Tapera: Providing Affordable Housing or Adding Financial Burden?

People's Housing Savings (Tapera) is a program designed by the Indonesian government to help people who do not have a home, so they can buy a house. This program has actually been around for a long time, which is intended for State Civil Apparatus (ASN), but recently the government wants to expand the scope of Tapera by including private workers, and Foreign Citizens (WNA) who have worked in Indonesia for more than 6 months. Although the goal of Tapera is positive, namely to increase access to housing for the people, this policy has reaped many pros and cons from all groups. In this discussion, we will look at several points of view regarding this content.

As one of the parties who disagrees with Tapera, I think this is actually burdensome for workers and employers. The 2.5% monthly cut for Tapera is only an additional burden for workers who also get monthly cuts for other things such as BPJS health and BPJS employment, which can reach 18.24% to 19.74%. In addition, I think this is not timely because the economic conditions of our society are currently helpless, where the minimum wage in each region is only able to meet their daily needs. I hope the government will think again about the determination of this policy because many of our people feel burdened by this Tapera policy.

Deputy Speaker of the DPR, Muhaimin Iskandar, is of the opinion that the implementation of Tapera in the midst of the economic conditions of the people who are currently helpless is an inappropriate step. He also believes that cutting private sector workers' salaries for Tapera is considered unrealistic considering that many people are struggling to meet their basic daily needs. The Speaker of the MPR, Bambang Soesatyo, also believes that this regulation is very burdensome for private sector workers, and he asked the government to review this policy. Meanwhile, the Chairperson of the Indonesian Employers Association (APINDO), Shinta Khamdani, added that the Tapera regulation is burdensome for both workers and employers, and housing facilities should be able to be utilized from the Old Age Security (JHT) program funds.

National Political and Legal Communicator, Tamil Selvan, said that the Tapera PP could be canceled because it violates the mandate of Article 28H Paragraph 1 which underlies the birth of Law 4/2016 concerning Tapera. Article 28H paragraph 1 contains the rights of citizens to obtain decent housing, but according to Tamil, the government seems to be 'forcing' this regulation as a form of obligation to participate in the Tapera program. Legally, the requirements should be flawed and said to be canceled if Indonesia still upholds the law.

However, on the other hand, supporters of Tapera argue that the program designed by the government has many benefits. The Minister of PUPR, Basuki Hadimuljono, explained that Tapera is an old age security that can be used to buy a house. According to him, this savings is not a deduction from lost salary, but savings that can be used in the future to buy a house. Former Vice President of the Republic of Indonesia, Jusuf Kalla, also agreed with the Tapera program. According to him, Tapera can help underprivileged people to own affordable homes. In addition, economic observer from the University of Indonesia, Fithra Faisal said that the Tapera policy is a solution to the problem of people who do not have homes because of limited income. This policy will force workers with a contribution system to make it easier for them to get a home.

Coordinating Minister for the Economy, Airlangga Hartarto commented on criticism of the 3 percent salary cut for Tapera. According to him, the rules that will still be disseminated need to be understood by the community. Especially for housing. "We need to see what benefits workers can get related to obtaining housing or renovating housing,"

Pros and cons of Tapera are common in every government policy. Although this policy has good intentions to help people own homes. However, the government should think more about the additional burden that workers must bear. Dialogue and review of this policy are needed to find the best solution that is acceptable to all parties.