What Bala's Table Doesn't Tell You

Primary · Check my building

Is your sinking fund ready for an ageing building?

Send me your condo. I'll tell you what to look for in the MCST accounts and AGM minutes before the next levy surprises you.

WhatsApp James →

Part 2 of 2 · Bala's Table and Lease Decay

1. What You Lose Each Year 2. What the Table Misses

Bala's Table can tell you a 50-year lease is worth about three-quarters of freehold. It cannot tell you whether the next buyer can get a loan, or whether the sinking fund can pay for the lifts.

The short answer

Bala's Table prices land for government premiums, not resale units. Two things sit on top of it and often matter more: financing limits that shrink the buyer pool as the lease shortens, and the building's maintenance position, including the sinking fund and deferred works.

For the year-by-year values and how to calculate your own loss, read Part 1: what you lose each year.

Move 2What Bala's Table Doesn't Tell You+ Read →− Collapse

Bala's Table was built to price land, for the purpose of calculating a government premium. It was never designed to predict what a specific resale unit will fetch at the negotiating table. And treating it as a precise resale calculator is the single most common misuse of the table among buyers and sellers alike.

Two things sit on top of the curve and matter more, in practice, than the raw percentage. The first is the financing cliff: CPF usage is pro-rated once your remaining lease no longer covers the youngest buyer to age 95, and bank loan tenures compress sharply once the lease drops toward the 30-year mark. These are policy overlays, not part of Bala's Table itself. A property can sit at a perfectly respectable 75% on the curve and still face a shrinking buyer pool because the next purchaser can't get the CPF or loan quantum they expected. The second is condition and governance. A 45-year-old building's sinking fund position, deferred maintenance, and MCST track record are not inputs to Bala's Table at all, but they show up in the price a real buyer is willing to pay.

This is the practical answer to "when is a good time to get out": not the moment the Bala percentage crosses some round number, but the moment your buyer pool starts to narrow because financing is tightening around them. That narrowing is visible well before the lease itself is in any danger, CPF pro-ration typically starts to bind in the 50 to 60 year band, long before the "cliff zone" below 30 years most owners fixate on. Speak to a licensed financial adviser or your bank for advice specific to your own CPF and financing position. What follows is the general mechanic, not personalised advice.

Here is where that gap becomes visible with real numbers. Braddell View and Lakeview. Two privatised HUDC estates in District 20, completed 1977 to 1981. Currently sit at roughly 50 to 54 years remaining, which Bala's Table prices at 74.7 to 75.2% of freehold value. JadeScape, a modern development roughly two kilometres away with a fresh-ish 99-year lease, transacts at approximately $2,296 psf. If you scale JadeScape's psf down using nothing but the ratio of Bala's Table values (75.2% ÷ 96.0%), the tenure-only adjustment implies a rough ceiling of about $1,799 psf for a similarly-located 51-year asset. Braddell View actually transacts at approximately $1,041 psf, a gap of roughly 42%, well beyond what lease decay alone explains.

That gap is not a pricing error. It is the market pricing in everything Bala's Table leaves out: 45-year-old lifts and waterproofing, a sinking fund carrying more risk than a five-year-old building's, and. As the full analysis linked below covers. An en bloc story that has failed three times since 2017. The curve tells you the floor. It does not tell you why the actual price sits well below even that floor. For the complete governance and en-bloc-probability picture behind these two estates, see Braddell View vs Lakeview: What the Numbers Say and Braddell View En Bloc 2026: The Thomson View "Success" Trap.

The Projects Most Exposed to This Curve

Braddell View and Lakeview aren't isolated cases. They're two of seven privatised HUDC estates in Singapore that have never gone en bloc. All built on 99-year leases commenced between 1973 and the early 1980s, which puts most of them somewhere in the 44 to 55 year band today, squarely on the steep part of the curve above. The gold arrow marks the two with a full published analysis on this site.

Estate	Location	Lease Commenced	Est. Remaining (2026)	En Bloc Track Record
Braddell View →	Toa Payoh / Bishan, D20	1978 (lease)	~54 yrs	2 failed attempts (2019 tender, zero bids at $2.08B)
Lakeview Estate →	Upper Thomson, D20	1977	~50 yrs	No completed tender attempt
Pine Grove	Ulu Pandan, D21	1970s to 80s	~44 to 53 yrs (est.)	Tender failed, zero bids on ~$1.8B reserve
Ivory Heights	Bukit Batok, D22	1986 (100-yr lease)	~60 yrs	Failed to reach 80% owner consent
Laguna Park	Marine Parade, D15	1970s to 80s	~44 to 53 yrs (est.)	4 failed attempts
Neptune Court	Marine Parade, D15	1970s to 80s	~44 to 53 yrs (est.)	No completed tender attempt
Lagoon View	Marine Parade, D15	1970s to 80s	~44 to 53 yrs (est.)	No completed tender attempt

"Est. remaining" for Pine Grove, Laguna Park, Neptune Court and Lagoon View reflects the general 1973-early 1980s lease-commencement window reported for the surviving HUDC cohort, not individually verified title data. Confirm the exact figure for any specific unit against its title deed. Braddell View and Lakeview figures are individually sourced (see linked article). Sources: HUDC Singapore (hudcsingapore.com, 2026); Homejourney.sg, Ivory Heights project data; PropertyGuru, Laguna Park listing data.

