Cancellation Of The Tapera Law: Worker Class Victory And Challenges To Face The Housing Crisis

JAKARTA - The Constitutional Court (MK) has decided that the payment of the Public Housing Savings or Tapera contributions cannot be forced. But on the other hand, the housing crisis has not found a bright spot.

The Constitutional Court has canceled Law Number 4 of 2016 concerning Tapera as a whole on Monday (29/9/2025). The scheme prepared is considered not to provide access to the people to meet the needs of decent and affordable houses. The Constitutional Court gave a two-year deadline to regulators to make improvements.

One of the Constitutional Court's decisions is to cancel the payment of Tapera contributions for workers.

Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Suhartoyo explained that the Tapera Law was contrary to the 1945 Constitution and did not have binding legal force as long as no rearrangement was carried out, as mandated by Article 124 of Law Number 1 of 2011 concerning Housing and Settlement Areas.

Thus, workers are not required to be Tapera participants. Previously, every Tapera participant required workers to pay three percent savings dues (2.5 percent of participants and 0.5 percent of employers) from their total monthly salary.

Previously, there were three parties who filed a lawsuit, two from the labor group and a worker, on Article 7 paragraph 1 which contained: Every worker and independent worker who earns at least the minimum wage must be a participant'.

The plaintiff assessed that the mandatory phrase only adds to the financial burden, while there is no guarantee that they will get a house.

The Constitutional Court mentioned a number of considerations regarding the cancellation of the Tapera Law. First, Tapera is considered to shift the meaning of the concept of savings which is actually voluntary to a forced debtor.

Second, the Constitutional Court considers the obligation of workers to become Tapera participants to get a home to shift the role of the state. According to the Constitutional Court, the state should be responsible for providing decent housing for its citizens.

Third, the phrase mandatory' in Article 7 paragraph 1 of the Tapera Law will become a burden for workers, especially for those affected by layoffs and or employers whose businesses have been frozen or revoked their business licenses.

Finally, the Constitutional Court considers that the provisions of Article 7 paragraph 1 which require workers to set aside their income for housing will cause duplication of the program with the Old Age Security (JHT) scheme which has access to savings and housing purchase facilities without having to be burdened with other additional contributions.

The Constitutional Court's decision to annul Tapera's membership obligations for workers was positively welcomed by the Confederation of Nusantara Workers Unions (KSPN). KSPN President Ristadi said that from the start his party considered the Tapera contribution scheme to be illogical and did not provide certainty for workers to be able to own a house.

According to the calculations, if the pure home ownership scheme relies on a three percent accumulated contribution, it is mathematically impossible to achieve.

If the average wage is IDR 3.5 million, then the monthly fee is only around IDR 105,000. He said it took up to 2,000 months to be able to collect IDR 250 million, the price of a simple subsidy house at this time.

The Constitutional Court's decision is called a big victory for workers, especially workers and independent workers, who since 2024 have indeed protested Tapera's contributions amid increased living expenses.

The abolition of this contribution obligation could allow low-income workers to maintain their purchasing power, which was previously threatened by a 2.5 percent discount on salaries.

For workers who already have a home, this decision also ends policy injustices that do not consider ownership status.

Meanwhile, on the other hand, this decision poses a challenge for the government's efforts to overcome the housing backlog. Referring to data from the Central Statistics Agency (BPS) and the Ministry of PUPR compiled in the Special Report of the FEB UI Institute for Economic and Community Research (LPEM) in June 2024, the number of backlog for housing in Indonesia reached 12.7 million units in 2023.

In general, the housing backlog can be interpreted as a condition of the gap between the number of houses being built and the number needed by the people.

A housing observer from the Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB) Muhammad Jehansyah Siregar said, by eliminating the obligation of Tapera contributions, the Constitutional Court emphasized that public policies must respect constitutional rights and the principle of volunteerism.

However, said Jehansyah, the two-year deadline for the restructuring of the Tapera Law puts the government at an intersection.

"Will they design a more inclusive housing policy, or allow the housing crisis to drag on?" he said.

This victory is not the end, but rather the beginning of the challenge of creating a fair, transparent and effective housing financing system.

"In the midst of euphoria, the public must remain critical of monitoring the government's steps, ensuring that new solutions not only resolve symptoms, but also the root of the housing backlog problem," Jehansyah said.