Welker’s Wikinomics Blog » Letting markets work: the Malaysia fuel subsidy goes bye bye

Jun 09 2008

Letting markets work: the Malaysia fuel subsidy goes bye bye

Published by Jason Welker at 1:55 pm under

Asia Sentinel - Malaysia cuts fuel subsidy

One of the recurring themes of this blog is the conflict between good politics and good economics. Most of the time in government, smart economic policy is sacrificed in order to achieve political favor with voters. Whether it’s price ceilings on petrol in China, Zimbabwe’s slashing of food prices, harmful import restrictions to benefit domestic producers, or the proposed suspension of gas taxes in a time when fuel conservation is really what’s needed, politicians often act in economically stupid ways to bolster or hang on to their popularity.

So when a government makes a bold move that is economically sound, it sometimes comes as a surprise, as in the case of the Malaysian government this week. The government in Kuala Lumpur has for years subsidized domestic fuel prices, which at under 2 Malaysian Ringit per liter have been the equivelant of roughly $2.40 US per gallon, far below the average price in the west. Drivers benefited from this subsidy, but were not forced to bear any of the burden of rising oil prices, nor had they any incentive to conserve or switch to more fuel efficient automobiles or alternative forms of transportation. The Malaysian government, on the other hand, has had to allocate more and more of its limited budget towards subsidizing petrol prices.

Well, as of yesterday, all price supports for petrol are cancelled, and the effect will be sweeping in the Malaysian economy:

The government announced Wednesday evening that petrol prices would rise by 78 sen (US24¢) at midnight — a 41 percent jump from RM1.92 per liter to RM2.70. That means those spending RM2,000 per month to fill the tanks of their BMWs will now be paying RM2,820. Regardless of income levels, it is likely most Malaysians will feel the pinch.

The subsidy would have cost the Malaysian government 56 billion ringit (around $17 billion) this year. With the money it will now save by ending the subsidy, the government will begin making public transport cheaper and more convenient for commuters who wish to avoid paying for the more expensive petrol to fuel their personal automobiles:

The government hopes to channel the savings into improving public transportation, as it promised many years and elections ago but with little to show. In Kuala Lumpur, despite having a light rail train service and monorail, public transportation is expensive and inconvenient. Worse, intercity travel is still being serviced by old and slow trains, and accident-prone buses.

Malaysia is not the only country taking measures to end government fuel-price supports:

Indonesia has hiked fuel prices by an average of 29 percent, saving about 34.5 trillion rupiah and kicking off a series of street demonstrations… Similarly, after slashing subsidies, Taiwan will distribute US$659 million to middle and low-income families. The latest to raise oil prices is India, whose government announced Wednesday that gasoline and diesel prices will increase by 10 percent.

As more and more countries allow the market mechanism to work, and in the short-run fuel prices rise with the price of oil, the chances are that the long-run equilibrium price of petrol will actually begin to fall.

Price controls and subsidies distort market demand. In Malaysia, where a government subsidy kept the price consumers paid around 2 RM, the quantity demanded exceeded the free market quantity. With the removal of the subsidy, consumers will respond by driving less, reducing overall quantity demanded for petrol. As other Asian nations follow suit, global quantity demanded for petrol will decline, while higher prices incentivize producers to increase output. New prouction facilities will come online, just as drivers begin to find alternative ways to get to work, either through carpooling, public transportation, cycling or walking.

The combined effect of slowing increases in demand (or perhaps even a decline in demand if enough substitution of alternative forms of transportation takes place), and increases in supply as new production facilities come on line will be a stabilization and eventual fall in the price of oil.

The future fall in oil prices is explained in more detail here. Malaysia’s repealing of the fuel subsidy is one example of how markets work to restore equilibrium in a market such as that for oil today, where short-term bubbles always burst. $135 oil is probably not here to stay, if only the market is allowed to works its magic.