Ivory Heights is the outlier. Its lease only commenced in 1986, five to nine years after the other six, which puts it at roughly 60 years remaining rather than the mid-40s to low-50s the rest of the cohort sits at. That gap alone is a reminder that "HUDC estate" is not a single risk category: two estates a short drive apart can be a decade apart on the curve.

Secondary · Book a review

Your building, your lease, your exit. In writing.

I'll work through your lease, MCST position and options in a free written Property Decision Review. No obligation.

Get my free review →

James's Note

Bala's Table prices the land. It has never once priced a sinking fund.

Read James's full note →

In my years as a Managing Agent, the owners who were caught off guard were rarely surprised by the lease number itself. Most people can look up their remaining years. What caught them off guard was discovering, usually at resale, that their buyer's bank was quoting a shorter loan tenure than they'd assumed, or that a special levy was about to land on top of an already-discounted sale price. The curve is public and has been for 25 years. The financing cliff and the maintenance curve are the two things that actually move the transaction, and neither one shows up in the table. If you own something in the 45 to 60 year band, the calculation above is worth doing now, while you still have a full pool of financeable buyers. Not after the pool has already started to shrink.

FAQ: What Bala's Table Misses

What is the formula for Bala's curve?+−

The table is closely approximated by a present-value formula at a 3.5% discount rate: percentage = 1 − (1 ÷ 1.035)^T, where T is remaining lease years. This formula matches the official table almost exactly at the extremes (near 99 years and near 0) but overstates value by 5 to 7 percentage points in the 35 to 55 year band, where the original table's values were interpolated between rounded landmark years.

Is there a "good time" to sell a leasehold property before it decays further?+−

There's no single deadline, but there is a mechanism to watch. CPF use usually starts being pro-rated once your remaining lease no longer covers a young buyer to age 95, often in the 50 to 60 year range, and bank loan tenures shrink further once the lease drops below about 30 years. Both shrink your pool of future buyers well before the lease itself is at risk. This is general market mechanics, not personal advice. Speak to a licensed financial adviser about your own CPF and financing position.

Why does the sinking fund matter for an older condo?+ Read →− Hide

Major works such as lift replacement, waterproofing and facade repairs come due as a building ages. If the sinking fund is too small, owners face special levies, and buyers price that risk in.

How do I check a condo's sinking fund?+ Read →− Hide

Ask for the latest MCST financial statements and the last two years of AGM minutes. Divide the sinking fund by the number of units, and look for major works that were proposed but postponed.

Does Bala's Table include the building's condition?+ Read →− Hide

No. It measures how the value of leasehold land changes with remaining lease. The building's condition, management and maintenance costs affect real prices on top of that.

Part 2 of 2 · Bala's Table and Lease Decay

1. What You Lose Each Year 2. What the Table Misses

Sources+ Show− Hide

Kwek Sian Choo & Dionne Hoh, "Determining the Value of Leasehold Land: A Closer Look at Bala's Table," Centre for Liveable Cities, 2017 (full leasehold table, Appendices 1 and 2)
Motha, P. & Yuen, B.K.P., Singapore Real Property Guide, 4th ed., Singapore University Press, 1999 (original three-point benchmark: 96%/80%/60%)
Singapore Land Authority: Leasehold Table, published online from 31 July 2000
CPF Board: CPF Ordinary Account usage pro-ration rules for leasehold properties
HDB: Lease Buyback Scheme mechanics and valuation basis
EdgeProp Singapore: Braddell View average $1,041 psf; Lakeview Estate average $1,068 psf; JadeScape average $2,296 psf, May 2026
Singapore Parliamentary Report, 8 September 2014, Vol. 92: Minister Khaw Boon Wan on Lease Buyback Scheme valuation
mychoicehomez.com: Braddell View vs Lakeview 2026; Braddell View En Bloc 2026 Analysis

Disclaimer+

This article is for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Property investments involve risk. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The rough calculation method described is a simplified estimate, not a professional valuation. Readers should seek independent advice from licensed professionals, including a registered valuer, before making any property or financial decision. James Ong is a licensed real estate salesperson (CEA Reg No. R008385F) with PropNex Realty Pte Ltd and is not a licensed financial adviser.