<轉載自2011年10月14日 明報 社評>
特首曾蔭權在最後一份施政報告，以較多篇幅具體地闡述土地房屋政策，在臨別秋波之際，曾蔭權才認真體待土地房屋問題，包括提出新居屋計劃和優化置安心計劃，對應夾心階層和中產人士置業難問題，以紓解怨氣。不過，這兩項計劃異乎昔日的居屋計劃，原則上扭曲了資助有需要人士置產安居的原旨，變相資助一些人賺錢，公平性會引起爭議；新居屋設定「退市」機制，客觀效果更有托市之嫌，扭曲了「居者有其屋」協助市民置業安居的宗旨。這兩項計劃對房地產市場和社會有什麼影響，值得關注。
新居屋存廢由樓價決定與原居屋性質完全不同
源自1978 年的居屋計劃，目的為收入超過申請公屋入息上限，但不足以購買私人樓宇的市民，提供自置居所選擇，亦可讓收入較高的公屋居民加快騰出公屋單位，供有需要人士居住。原居屋除了協助有需要人士置業，當時港英政府還有一個盤算，就是讓更多市民擁有自置居所，以增加歸屬感，從而構成一股龐大穩定力量。事實上，30 多年來，原居屋計劃行之有效，安頓了超過30 萬個家庭，起到穩定社會的功能。另外，房委會經營居屋所獲收益，也大大減輕公屋對公共財政所構成壓力。
曾蔭權施政報告所說新居屋計劃，卻沒有上述功能。他說，「新居屋計劃的目的，是當私人住宅物業市場因為供求問題，以及內外的宏觀經濟因素，包括利率環境以及其他地區的量化寬鬆措施，令本地樓市出現失衡時，提供緩衝」，按曾蔭權這個說法，新居屋只是一時一地的產物，其出現或暫時隱沒，由經濟周期、更具體地說由樓價決定。新居屋具體操作尚待房委會釐定，不過，已經有一個基本準則，就是合資格申請者（每月收入3 萬元以下）供樓負擔比率，若低於收入的40％，政府就會停售或停建新居屋。
施政報告把新居屋實用面積400 至500 平方呎單位售價，初步估算為150 萬至200 萬元，即是平均呎價約4000 元，目前新界400 至700 平方呎住宅呎價平均呎價約5300 元，若樓價下跌約25%，政府就可以停建停售新居屋。由此看來，新居屋計劃與樓市、樓價掛鈎，其角色和功能與原本居屋計劃有根本不同。初步所見，新居屋計劃只為消解月入2 萬至3 萬元夾心階層人士的怨氣，而非以解決住屋需求、厚植社會穩定力量為宗旨。所以，新居屋計劃只有居屋之名，而無原居屋之實。
新居屋升值全歸業主增加套現買私樓誘因
新居屋補價安排，也為下屆政府製造難題。曾蔭權表示，新居屋業主在購入單位5 年後賣樓，以購入單位時的資助額計算補價，不會跟隨物業市場升值而調整，也就是說，升值收益全歸業主所有。如此賣大包，新居屋業主當然高興，但是30 萬原居屋業主卻未能享用這種安排，形成政府大細超，對於下屆政府這是一個大難題，若處理不善，會製造極大社會矛盾。
過去，曾蔭權政府抗拒復建居屋，其中所持理由是政府不應該協助市民投資，但是，現在宣布的新居屋升值紅利卻全歸業主；另外，置安心計劃為吸引市民，單位開售時所訂價格，就是「封頂價」，合資格人士在規定期間內購買，無論單位升值多少，都可以「封頂價」購得，若「先租後買」，樓價下跌，合資格人士當然不會購買，所以，若決定購入，必定即時賺錢。這兩項賣大包，與政府原來立場自相矛盾，在社會上也會引起公平與否的討論。
政府以公共資源資助有需要人士置業安居，例如原居屋計劃，爭議不大，很多人都認為此乃政府應有之義；但是，關於新居屋補價和置安心單位售價封頂，變相資助合資格人士買樓賺錢，相信大多數人都不以為然，對此會有較強烈反彈。
過去兩三年，社會對復建居屋訴求強烈，也形成廣大共識，但是曾蔭權政府一直抗拒，在還有不到9 個月任期，曾蔭權卻推出「曾版居屋」，其實質與社會要求復建的、熟悉的居屋，卻是兩回事，社會共識與曾版居屋為何出現如此巨大落差，難以理解。不過，新居屋補價和置安心封頂價安排，箇中隱約有一條理路，就是提供極大誘因，鼓勵業主賣樓套現賺錢，然後投入私人住宅市場。
政府停建停售新居屋，以兩條線為準則，即合資格申請者供樓負擔比率在40%或以下，或是新界樓價跌至呎價4000 元，所以，這兩條線被解讀為政府對樓市的托價線，高於這兩條線，建售新居屋，低於者，則停建停售。昨日股市地產股顯著做好，很能說明市場對曾版居屋的反應。
關於原居屋計劃，有一個情况值得注意，就是歷來房委會所推售居屋，即使在2002 年經濟最低迷時，仍然有1.4 倍認購率，2007 年房委會兩次推售居屋剩餘單位，認購倍數即高達3.9 和4.4。認購居屋從未出現過不足額情况，顯示市民對居屋
需求並非一時一地，而是長期存在，不受經濟周期影響，只是認購人數多少而已。
曾蔭權改變原居屋性質，以升值盡歸業主為誘因，鼓動業主賣樓套現再買樓（甚或炒樓），如此新居屋和優化置安心計劃，對香港社會是好是壞，值得深入探討。我們認為，30 多年來行之有效、大家熟悉的原居屋計劃，對香港社會有很大貢獻，曾蔭權不復建原居屋，興建諸多疑竇的新居屋，使人費解。
New HOS
【明報專訊】MUCH of Chief Executive Donald Tsang's last policy address is devoted to land and housing policies. Only when he is about to depart has he seriously looked at the issue. He has proposed to introduce a new Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) and enhance the My Home Purchase Plan (MHPP).
His last policy address says, "The new HOS will serve as a buffer when the private residential property market is in disequilibrium due to unbalanced demand and supply, as well as internal and external macroeconomic factors such as low interest rates and quantitative easing measures taken by other economies." It follows that the new HOS will be ephemeral. The availability of new HOS flats will depend on the business cycle, or rather, on property prices. The specifics of the new HOS have yet to be devised by the Housing Authority. However, it is quite clear that there will be a basic criterion. The government will stop selling or building new HOS flats if the monthly mortgage repayment of an eligible family (whose monthly household income does not exceed $30,000) does not exceed 40% of its monthly household income.
