Batam tax, misguided policy
Batam tax, misguided policy
Your editorial on the subject of applying value added taxes
and import duties in Batam (The Jakarta Post, April 20, 2000) was
timely but misguided.
The issue is creating a serious rift between Jakarta
authorities and the residents of Batam, even including many Batam
based tax and customs officials.
Your assertion that the 1978 law that established Batam as a
free trade zone was a "mistake" is wrong. Batam's competitive
edge over neighboring free trade zones (FTZ), such as Penang and
Langkawi, occurs precisely because Batam is totally free to
trade, both within the island and overseas.
This system minimizes encumbrances involved when shipping
materials into and within Batam. Other places that compete with
Batam are "Bonded Zones" (BZ), which use a system of bonded
warehouses to transship goods between supplier, factory and
customer. Bonded warehouses cost more to operate, suffer heavy
material handling costs and serious delays involved with custom
approvals. Batam's present system is easy and attractive to
foreign investors, proven by the hundreds of foreign companies
that have set up operations here in the past 15 years. The FTZ
system readily lends itself to modern "just in time"
manufacturing processes.
Jakarta's authorities fail to recognize that the types of
factories operating in Batam are highly mobile and highly
sensitive to factors which delay goods shipments or increase
costs. Under Batam's unique FTZ system, greedy customs and tax
officials had little opportunity to hinder the flow of goods for
their own personal gain.
You are correct in saying that the scariest part of the new
policy is the measure to require all businesses to pay VAT up
front. A great majority of the island's manufacturing industry,
like the tax itself, is in the business of adding value. Batam's
factories take partly finished goods from other factories, add
value to those goods, then send the goods to yet another factory.
The goods themselves are often not the property of the
factory; they are the property of a third party. The factory is
merely a contractor to perform certain work on the customer's
goods. As the factory never bought the goods and therefore never
sold those goods, VAT should not apply to the goods themselves,
only to the value added by the factory.
The finance minister argues that it is not fair that the
residents of Batam (with an average US$3,000/year per capita GNP)
should not pay tax when the rest of Indonesia ($700/year GNP)
does. The good minister should come to Batam and personally
explain his ideas to the many unskilled workers who earn Rp
8,000/day. Batam is already the most expensive place in
Indonesia, where a plate of rice in the most humble roadside food
stall costs Rp 4,000. These new taxes will hit the little people
hardest.
Many have overlooked just how quickly Batam rose from an
unknown backwater to become Indonesia's export powerhouse.
Warnings by local citizens that Batam's fall could be just as
fast as its rise, are not an empty threat. Foreign investors,
particularly the ones in the electronic sector, are highly
mobile. Many of the factories in the highly successful Batamindo
Industrial Estate are in their second or third country. In this
competitive world, a few percent difference in operating margins
is enough to prompt then to move.
Ironically, the IMF is now sending signals that imposition of
import duties and taxes in Batam is no longer one of their
priorities. So the wrangle now appears to be between the minister
of finance and the people of Batam.
The people of Batam feel that they are facing an economic
disaster. A single factory layoff could result in 10,000 jobless
people. Almost one hundred companies are contemplating moving. A
blockade of the local tax office since the beginning of April has
rendered it unable to collect taxes of any kind. This will
probably continue until Jakarta changes its mind, as the people
of Batam have nothing to gain and everything to lose by this
misguided policy.
EVAN W. JONES
Nagoya, Batam