Rethinking Singapore’s F&B Regulations Amid Business Closures

As Singapore’s food and beverage (F&B) landscape faces increasing challenges, the closure of notable establishments raises questions about the effectiveness of the current regulatory framework. Iconic outlets such as Crystal Jade La Mian Xiao Long Bao, which recently shut its doors after 20 years in Holland Village, and Wala Wala Cafe Bar, ending a 32-year run, exemplify the struggles faced by licensed F&B businesses. The sector’s difficulties are further underscored by the death of Ang Yong Seh, co-owner of Xin Ming Road Bak Kut The, who worked tirelessly to address pandemic-related debts.

Amidst these closures, a contrasting trend emerges, with over 150 home-based F&B businesses thriving in Singapore. As of June 2025, establishments operating from residential properties, such as the cafe Knead Kopi in Bukit Timah and Little Social in Tanjong Pagar, are proliferating. This disparity in operational environments has led licensed F&B owners to voice concerns about an uneven playing field. They argue that while they bear high overheads and stringent regulatory demands, home-based operators often face far fewer compliance obligations.

The Burden of Compliance

Prior to the pandemic, Ang Yong Seh’s establishment grappled with significant monthly costs, including a rent of S$9,000 and employee salaries of S$4,000. The COVID-19 crisis saw daily revenues plummet to as low as S$100, accumulating over S$100,000 in debt despite his relentless work ethic, which included only four days off during Chinese New Year. This narrative resonates with many in the industry, as evidenced by the parent company of Kanada-Ya, which cited “challenging conditions” and subsequently placed its Singapore subsidiaries under creditors’ voluntary liquidation.

Licensed F&B establishments encounter substantial financial burdens long before welcoming their first patrons. Prime location rents can exceed S$20,000 monthly, and the costs associated with fit-outs can reach six figures. Regulatory compliance is another significant challenge, requiring adherence to standards set by agencies such as the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), Singapore Food Agency (SFA), and National Environment Agency (NEA), among others. Daily expenses further complicate matters, with utilities, safety inspections, staff training, and various professional fees adding to the financial strain.

The Home-Based Advantage

In stark contrast, home-based food businesses operate with minimal oversight. Consider Lucky House Cantonese Private Kitchen, run by Sam Wong from an East Coast terrace house. With a cost of S$130 per person, this operation serves up to 30 diners a night, five nights a week, translating to over S$1 million annually from a residential property that lacks necessary licensing for dine-in services. Unlike traditional businesses, home-based operators like Wong are exempt from SFA licensing and regular inspections, allowing them to thrive in an environment with significantly fewer regulatory pressures.

The regulatory blind spots are evident. In June, Raymond Leong, who runs Ampang Kitchen from a semi-detached house, admitted he was unaware that domestic helpers are prohibited from assisting in home business activities. This oversight highlights a critical difference in compliance expectations between home-based and licensed establishments.

Singapore has built a reputation for its extensive regulations while also being celebrated as a culinary destination that embraces multiculturalism and innovation. The closure of local F&B players signifies not just the loss of businesses but also the erasure of cultural spaces that embody Singapore’s identity. The existing regulatory framework, while well-intentioned, may inadvertently jeopardize the survival and growth of F&B operators.

Reflecting on his experience as the co-owner of the now-closed Jekyll & Hyde, which faced unexpected zoning restrictions, the author understands the financial strain that navigating compliance can impose, particularly on smaller operators. Each adjustment to regulatory requirements can lead to lost revenue, staffing disruptions, and uncertainty about the future.

It may be time to consider a more nuanced regulatory framework, one that scales requirements based on business scope and impact. Just as GST registration aligns with revenue thresholds, a tiered system could allow smaller F&B operations to comply with fewer regulations, while larger entities face more stringent requirements. Additionally, addressing rising rents through government intervention, such as collaborating with landlords on rent stabilization mechanisms, could foster a more vibrant F&B ecosystem.

The goal should be to preserve a diverse and dynamic F&B sector where successful businesses do not falter under avoidable constraints. It is essential that regulations maintain a level playing field and do not disproportionately burden those striving to comply with both the spirit and letter of the law.

Chua Ee Chien, currently the commercial director at TOKEN2049 and SuperAI, draws upon his experience as a former co-owner of several F&B establishments to advocate for meaningful regulatory reforms.