskam
Chris Berg
Scott Hardgraves
Renee Gorman

14:40     Labour markets, unions & work

Kurt Wallace, Andrew Bragg,
Kyle Kutasi, Roger Douglas

AFTERNOON TEA
Keynote with Steve Baxter
Keynote with Matt Barrie
Closing Remarks with Tim Andrews & John Humphreys
CLOSE
V.I.P. Drinks with Alex Hawke - L'Aqua, Cockle Bay Wharf (1300 117 118) | sponsored by the Tax Foundation
19:00     GALA DINNER - Dockside Function Centre, Cockle Bay Wharf (Wheat Rd)  | sponsored by Tax & Super Australia

Saturday 25th of May

9:00        WELCOME
9:10        Joint Keynote: "Love, Liberty & Happiness" with Matt & Terry Kibbe
10:00     Keynote Panel: "Leaving the Left" with Bindi Cole Chocka, Miriam Isa & Vanessa de Largie
11:00     MORNING TEA
11:20     Breakout Session
Fundraising

Terry Kibbe
Al Canata
Ron Nehring
Growth of Government

Nonoy Oplas
David Limbrick
Dan Wild
Tamara Winter
Western Civilisation

Daisy Cousens
John Roskam
Satya Marar
Peter Phelps
Tax Success Around the World

Gia Jandieri
Chris Butler
Barbara Kolm
Jordan Williams

LUNCH
13:30     Breakout Session
Plain Packaging &
Tobacco Harm Reduction

Lorenzo Montanari
Colin Mendelsohn
Sinclair Davidson
Guy Bentley
Future of the
LIberal Party

Tim Wilson
Amanda Stoker
Chris Berg
T.B.C.
More than
Marijuana

Prash Puspanathan
Avens O'Brien
Ash Blackwell
Gabe Buckle
State
Taxes

Rob Carling
Mark Frost
Scott Farlow
Duncan Spender

14:40     Breakout Session
Storytelling / Videos

Miriam Isa
Troy Lanigan
Ben Whimpey
Matt Kibbe
Globalism

Marko Horg
John O'Connell
Ross Marchand
Monica Wilkie
Free Speech

Amanda Stoker
Chris Berg
Daniel Meyerowitz-Katz
Scott Hennig
Money & Macro

Richard Holden
Tony Makin
Sinclair Davidson

AFTERNOON TEA
Keynote with John Fund
Keynote with Grover Norquist
Group Photo and Closing Remarks with Tim Andrews & John Humphreys
18:00     Sydney Harbour Cruise - "Bella Vista" departing from Casino Wharf | sponsored by Kennards Self Storage

Sunday 26th of May

Keynote with Roger Douglas
Keynote with Sam Crosby
Keynote Panel: "Anti-Fragile" with Tanveer Ahmed, Joanna Crook-Barr & Anthony Dillon
MORNING TEA

11:50     Breakout Session
Regulating
the Internet

Katie McAullife
Paul Shetler
Gideon Rozner
Ben Guerin
Living with the
Panda & the Dragon

Sue Windybank
Dan Ryan
Andrew Pickford
Feng Chongyi
Media and
Fake News

Kerry Wakefield
James Morrow
Luke Malpass
John Fund
Energy
& Climate

Andrew Reynolds
Staffan Wennberg
Jo Nova
Nick Minchin

LUNCH
14:00     Breakout Session
Media Training
Workshop

Beverly Halberg
Seouled Out:
Preserving South Korea’s Freedom

Dan Schneider
Andrew Crilly
Agorism:
Life Without Politics

Avens O'Brien
Tomas Forgac
David Mullan
Les Hughes
Tax and Trade

Phillip Thompson
Keith Kendall
Michael Potter
Grover Norquist

15:10     Breakout Session
Using Social
Media Effectively

Ron Nehring
Scott Hennig
Ben Guerin
Avens O'Brien
Liberty Around
the World

Vale Sloane
Andreas Guevara
Rainer Heufers
Maryan Zablotskyy
Rise of the
Regressive Left

Jeremy Sammut
Renee Gorman
Sydney Watson
T.B.C.
Dealing
with Tax

Dan Mitchell
Ken Phillips
Pete Sepp
Christopher Lingle

AFTERNOON TEA
Keynote with Jim Lark
Closing Remarks with Tim Andrews & John Humphreys
CLOSE
18:30     MOVIE: "The Pursuit"