There is no material impact on its financial position and performance of the group

 

[SINGAPORE] The lawsuit against PropNex subsidiary PropNex Realty and two co-defendents for alleged misconduct has been dropped, the real estate services group said in a bourse filing on Friday (Jan 2).  

 

On Feb 11 last year, PropNex said a claimant had filed a suit in the High Court of Singapore, seeking to claim damages against PropNex Realty for liability arising from the alleged misconduct of one of its salespersons and his purported advice. 

 

It said then that it intended to defend it the suit and has filed the notice of intention to contest with the court.

 

In its latest update, PropNex said that the claimaint has &ldquo discontinued and withdrawn&rdquo the lawsuit, without providing more details on the case.

 

There is no material impact on its financial position and performance of the group for its financial year ended Dec 31, 2025, it added.

 

Last October, a S$849,287 lawsuit against PropNex Realty over a 99-to-1 deal was also dropped.

 

SINGAPORE &ndash   Some 13,480 Housing Board flats are expected to reach their minimum occupation period (MOP) in 2026, the bulk of which are in Punggol, Queenstown, and Tampines.

This influx is nearly double the 6,970 units that hit their five-year MOP in 2025, and could moderate resale price growth by addressing the demand for housing, said property analysts.

These flats are spread across 22 projects in 14 towns, they added.

According to analysts&rsquo data, Punggol is projected to have the largest supply of 3,222 MOP flats across five projects &ndash most of which are in the Punggol Northshore neighbourhood. This is followed by Queenstown with 2,405 units in Dawson.

In Tampines, the majority of the 2,133 MOP units are located in Tampines North, while Toa Payoh is expected to have 1,594 MOP flats in the new Bidadari estate.

Resale flats in Dawson and Bidadari are frequently among million-dollar flat transactions.

Those in the Dawson area have set some of the highest prices to date.

Of the flats set to hit their MOP in 2026, 5,909 are four-room flats and 2,711 are five-room units. Another 2,299 are two-room flats and 2,561 are three-room units.

This supply, alongside a steady stream of Build-To-Order (BTO) flats, Sale of Balance Flats and private homes, could address the demand for housing, said Ms Christine Sun, chief researcher and strategist at Realion (OrangeTee & ETC) Group.

With more sellers expected to list their flats for sale once they hit MOP, HDB resale prices are likely to face &ldquo some downward pressure... which will help to mitigate a significant surge in prices&rdquo , she said.

ERA Singapore key executive officer Eugene Lim believes this effect could be especially evident in highly sought-after areas such as Bidadari and Dawson, where large numbers of flats will reach their MOP.

Of the 6,974 flats that reached their MOP in 2025, three out of 10 were in popular, centrally located areas such as Toa Payoh and Queenstown, where Bidadari and Dawson are located, respectively.

As these areas tend to command higher resale prices, this led to 638 four-room flats transacting for at least $1 million each in the two estates, and six 

three-room flats surpassing $900,000   as at Dec 26, he noted.

 

In June, a five-room, 1,313 sq ft loft unit at SkyTerrace @ Dawson changed hands at $1.659 million, making it the most expensive HDB resale transaction in 2025  to date.

And in April, a 710 sq ft three-room flat in SkyParc @ Dawson recorded the highest resale price for such units to date at $935,000.

Mr Lim said: &ldquo The 2026 supply of MOP flats is likely to lead to prices growing at an overall slower rate with the larger supply, despite demand holding firm.&rdquo

However, Ms Sun expects that prices could remain buoyant for five-room flats in mature estates such as Queenstown, Toa Payoh, Tampines and Bedok, as larger, newer flats in these areas are relatively rare.

Mr Luqman Hakim, chief data and analytics officer at real estate portal 99.co, added that prices could stabilise in heartland estates such as Tampines, Bedok, Bukit Batok and Sengkang, where many flats expected to hit their MOP, are situated.

While these areas may not be centrally located, they appeal to families due to their access to schools, neighbourhood malls and MRT stations, he said.

&ldquo They offer good livability and value, and help meet demand for newer flats within their respective towns,&rdquo he added.

A report by OrangeTee in November said the supply of MOP flats is expected to grow to 18,939 units in 2027 and 21,393 units in 2028.

