Political Managements and Policies in Malaysia

An Exploratory Study of Goods and Services Tax

Awareness in Malaysia

K. Saira, M. A. Zariyawati & L. Yoke-May

Abstract
Tax has been recognized as one of the main sources of governments’ income.
Goods and Services Tax (GST) is an example of tax that contributes to the
governments’ income. This tax has been implemented in many countries
such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand. GST is a tax imposed on
the sale of goods and services. In recent years, this issue on GST has been
raised by the Malaysian Government as an approach to reduce its deficit.
However, the Malaysian Government is still finding the right time to
implement GST as they are still conducting studies on the social impact of
GST. This study attempts to investigate Malaysian awareness towards the
upcoming of GST implementation.

Keywords: Goods and Services Tax (GST), Awareness, Malaysia.

INTRODUCTION
Fiscal policies are being adopted by governments across the world in
order to influence their country’s economic condition. The government
has a choice of either to use expenditure or revenue collection in
implementing these policies. The purpose of this implementation is to
solve the economic problem (inflation or employment), thus, increasing
the country’s economic growth.

265
 Seminar on National Resilience

Tax is a major contribution of government’s revenue collection in any

countries, including Malaysia. In year 2008, statistics from the Ministry
of Finance reveals that 66.7 percent of Malaysian government revenues
were generated from taxes. Taxation in Malaysia is imposed by the
federal legislation, passed by the Parliament. Since the introduction of
tax legislation in Malaysia, there were numbers of changes made to this
legislation. For example, changes in year assessment, implementation of
e-filing, several changes in income tax rate and the latest changes was
government’s intention to implement Goods and Services Tax (GST).
This issue has been debated for several years in the Parliament. GST is a
tax on consumption of goods and services to end user. GST is also known
as value added tax (VAT) in other countries such as United Kingdom,
Finland and Canada. GST has been implemented in more than 146
countries including Australia, Hong Kong and Singapore as part of their
revenue. The range of the tax is between 5 percent and 24 percent.

Malaysia has been immovable with fiscal deficit for more than a decade.
The budget deficit accounted 7 percent of the country’s gross domestic
product in year 2009 and the government is trying to reduce it to 5.6
percent by this year and lesser than 4 percent by year 2015. Due to the
fixed fiscal deficit and declining revenue, the government has taken
several steps to counter this issue, for example by ceasing unnecessary
government expenditure. Another way to strengthened and stabilized the
government’s revenue in the future was to propose the implementation of
GST in Malaysia. The Malaysian Government has proposed a GST rate
of 4 percent, which is a lower rate compared to the other countries. The
Government aimed to implement this new tax scheme in the middle of
year 2011. By doing so, they hope this will help to increase the economic
growth in Malaysia.

Many questions, opinions and responses from various industries and

consumer groups arose during the proposal of this issue while still being
debated in the Parliament. They are keen to know how GST will affect

266
 Political Managements and Policies in Malaysia

their interest, with some agreeing to it while some opposing to the

implementation of GST. Those who oppose believed that GST will affect
the price of goods and services, leading to price increase. This matter
concerns especially the lower income bracket. However, the government
has mentioned that GST is not a new tax. GST is actually a tax replacing
the service tax that rate between 5 percent and 10 percent, which is
higher than the 4 percent GST rate proposed. The opponents believed
that GST is another political game played by the politicians though the
government has explained the purpose of this implementation was to
increase its revenue and to boost the economic growth of the country.
Why these affairs do come into view? Do Malaysian citizen understand
the concept of GST? Hence, this study intends to investigate the
Malaysian citizen awareness towards the implementation of GST. This
study hopes to increase the level of awareness among Malaysian on GST
and perhaps as a guide for the government to take appropriate action in
regards to that.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Goods and services tax (GST) is also commonly referred to as value
added tax (VAT). It is a tax government collected at the final purchase
consumption. However, according to Hooper and Smith (1997), GST is
actually collected at various stages of the production process. Accordingly,
there is output tax, a GST tax charges by the suppliers on taxable goods
and services and input tax, a tax incurred by businesses on goods and
services purchases. Thus it is noted that GST is not a cost to the sellers
and would not appear in financial statements as expenditure.

Recently, the government initiative to introduce Goods and Services

Tax (GST) has been a growing topic of interest in Malaysia. Despite
the increasing popularity and success of GST implementation around
the world (Hooper & Smith, 1997), Malaysian citizens are not entirely
convinced with this new tax scheme. The debates mainly centered on the
advantages and disadvantages derived from the new tax initiative.

