LIKE it or not, the recent question posed by our former prime minister Najib Razak is a valid one – why was he charged 6% SST for a pau? Even I would have asked that question if I were charged the same.

But the point that we must keep in mind is that the said question must have been asked by Najib Razak as a form of complaint against that shop in Tanjung Malim for being a small business and perhaps not reaching the threshold of an annual revenue of RM1.5 million and yet still charging 6% SST.

Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng’s reply should have focussed on that and that alone.

The reply should have been something along the lines of, perhaps, the relevant authorities will look into the complaint and investigate the pau shop. Simple. And perhaps even thank Najib Razak for pointing it out.

Instead, the finance minister gets into a debate on why SST is better than GST. He should not have taken that question as a personal attack on him, even though it was worded in such a way.

It’s almost as if he fell right into Najib Razak’s trap. The finance minister should realise by now that the person who introduced GST would do all that it takes to paint a bad of picture of SST.

The finance minister should instead focus on creating awareness of the workings and benefits of SST, and stop comparing it with GST or get into debates about it. It is no use because GST has been repealed.

Meanwhile, that pau shop in Tanjung  Malim, thanks to Najib Razak, would now probably have to justify the imposition of 6% SST.

I am hoping that that pau shop makes a revenue of at least RM1.5 million a year. It would then make this entire fiasco redundant, wouldn’t it?

Actually, it might be some form of free advertising for that pau shop. – September 11, 2018.

* Puthan Perumal reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.