In all, more than 53,000 flats are projected to obtain their MOP from 2026 to 2028, surpassing the estimated 34,000 units that reached their MOP between 2023 and 2025.

National Development Minister Chee Hong Tat said in June that resale prices 

are expected to moderate in the years ahead   as batches of BTO flats affected by the Covid-19 pandemic reach their MOP.

 

When the resale market has stabilised and the supply of resale flats increased, the authorities could consider relaxing the 15-month wait-out period for private property downgraders looking to buy a resale flat, said Mr Chee.

This is in response to a case filed by a couple over the purchase of a unit at The Gazania

 

[SINGAPORE] Anthony Law Corp, which has been sued by a husband and wife over the so-called two-step 99-1 property transaction, alleged that the couple had not sought legal advice from it on the structure.

 

Meanwhile, Don Tay, the salesperson being sued together with his agency PropNex Realty and Anthony Law, refuted the allegation of him having represented to the couple that the structure was legal and legitimate. 

 

Anthony Law and Tay are responding to a lawsuit from Neo Say Chuan and his wife Tiong Bock Lian that was lodged in early November. PropNex Realty has already filed its defence against the claims.

 

Neo and Tiong alleged that they were induced by the salesperson&rsquo s representations into buying a unit in condominium development The Gazania using the two-step 99-1 structure. Tiong bought the S$2.8 million flat in her sole name on Apr 14, 2022, and then sold a 1 per cent stake to her husband four days later. 

 

In August 2025, the taxman sent them a notice, saying that their property transaction was a case of illegal avoidance of stamp duty. They owed the taxman S$586,172. The sum comprised S$477,360, the 17 per cent additional buyer&rsquo s stamp duty (ABSD) liability on the full price of the property, and a 25 per cent surcharge of S$117,234.  

 

Singapore citizens buying their second residential property at that time were required to pay an ABSD of 17 per cent. Neo then was an owner of a Housing & Development Board flat.

 

If the unit had been bought in the couple&rsquo s names from the start, Neo would have had to pay the 17 per cent ABSD on the full price of the unit, and not on only 1 per cent of the purchase price.

 

The couple alleged that Tay had told them that the two-step 99-1 structure was legal and legitimate, and that Anthony Law had failed to inform them that the arrangement was unlawful or could be viewed as an illegal act of avoiding stamp duty.

 

As for PropNex Realty, the Neos alleged that it owed them a duty to ensure that its salesperson Tay was well-versed in the law and would not make false representations. The agency is liable for Tay&rsquo s misrepresentations as well, the couple argued through WongPartnership&rsquo s Gavin Neo.

 

Anthony Law denied all the allegations made by the husband and wife. It said it will not pay the S$586,172 being claimed, or comply with the non-monetary remedies or alternative remedy sought, based on its defence filed on Tuesday (Dec 2).

 

The law firm pointed out that it acted only for Neo Say Chuan for his purchase of a 1 per cent share of the four-room condo unit from his wife, while she was separately represented by Acclaim Law in that transaction.

 

It alleged that it acted in accordance with the instructions of the claimants, who had already decided beforehand on using the two-step 99-1 structure. 

 

The couple allegedly did not ask Anthony Law for advice, clarification or confirmation on the legality and legitimacy of purchasing a property in a two-step 99-1 structure. 

 

The firm also denied having told them that the structure was legal or legitimate.

 

But it noted that using the structure is not in and of itself illegal, as a material consideration is the intention of the purchaser in using the structure. 

 

It also claimed it was not informed by Neo Say Chuan and Tiong that they adopted the two-step 99-1 structure with the intention to avoid stamp duty. 

 

Their conduct was illegal and contrary to public policy, and therefore they are precluded from enforcing any rights or recovering any benefits in relation to the transaction, argued Anthony Law through Allen & Gledhill.

 

Tay alleges he was not representing the claimants

As for Tay, in his defence filed on Nov 26, he alleged that he had told the claimants he was aware that the structure had previously been used by buyers of properties under construction in order to secure a larger quantum of mortgage, and that the law firms that had assisted buyers to use this structure could help others to do this. 

 

But he denied having told the couple that structuring their property transaction using the two-step 99-1 way would reduce the ABSD payable.