267
 Seminar on National Resilience

Proponents of GST contended that GST tax is necessary to reduce

federal government deficit (McGowan & Billings, 1997). It is also
viewed as a method to diversified government sources of income. GST
would be able to provide government with a constant flow of income, thus
increasing government abilities to elevate public services and improve
economic stability. Nevertheless, opponent of this new tax reform argued
that GST is difficult to implement and increased in tax revenue would
only promote larger government spending (Bickley, 1989). In addition,
GST would have profound impact to lower income group as opposed to
higher incomes group (Hooper & Smith, 1997). This is mainly because
the introduction of GST would reduce the lower income group’s ability
to purchase goods and services.

Cullis and Jones ( 1992) have highlighted the concept of false awareness
in citizens, which are optimistic and pessimistic. Optimistic refers to
citizens who ‘underestimate the tax load incurred from public services’
(Csontos, Kornai, & Toth, 1998). Alternatively, pessimistic are citizens
who have overestimated tax burden or inaccurately estimate public
service burden with the tax imposed to the public. These contradictive
views have continually provided misconception on tax requirements,
particularly when a new tax reform is to be introduced. Thus, this raises
the need to increase awareness on what constitute GST.

One of the fundamental ways to increase public awareness is through

knowledge (Mohani, 2003). (Tan & Chin-Fatt, 2000) asserted that
tax knowledge can be imparted through general understanding on the
tax regulations. Knowledge provide the taxpayers with the ability to
comprehend the need for a new tax reform and this would eventually
promote compliance (Singh, 2003).

A study conducted by (Csontos, et al., 1998) in Hungarian found that

many citizen are not aware of the numerous kind of taxes levied on them.
They have very limited knowledge on government true expenditures and

268
 Political Managements and Policies in Malaysia

the cost of public services provided by the state government. This poor
awareness has created many misconceptions on the true value of tax.
Many have underestimated the tax burden needed in sustaining public
services. This situatuation is not only unique in European countries as
Cullis and Jones (1992) investigated the level of tax knowledge and
awareness in the UK arrived at similar conclusions. Majority of the
citizen (93 percent) only recognized income tax as government source
of revenue. They also observed that female respondents display higher
ignorance on government source of income than the male respondents.
This result highlighted that the male counterparts are more concern
with tax issues. In addition, they (Cullis & Jones, 1992) also noted that
majority of respondents preferred fixed tax at current rate than the idea
of improving public services by imposing increase tax rates.

Increase awareness and knowledge on a new tax initiative is essential to

gain public acceptance and confidence, particularly in tax situation. Tax
involves public expenditure. New tax reform creates uncertainty of future
expenditure (Cullis & Jones, 1992). Uncertainty would subsequently
initiate resistance and poses as a challenge towards government initiative
to impose new regulations. Thus, it is paramount to educate the public on
what is expected from the new tax initiative.

DATA & METHODOLOGY

Primary data was collected through questionnaires-based survey. The
questionnaire was divided into two sections with the intention to
extract information regarding citizens’ awareness on GST. The first
section comprised of questions related to Malaysian citizen awareness
on goods and services tax (GST). Meanwhile, the samples’ demographic
information was contained in section two.

Table 1 below is the summarization of descriptive statistics performed.

Panel A reported that 94.74 percent of respondents are male while female
only accounted a percentage of 5.26. From that total, 95.83 percent of the

269
 Seminar on National Resilience

male respondents came from the accounting background while only 4.17
percent are females.

