TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search results
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search resultsRedesigning Tapera
Soaring land prices, costly construction materials, inconsistent spatial planning and stringent bank requirements for mortgages pose a challenge to house saving schemes like Tapera.
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
A woman and her child walk out of a subsidized house for media industry workers at Gran Harmoni Cibitung Residential Complex, Bekasi, West Java, on June 5, 2025. (Antara/ Fakhri Hermansyah)
At first glance, the Public Housing Savings (Tapera) program sounds promising.
The concept is reminiscent of the haj pilgrimage savings managed by the Haj Financial Management Agency (BPKH), which has now been upgraded into the Haj and Umrah Ministry. In both cases, people set aside part of their income, entrusting the government to help them reach a long-term goal, whether that is owning a home or embarking on a spiritual journey.
But while the dream of owning a home is immediate, the haj pilgrimage can be deferred, its queue determined by yearly quotas. That fundamental difference makes Tapera far more complex.
To cut corners in the process, the government introduced the 2016 Tapera Law, making contributions compulsory and requiring all employers to register their workers by 2027. Even freelancers are expected to join, though officials have yet to explain how their contributions would be collected.
The idea was simple in theory: Pool public funds to make affordable housing easier to provide. But in practice, Tapera strayed from its original spirit of voluntary savings and became yet another mandatory deduction.
Unsurprisingly, both workers and employers pushed back, calling it an additional burden amid a sluggish economy. The Constitutional Court’s recent decision to annul the Tapera Law in its entirety was therefore widely welcomed. The ruling gives the government two years to revise the law and, perhaps, rethink its entire housing strategy.
Officials have pledged to respect the verdict but admit it will slow progress toward President Prabowo Subianto’s lofty goal of providing 3 million homes a year.