 

He added that he had learnt of the structure from the training sessions conducted by PropNex Realty in 2016 and 2017. He thus reasonably believed that the method was legal and legitimate.

 

Furthermore, he was aware that Anthony Law and some other law firms assisted buyers to structure their purchases using the arrangement. This made him believe that the two-step 99-1 method was legal and legitimate.

 

He denied making any representations to Neo Say Chuan and Tiong that the two-step 99-1 arrangement was legal and legitimate. But he had allegedly told them they should consult a law firm, when they expressed concerns about the legality and legitimacy of the structure. 

 

He further denied portraying himself as an experienced real estate salesperson with the requisite expertise on the use and legality of the structure, said his defence filed through Withers KhattarWong. 

 

The claimants were allegedly aware that he was not legally trained or qualified to provide legal advice on the structure.

 

Additionally, the salesperson denied that he had informed Anthony Law to structure the transaction in the two-step 99-1 arrangement for the couple. He added that only the clients would have the standing to instruct the law firm.

 

He also alleged that he had inquired with Anthony Law and was told the structure was legitimate after he was asked by Neo Say Chuan and Tiong, who became concerned when they learnt that the taxman was investigating buyers who used the structure to avoid ABSD. 

 

Tay added that he was not representing the couple in the purchase of The Gazania unit &ndash there was no estate agency agreement between them, and he did not pocket any commission from them for the transaction. But he did not elaborate on whether he was acting for someone else.

 

PropNex Realty denies allegations

PropNex Realty, in its defence earlier filed on Nov 25, denied breaching a duty of care, even if it owed the claimants one. Additionally, the subsidiary of the mainboard-listed   PropNex Ltd   : OYY -1.03%, contended that it is not liable to the couple, and that they are not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed against it. 

 

It also denied the allegation that it permitted Tay to make representations or encourage Neo Say Chuan and Tiong to engage in illegal arrangements.

 

It further argued that Tay and its other salespersons were provided with updated information on transaction structures, and trained on developments in the property market, including the applicable ABSD rules and guidelines.

 

Tay has also agreed to abide by the law and regulations stipulated by the Council for Estate Agencies, added PropNex Realty through Rajah & Tann.

 

A case conference is slated for Dec 23.

This is the third reported lawsuit embroiling PropNex over purported sale arrangements for buyers to avoid paying more in ABSD

[SINGAPORE] A   PropNex   : OYY +0.97% subsidiary has been sued, along with its salesperson and a law firm, over a so-called &ldquo 99-1&rdquo property transaction, by a couple who allege a breach of duty by the three parties.

 

The couple are claiming a sum of S$586,172, the amount in additional tax and surcharge that the taxman had asked them to pay, for having avoided paying the relevant stamp duty for their purchase of a condo unit.    

 

Neo Say Chuan, 47, and his wife Tiong Bock Lian, 43, are represented by WongPartnership&rsquo s Gavin Neo. They have named PropNex Realty, salesperson Don Tay and Anthony Law Corporation as defendants in the lawsuit. 

 

The claimants identified Tay as an agent of PropNex Realty, but the agency, in its defence, has denied he is one. It instead described him as an &ldquo independent contractor&rdquo .

 

The Neos claim that Tay told them that 99-1 deals were legitimate and legal, and that Anthony Law Corporation, which handled the transaction, failed to inform them that the arrangement was unlawful or could be viewed as an illegal act of avoiding stamp duty.

 

In their statement of claim filed in early November, the pair alleged that Tay presented them a two-step 99-1 arrangement when he learned that Tiong, the wife, would not qualify for a loan to buy a four-room unit in The Gazania based on her salary alone. She had refused to buy a lower-priced three-room apartment in the development, which is located near Bartley MRT station. 

 

She was already an owner of an apartment in another condo development, and her husband was an owner of a Housing & Development Board flat. 

 

Singapore citizens buying their second residential property at that time were required to pay an additional buyer&rsquo s stamp duty (ABSD) of 17 per cent.

 

Tay allegedly suggested to them that Tiong first sell her other apartment to avoid paying that level of ABSD. She was then to buy The Gazania unit in her sole name, and then sell 1 per cent of the property to Neo, her husband, so that they would be able to use their joint salaries to qualify for a higher loan amount.