Under the new HOS, flats with a saleable floor area between 400 square feet and 500 square feet will be offered at between $1.5 million and $2 million each, or on average at about $4,000 a square foot. New Territories residential properties between 400 square feet and 700 square feet now go for about $5,300 a square foot. If their prices drop 25%, the government will stop selling new HOS flats. The availability of new HOS flats will depend on property prices. Clearly, the new scheme is essentially different from the old one. It is apparently aimed at pacifying sandwich-class citizens (who each make between $20,000 and $30,000 a month) rather than meeting housing demand or increasing social stability.
The way of determining the premium a new HOS flat owner will have to pay when he sells his unit may cause the next administration difficulty. Donald Tsang said, "The Housing Authority may take the subsidised portion of a unit's purchase price as a loan to the owner, the amount of which will not be adjusted even if the market value of the unit increases." In other words, the owner will pocket any value increase. New HOS flat owners will of course be happy to take such a generous offer. However, old HOS flat owners (who number 300,000) will have no such benefit. The government will favour one group and discriminate against the other. This will be a big problem the next administration must solve. Its mishandling may cause a serious social contradiction.
The Tsang administration was against reviving the HOS. It argued, inter alia, that the government should not help citizens to invest. However, new HOS flat owners may pocket value increases. Furthermore, to make the MHPP more appealing to citizens, the government has proposed the initial market selling price will serve as the "ceiling price". A participant may buy the flat he rents at the "ceiling price" within a specified period regardless of any rise in property prices.
It is hard to see why Donald Tsang has come up with an HOS that is so vastly different from the one the generality of citizens want the government to revive. Nevertheless, the new HOS and the enhanced MHPP have one thing in common. Both will provide considerable incentive for owners to sell their subsidised flats to get cash to enter the private housing market.
Whether the new HOS and the enhanced MHPP will be good or bad for Hong Kong is worth thorough discussion. The old HOS (which was introduced thirty years ago) has proved effective and has done Hong Kong a lot of good. It is baffling that Donald Tsang has decided to introduce the dubious new HOS rather than revive the old HOS.