Table 1: Descriptive Statistic

WĂŶĞů
'ĞŶĚĞƌ DĂůĞ &ĞŵĂůĞ
Ed ϵϰ͘Ϯϯй ϱ͘ϳϳй
d ϵϱ͘ϴϯй ϰ͘ϭϳй
dŽƚĂů ϵϰ͘ϳϰй ϱ͘Ϯϲй
WĂŶĞů
ŐĞ ϮϱͲ
ϮϬͲϮϰ ϯϬͲϯϰ ϯϱͲϯϵ ϰϬͲϰϰ ϰϱͲϰϵ ĂďŽǀĞϰϵ
;LJĞĂƌͿ Ϯϵ
ϯϬ͘ϳ
Ed ϵ͘ϲϮй ϯϬ͘ϳϳй ϵ͘ϲϮй ϯ͘ϴϱй ϳ͘ϲϵй ϳ͘ϲϵй
ϳй
ϯϳ͘ϱ
d ϭϮ͘ϱϬй Ϯϱ͘ϬϬй ϮϬ͘ϴϯй ϰ͘ϭϳй Ϭ͘ϬϬй Ϭ͘ϬϬй
Ϭй
ϯϮ͘ϴ
dŽƚĂů ϭϬ͘ϱϯй Ϯϴ͘ϵϱй ϭϯ͘ϭϲй ϯ͘ϵϱй ϱ͘Ϯϲй ϱ͘Ϯϲй
ϵй
WĂŶĞů
^ƚĂƚƵƐ ^ŝŶŐůĞ DĂƌƌŝĞĚ
Ed ϰϴ͘Ϭϴй ϱϭ͘ϵϮй
d ϱϬ͘ϬϬй ϱϬ͘ϬϬй
dŽƚĂů ϰϲ͘ϲϴй ϱϭ͘ϯϮй
WĂŶĞů
ĚƵĐĂƚŝ
ŽŶ ŝƉůŽŵĂ ĞŐƌĞĞ DĂƐƚĞƌ WŚ
>ĞǀĞů
Ed ϭϯ͘ϰϲй ϱϱ͘ϳϳй ϵ͘ϲϮй Ϯϯ͘Ϭϴй
d ϰ͘ϭϳй ϳϱ͘ϬϬй ϮϬ͘ϴϯй Ϭ͘ϬϬй
dŽƚĂů ϭϬ͘ϱϯй ϲϬ͘ϱϯй ϭϯ͘ϭϲй ϭϱ͘ϳϵй
WĂŶĞů
/ŶĐŽŵĞ
>ĞƐƐϮϬϬϬ ϮϬϬϭͲϯϬϬϬ ϯϬϬϭͲϰϬϬϬ ďŽǀĞϰϬϬϬ
;ZDͿ
Ed ϭϵ͘Ϯϯй Ϯϴ͘ϴϱй ϭϱ͘ϯϴй ϯϲ͘ϱϰй
d ϰ͘ϭϳй ϭϮ͘ϱϬй ϭϲ͘ϲϳй ϲϲ͘ϲϳй
dŽƚĂů ϭϰ͘ϰϳй Ϯϯ͘ϲϴй ϭϱ͘ϳϵй ϰϲ͘Ϭϱй
WĂŶĞů&
:Žď ĐĂĚĞͲ ŶŐŝŶĞͲ /ŶƐƵƌĂͲ 'ŽǀĞƌͲ ĐĐŽƵͲ
/d KƚŚĞƌƐ &ŝŶĂŶĐĞ
ƌĞĂ ŵŝĐŝĂŶ ĞƌŝŶŐ ŶĐĞ ŶŵĞŶƚ ŶƚŝŶŐ
Ed ϯϴ͘ϰϲй ϱ͘ϳϳй ϭϵ͘Ϯϯй ϭϳ͘ϯϭй ϵ͘ϲϮй ϵ͘ϲϮй Ϭ͘ϬϬй Ϭ͘ϬϬй
d Ϭ͘ϬϬй Ϭ͘ϬϬй Ϭ͘ϬϬй Ϭ͘ϬϬй Ϭ͘ϬϬй Ϭ͘ϬϬ ϱϴ͘ϯϯй ϰϭ͘ϲϳй
dŽƚĂů Ϯϲ͘ϯϮй ϯ͘ϵϱй ϭϯ͘ϭϲй ϭϭ͘ϴϰй ϯ͘ϵϱй ϵ͘Ϯϭй ϭϴ͘ϰϮй ϭϯ͘ϭϲй
WĂŶĞů'
WŽƐŝƚŝŽŶ DĂŶĂŐĞƌ ^ĞŶŝŽƌdžĞĐ͘ :ƵŶŝŽƌdžĞĐ͘ ůĞƌŬ KƚŚĞƌƐ
Ed ϵ͘ϲϮй ϯϬ͘ϳϳй ϭϳ͘ϯϭй Ϯϱ͘ϬϬй ϭϳ͘ϯϭй
d ϭϮ͘ϱϬй ϳϬ͘ϴϯй ϭϮ͘ϱϬй Ϭ͘ϬϬй ϰ͘ϭϳй
dŽƚĂů ϭϬ͘ϱϯй ϰϯ͘ϰϮй ϭϱ͘ϳϵй ϭϳ͘ϭϭй ϭϯ͘ϭϲй


270
 Political Managements and Policies in Malaysia

Panel B showed that most of the respondents are from the age group of
25 – 29 years old, charting a percentage of 32.89, followed by 35 – 39
years old (13.16 percent), 20 – 24 years old (10.53 percent), 45 – 49 years
old (5.26 percent), above 49 years old (5.26 percent) and 40 – 44 years
old (3.95 percent). In the age group of 25 – 29 years old, 37.5 percent
are from the accounting background while 30.57 percent came from the
non-accounting background.