 

Under this arrangement, Neo would pay the 17 per cent ABSD on only 1 per cent of the purchase price, since it was his second residential property.  

 

If the unit had been bought in the couple&rsquo s names from the start, he would have had to pay the 17 per cent ABSD on the full price of the unit.  

 

The claimants alleged that Tay told them that the two-step 99-1 arrangement was a legal and legitimate way to reduce the ABSD payable. Persuaded by his representations, Tiong bought the S$2.8 million unit on Apr 14, 2022, and then sold a 1 per cent stake to her husband four days later.

 

The claimants also alleged that they had sought clarifications and confirmation from Anthony Law Corporation regarding the legality of the arrangement, and that lawyers from the firm made the same representations as Tay.

 

A year after they bought the unit, the couple read about the taxman probing this method of tax avoidance. They checked with Tay, who allegedly reassured them that it was legal for cases where qualifying for a loan was an issue for married couples.

 

After this, the claimants decided against voluntarily disclosing their transaction to the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (Iras), the statement of claim said.

 

In August 2025 &ndash more than three years after their purchase &ndash a notice from the taxman came, informing the couple that their property transaction was a case of the illegal avoidance of stamp duty.

 

They owed the taxman S$586,172. The sum comprised S$477,360, the 17 per cent ABSD liability on the full price of the property, and a 25 per cent surcharge of S$117,234. (The surcharge would have been twice that, but the couple appealed successfully for it to be halved.) 

 

The claimants said Tay owed them a duty of care to tell them the truth, and that PropNex owed them a duty to ensure that Tay was well-versed in the law as an agent, and would not make false representations. The agency is liable for Tay&rsquo s misrepresentations as well, the claimants argued. 

 

Further to this, the couple argued that the law firm also had a duty to ensure that the structure of the transaction was not an illegal avoidance of stamp duty, and to advise them that the two-step 99-1 arrangement could be construed as such.  

 

Defence

PropNex Realty, in its defence on Tuesday (Nov 25), denies breaching a duty of care, even if it owed the Neos one. The agency contended that it is not liable to the claimants, and that the Neos are not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed against it.

 

It described Tay as an independent contractor and its salesperson, but not its servant, agent or employee, and that it had prohibited him from making representations or encouraging the claimants to go into arrangements to avoid stamp duty.

 

PropNex Realty further argued that Tay and its other salespersons were provided with updated information on transaction structures, and trained on developments in the property market, including the applicable ABSD rules and guidelines.

 

Tay has agreed to abide by the law and regulations stipulated by the Council of Estate Agents, PropNex Realty added.

 

Meanwhile, Tay and Anthony Law Corporation have said they would contest the claims against them, and their defences are pending. 

 

Rajah & Tann Singapore is acting for PropNex Realty,   Allen & Gledhill for Anthony Law Corporation, and Withers KhattarWong, for Tay. A case conference will take place on Dec 23.

 

This case is PropNex Realty&rsquo s third reported lawsuit involving 99-1 transactions.

 

The first reported case, in which the agency is being sued for about S$1.2 million, is pending.

 

PropNex Realty&rsquo s parent announced earlier that the second reported lawsuit, involving a claim of about S$850,000, has been withdrawn, for reasons that have not been made public,   

 

[SINGAPORE] A wholly-owned subsidiary of PropNex and two other defendants are being sued for at least S$586,172, allegedly over a breach of duty of care as well as negligent misrepresentation by one of its salespersons. 

 

The property agency announced that its unit, PropNex Realty, has been named as one of the three co-defendants in a lawsuit filed in the High Court. 

 

The amount of S$586,172 is among the damages being sought, jointly and severally, from the defendants.

 

The filing to the Singapore Exchange did not name the salesperson, the third defendant, or the claimants. Neither did PropNex provide details of the allegations.

 

PropNex, which is seeking legal advice, said its board intends to &ldquo vigorously defend&rdquo the suit.

 

Its board said in the filing that the lawsuit is unlikely to materially affect the financial position and performance of the group for the financial year ending December 2025.

 

This lawsuit is the fourth reported dispute to be brought against PropNex Realty before the High Court in the year to date.  

 

In one suit, Hao Mart is suing PropNex Realty and its agent for more than S$3.5 million, allegedly for misrepresentation involving the lease for Taste Orchard, a five-storey food-and-beverage facility.    

