{"id":13457,"date":"2025-06-12T08:00:00","date_gmt":"2025-06-12T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dollarsandsense.sg\/business\/?p=13457"},"modified":"2025-06-14T21:07:50","modified_gmt":"2025-06-14T13:07:50","slug":"rethinking-fairness-in-fb-why-the-home-cafe-debate-is-really-about-policy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dollarsandsense.sg\/business\/rethinking-fairness-in-fb-why-the-home-cafe-debate-is-really-about-policy\/","title":{"rendered":"Rethinking Fairness In F&B: Why The Home Cafe Debate Is Really About Policy"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

I wrote a LinkedIn post<\/a> about home-based caf\u00e9s, didn\u2019t quite expect it to blow up the way it did, but it clearly struck a nerve and resonated with others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hundreds of comments poured in. Some defended home caf\u00e9 owners and praised their creativity. Others, like myself, have raised concerns about the growing disparity between licensed food and beverage (F&B) businesses and home-based operators. What began as a post about fairness and regulation quickly evolved into a broader conversation about entrepreneurship, public policy, safety, and what it really takes to succeed in Singapore\u2019s food scene today.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019m Not Against Home-Based Caf\u00e9s. I\u2019m Against A Broken System<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

As an entrepreneur and former bar owner, I deeply respect anyone trying to build something of their own. Whether you’re running a tech startup or baking brownies in your HDB flat, the grind is real, and the courage it takes is no small thing. Entrepreneurship and starting a business, small or otherwise, is something that takes time and heart, and I never want to belittle an entrepreneur.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, what actually is the challenge and concern here?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The issue at hand is not about whether people should be allowed to start small. It\u2019s about the fact that licensed F&B establishments are playing by a set of strict, costly rules, while home-based caf\u00e9s are operating with minimal (and often zero) oversight. That creates an uneven playing field.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Meanwhile, some home caf\u00e9s are hosting over 100 customers a day, with seemingly no visible compliance requirements in place. Clearly, something in the system is broken.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Certification \u2260 Licensing<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

One common rebuttal I heard was: \u201cHow do you know they\u2019re not licensed?\u201d<\/em> The answer is simple: they can\u2019t be, at least not in the traditional sense.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Under current regulations, it\u2019s not legally possible to operate a licensed dine-in F&B outlet from a private residence in Singapore. The Singapore Food Agency (SFA) only issues food shop licences to premises that are zoned and approved for commercial use. Residential properties do not qualify. This means that even if a home-based caf\u00e9 regularly hosts dine-in customers, it\u2019s technically operating outside the framework of what\u2019s legally allowed for F&B businesses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some home caf\u00e9 owners may have attended basic food safety courses or even obtained a Food Hygiene Certificate, and that\u2019s commendable. But let\u2019s be clear: holding a certificate is not the same as holding a valid food service licence. A certificate simply shows that the individual has undergone training. A licence, on the other hand, signifies that the premises have passed a rigorous series of site inspections, compliance checks, and regulatory approvals, covering everything from kitchen layout and floor drainage to pest control measures and staff hygiene systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The difference is significant. Licensed operators are subject to regular audits and spot checks. They must meet the requirements of multiple agencies, including SFA, NEA, SCDF, and occasionally MUIS. They\u2019re required to publicly display their licence and renew it periodically. Failure to comply can result in fines, demerit points, or even the forced closure of the premises.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So when people ask whether home-based operators are \u201clicensed,\u201d it\u2019s not a matter of speculation. By definition, they\u2019re not, and under the current system, they can\u2019t be. That\u2019s where the imbalance begins.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A Threshold Model Is Long Overdue<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

This isn\u2019t about clamping down on passion. One possible way forward is to adopt a tiered regulatory model, similar to how businesses are required to register for GST once they exceed the $1 million annual revenue threshold.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this context, thresholds could be based on factors such as:<\/p>\n\n\n\n