Panel C displayed the marital status of respondents. 48.68 percent are

single while 51.32 percent are married, both striking a balance from the
accounting background. The non-accounting background reported 48.08
percent and 51.92 percent respectively.

Panel D showed majority of the respondents holds a Degree qualification

with a percentage of 60.53, with 75 percent of them from the accounting
background. This is then followed by 20.83 percent with a Master and
4.17 percent with a Diploma in Accounting/Finance.

Panel E clearly shown that almost half of the respondents (46.05 percent)
have an income level of RM4000 and above. This is then followed by
those with an income level of RM2001 – RM3000 (23.68 percent),
RM3001 – RM4000 (15.79 percent) and those less than RM2000 (14.47
percent). Of the total of the high income level (RM4000 and above),
66.67 percent has an accounting background while the remaining 36.54
percent without any accounting background.

Panel F exhibited 31.58 percent of the respondents are working in the

Finance and Accounting area, followed by 26.32 percent from Academics,
13.16 percent from Engineering, 11.84 percent from Insurance and 9.21
percent from other areas. Those working in the field of Information
Technology and Government only accounted 3.95 percent. Of the total,
most of them are Senior Executives (43.42 percent) with 70.83 percent
came from the accounting background while 30.77 percent do not have
any accounting background.

271
 Seminar on National Resilience

FINDINGS
We begin our questionnaire by questioning the respondents if they
realized that tax is the major revenue for the government before
proceeding with questions regarding GST. From Table 2, we found that
about 95 percent of respondents realized that tax is the major source
of income for the government. However, there are small groups (5.26
percent) of respondents who are still not aware of this. Surprisingly,
from that amount, about 4.17 percent came from the accounting (ACT)
background.

Table 2
Knowledge of tax as government revenue
Yes No
NACT 94.23% 5.77%
ACT 95.83% 4.17%
Overall 94.74% 5.26%

In total, 93.42 percent (71) heard about GST as being revealed in Table 3.
The remaining who have yet to hear about GST are female respondents
from the non accounting (NACT) working background. Hence, this
shows that respondents from ACT background are aware and should be
aware of GST.

Table 3
Heard about GST
Yes No
NACT 90.38% 9.62%
ACT 100.00% 0.00%
Overall 93.42% 6.58%

Table 4 shows respondents’ understanding towards GST. The results

showed a balance between those who understands and those who do
not. However, majority (57.69 percent) of NACT respondent do not

272
 Political Managements and Policies in Malaysia

understand what GST is. In contrast, the ACT group reported only
33.33 percent. We then further analyzed whether respondents who
understands GST are able to define what GST is. We found that they
are only able to provide a very general meaning of GST. For example
they defined GST as tax with certain rate that were being charged on
goods and services that consumer purchase. They did not mention about
GST being charged at end user and were not aware that the Malaysia
government has proposed a GST rate of 4 percent beginning middle of
next year.

Table 4
Understand about GST
Yes No
NACT 42.31% 57.69%
ACT 66.67% 33.33%
Overall 50.00% 50.00%

Overall, 60.53 percent of them do not agree with the implementation of

GST proposed by the government. Concurrent with the previous respond
from NACT (Table 4), we found that respondents who answered “yes”
(really understand about GST) seems to agree with the implementation
of GST. Alternately, respondents who answered “no” (do not really know
about GST) disagreed with the implementation of GST. However, these
results are not in line with ACT respondents. As revealed, 66.67 percent
of ACT respondents who understand about GST (Table 4) do not agree
with the implementation (Table 5). Meanwhile, 33.33 percent of ACT
respondents agreed with the implementation of GST (Table 5) even
though they do not have in-depth knowledge regarding GST (Table
4). In addition, those who disagreed with the implementation of GST
believed that GST will further increase the price of goods and services.
Consequently it would affect consumer purchasing power, especially
the poor people. In addition, some of the respondents suggested that
there is a need for the government to conduct a thorough research before

273
 Seminar on National Resilience

implementing GST, to provide a win-win situation. They also stressed on

the need to reduce the role of “middle person” in business transaction, in
order to avoid paying higher price of goods and services.