 

In another suit, a claim of S$849,287 was made against the subsidiary over a so-called 99-1 deal, but this claim has since been dropped, PropNex said in mid-October.    

 

A third suit is pending before the High Court,   also involving a 99-1 transaction.  

 

The &ldquo 99-to-1&rdquo scheme is a tax-avoidance arrangement used by some property buyers to reduce the rightful Additional Buyer&rsquo s Stamp Duty (ABSD) payable on the purchase of a residential property. It enables those who already own a residential property to reduce or avoid paying ABSD, while still becoming a co-owner of an additional property and a co-applicant for a loan to finance the purchase.

heard buyers who are very savvy, knowing if this new launch gives 6% comm, buyers will ask developers for less psf and developers will then say to agent, for this and that buyer, comm will be 1% or even 0.5%, it is important to go viewing first n ask agents what comm they are getting, then call developers for discount, if no discount, go for other new launches, developers are all vying to complete the sale within 5 years, they will definitely need buyers those days of big luxury cars generally bought by agents has come to an end cooling measures should be in place for a long time for small city singapore otherwise no homes to build and no more singaporean babies ! great governance.

For full year, Singapore developer sales expected to hit 8,000 to 9,000 new private homes excluding ECs, resale volume forecast to reach up to 15,000 units

 

[SINGAPORE] Real estate agency PropNex reported a record net profit of S$42.3 million for its first half-year ended Jun 30, more than double from the year-ago period.

 

The 122.4 per cent rise from S$19 million in the first half of 2024 comes as its revenue jumped 73.3 per cent to S$598.9 million from S$345.6 million in the previous corresponding period, based on the company&rsquo s financial results released on Tuesday (Aug 12). 

 

PropNex said the stellar performance was driven by a 7 per cent increase in sales and leasing transactions.

 

The number of new units sold in Singapore in the first half more than doubled to 4,587 units from 1,889 units previously. Resale private homes transacted rose 11.1 per cent to 7,212 units. However, resale HDB flats clocked in 5 per cent lower at 13,692 units, down from 14,420.

 

Earnings per share stood at S$0.057, up from S$0.025 previously. 

 

The company declared an interim dividend of S$0.05 per share, the highest in its history. Interim dividend for the previous comparative period was S$0.0225 per share. The latest payout ratio is 87.6 per cent of net attributable profit with a 4.6 per cent dividend yield based on the counter&rsquo s share price as at June 30, 2025, PropNex said. 

 

Optimistic outlook

PropNex said it remains &ldquo optimistic&rdquo about private home sales as there is a gradual recovery in market sentiment. This follows the uncertainty in the market after US President Donald Trump announced his so-called &ldquo Liberation Day&rdquo tariffs in April.

 

&ldquo While downside risks persist, the sensitive pricing of homes, moderation in mortgage rates, potential wealth effect from the stock market rebound, and the still tight labour market may boost private housing demand,&rdquo said PropNex in a statement.

 

The property group added that improved participation from developers in recent government land sales tenders also reflected their continued confidence in the market.

 

UOBKH portfolio of alpha picks beats STI in July new top choices for Singapore, Malaysia named

The group forecast a 3 to 4 per cent rise in private home prices in 2025 on the back of &ldquo resilient&rdquo demand, healthy household balance sheets, easing interest rates, and &ldquo attractive&rdquo new launches.

 

For the full year, it expects Singapore developer sales of 8,000 to 9,000 units, excluding executive condominiums, while private resale volume is expected to come in at 14,000 to 15,000 units.

 

PropNex said that resale volume for HDB flats is forecast at 27,000 to 28,000 flats, with 4 to 5 per cent gains in the second half of the year due to the stricter loan-to-value limit of 75 per cent for HDB loans, affordability concerns and price resistance from buyers, and new supply from build-to-order and sale of balance flats.

 

&ldquo Buoyed by a record first half and a large, highly-driven salesforce, we maintain our optimism about delivering a strong performance for the full-year of 2025, barring unforeseen events,&rdquo said PropNex CEO Kelvin Fong. &ldquo Our playbook continues to focus on investments in technology and training initiatives to boost productivity and support long-term growth.&rdquo