Discussion Questions:

Why does a subsidy create disequilibrium in a product market like the petrol market in Malaysia?
Give two examples of how consumers may respond to the 40% increase in petrol prices once the subsidy is removed in Malaysia.
How could making fuel more expensive to consumers in the short-run actually lead to a fall in oil and fuel prices in the long-run?

About the author: Jason Welker is a teacher at Zurich International School in Switzerland, where he teaches Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate Economics. Jason was an international school student in Malaysia before studying economics at Seattle University then earning his Masters in Education. He calls Seattle and Northern Idaho home. In addition to maintaining an economics wiki and this blog for economics student and educators, Jason also gives presentations on using Web 2.0 tools in education at workshops and conferences around the world. His economics wiki won the 2007 "Best Educational Wiki" award from the "EduBlog Awards".

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

2 Responses to “Letting markets work: the Malaysia fuel subsidy goes bye bye”

# ckon 10 Jun 2008 at 2:59 pm

Petrol price had gone up. Everyone knows it. So many desperate fellows actually drove their cars bumper to bumper queuing in lines just to get their tanks filled last night hoping to save some money before the super price hike. I am no MBA or economist, so I am in no position to fully understand the fuel subsidy thing and their effect on the economy and blah blah blah. But as a normal citizen who has an almost properly functioning brain, I can tell you that the currently planned method of cash rebate is a piece of shit that could only come from someone with shits in their heads.

Reasoning:

1) How many cars are over 2000cc?? Few or may be very few only. Meaning that many (rich or poor), will still benefit from the cash rebate irrespective of their gas using habit. This is not what we want. We want the poor to receive more.

2) Let say I am a businessman who runs a car rental service and I own 50 cars for rental. I rent the car to customers and customers fill and pay for the petrol themselves, so essentially I will receive $31,250.00 ($625.00 x 50) annual cash rebate for doing nothing, extra profit from the stupid policy maker and government.

3) Let say I am a filthy rich man and I own 5 luxury cars but all are below 2000cc, or may be I am just a rich man who likes to own nice cars, then I will be entitled $3,125.00 ($625.00 x 5) annual cash rebate despite being filthy rich with overspending lifestyle while my fellow poor neighbor who owns a Honda 70cc kap-cai only receive $150 annual cash rebate despite being poor and living a thrifty lifestyle!!! VERY STUPID GOVERNMENT!!!

4) Let say I am a poor man who don’t own any cars/motorbike and I rely on public transportation to go to/from work, then I will not get anything sumore I am likely to pay more for transportation fares due to the diesel hike, despite me being very poor not even capable of owning a motorbike, being nice for using public transportation thus relieving road congestion, being environmental friendly by not burning fossil fuels, but in return I get punished!!!! DAMN STUPID GOVERNMENT!!!!!

5) And lastly can the uncle-uncle and auntie-auntie at the POS offices handle the sudden surge in demand for counter services as a result of the cash rebate?? Judging from the services and experiences I had with those uncles and aunties, I don’t think so!

Anyway, I am not all critics and no help. My suggestion is why not implement the rebate in the form of income tax relief/rebate base on income level?
# moritzreithmayron 23 Oct 2008 at 3:58 am

A subsidy creates a disequilibrium in the petrol market in Malaysia because it increases supply and the supply curve shifts outwards, away from the equilibrium. Therefore, the quality demanded increase because the price of gas decreases. Without the subsidy, the market would move to the equilibrium.
There are several things that the Malaysian people would do after such a high increase in gas prices besides demonstrating of course. First of all, it will cut down driving. Secondly, the Malaysians will start using Public transportation. Another thing, they may do is going to a neighbouring country, such as Singapur, and buy enough fuel for the next few months at the market price in Singapur.
By making fuel prices rise and foring consumers to pay more in the short-run, the market would react by a decrease in quantity demanded. Hence, the equilibrium would move down the demand curve in the long-run causing prices to drop.