Table 5
Implementation of GST
Yes No
NACT 42.31% 57.96%
ACT 33.33% 66.67%
Overall 39.47% 60.53%

Finally, asked the respondents whether they prefer the implementation

of GST or increasing income tax rate in assisting the government to
increase its revenue. Even though 60.53 percent (Table 5) of respondents
disagreed with the implementation of GST, majority (51.32 percent
in Table 6) of them opted for the implementation of GST instead of
increasing income tax rate. More than 70 percent of ACT respondents
chose the implementation of GST. Meanwhile, NACT respondents
who agreed with the implementation of GST in Table 5 opted for the
implementation of GST (Table 6), showing a consistent response. 40.38
percent of them chose the option to increase tax rate while the balance
do not agree with either option.

Table 6
GST or increase income tax
Yes No
NACT 42.31% 40.83%
ACT 70.83% 29.17%
Overall 51.32% 36.54%

In a nut shell, the awareness of GST among respondents is not

consistent. This could be due to the lack of understanding or knowledge
regarding GST. As a result, this motivates them to disagree with the

274
 Political Managements and Policies in Malaysia

implementation o f GST. This result is consistent with (Mazni & Noor-

Sharoja, 2008; Tan & Chin-Fatt, 2000). The authors suggested that the
level of respondents’ awareness were associated with the tax knowledge.
Respondent who are lack of knowledge relating to tax will have negative
perceptions towards the tax imposed. It is also found in this study that
the different level of awareness between respondents is related to their
background, whether they have knowledge in accounting. This is clearly
shown from the explanation in Table 4 and Table 5. This revealed that
people with knowledge or works in the accounting area have different
judgment regarding the implementation of GST.

CONCLUSIONS
GST is an issue much being discussed in Malaysia recently. This situation
occurs when the government proposed the implementation of GST
as a way to increase its revenue and to further reduce government’s
deficit. An earlier plan by the government was to implement GST in
the beginning of January 2007; however this plan was being deferred.
The Government hopes to investigate further the social impact of GST
implementation and to wait for the best time to implement it. This study
intends to investigate the awareness among Malaysians regarding the
implementation of GST. Findings of this study show that the level of
awareness among Malaysian is still relatively low. This could be due to
the lack of knowledge or information regarding GST. Consequently,
this affected their decision to disagree with GST (Mazni & Noor-
Sharoja, 2008; Tan & Chin-Fatt, 2000). For this reason, the government
should reflect on how to increase the knowledge of GST among citizen.
Furthermore, they should put more effort in delivering information and
educating the citizen regarding GST, so that the citizen will have positive
view about this GST implementation.

275
 Seminar on National Resilience

References
Bickley, J. M. (1989). Value-added tax: Concepts, policy issues and
OECD experiences. Congressional Research Service, 89-638.
Csontos, L., Kornai, J., & Toth, I. G. (1998). Thax awareness and reform
of the welfare state: Hungrian survey results. Economics of
Transition, 6(2), 287-312.
Cullis, J., & Jones, P. (1992). Public Finance and Public Choice. New York:
McGraw Hill.
Hooper, P., & Smith, K. A. (1997). A Value-Added Tax In The U.S. : An
Argument In Favor. Business Horizon, 78-83.
Mazni, A., & Noor-Sharoja, S. (2008). Some evidence of tax knowledge
in Malaysia: The case of service tax. International Journal of
Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, 13(5), 73-82.
McGowan, J. R., & Billings, B. A. (1997). An analysis of the European
community VAT : Implication for U.S tax policy. Journal of
accounting, auditing and taxation, 6(2), 131-148.
Mohani, A. (2003). Income tax non-compliance in Malaysia. Petaling Jaya:
Prentice Hall.
Singh, V. (2003). Tax compliance and ethical decision making: A Malaysian
perspective. Petaling Jaya: Longman.
Tan, L. M., & Chin-Fatt, C. (2000). The impact of tax knowledge on
the perception of tax fairness and attitudes towards compliance.
Asian Review Of Accounting, 8, 44-58.

276