REPORTER’S NOTEBOOKFlexibility or inconsistency? President's policy U-turns raise questions

President Lee Jae Myung made a candid acknowledgment at a Cabinet meeting Tuesday, amid criticism that his administration has repeatedly revised policy proposals following public backlash.

“We have to accept that government proposals are not always right, nor can they be perfect,” Lee said, urging ministries to take concerns seriously and reflect reasonable alternatives in their policies.

The remarks could be viewed as an expression of flexibility — a president acknowledging that policymakers can make mistakes and should correct them when better options emerge.

But they also touch on a growing question surrounding the Lee administration: At what point does flexibility turn into inconsistency?

The question has become increasingly relevant as the government has repeatedly modified or reconsidered major policy proposals in response to public opposition.

The latest example came at the same Cabinet meeting, when the government reversed a key part of its real estate tax reform just a month after unveiling the overhaul plan.

Under the tax reform plan announced Aug. 3, the government proposed raising taxes on people who own one home but live elsewhere, by lowering their tax-free threshold from 1.2 billion won ($865,000) to 900 million won, while raising it to 1.4 billion won for those who live in their homes.

The plan drew criticism for penalizing homeowners who cannot live in their properties because of their jobs, their children’s education or other circumstances, while raising concerns about repercussions for tenants.

The ruling Democratic Party of Korea also called for changes.

Accordingly, the government reversed course, restoring the 1.2 billion won deduction and scrapping another proposed increase in the tax burden.

The reversal was not an isolated case.

The Lee administration faced similar backlash over proposed changes to individual savings accounts (ISAs), a tax-advantaged investment vehicle.

The government initially proposed preventing investors from using portions of their annual contribution limits left unused in previous years, while also limiting how long ISA accounts could remain open.

Critics said the changes would disadvantage freelancers, self-employed people and younger workers with fluctuating incomes, and would discourage long-term investment.

After learning of the criticism in August, Lee questioned whether the proposal had been sufficiently reviewed and ordered a reconsideration.

The government ultimately backtracked, retaining the existing contribution rules and allowing accounts to remain open indefinitely.

“Such episodes offer two very different interpretations of Lee's governing style,” said Jung Jae-hwan, a political science professor at Inha University.

The professor noted that the president appears prepared to adjust policies in response to convincing objections, rather than defending government proposals simply because his administration produced them.

“In an era when political leaders can become trapped by their own policy commitments, such pragmatism can be an advantage," the professor said.

Shin Yul, a political science professor at Myongji University, voiced a similar view.

“The president appears to regard policymaking as an interactive process rather than a one-way exercise in which the government announces a decision and expects the public to accept it,” he said.

Lee has also shown an inclination to test public sentiment before pursuing contentious ideas.

In January, for instance, he published a post on social media floating the idea of imposing a levy on excessive sugar use, asking the public what they thought about using the proceeds to strengthen public and regional health care.

When reports characterized the idea as a plan to introduce a “sugar tax,” Lee stressed that he was seeking public opinion rather than announcing a government policy.

But what appears to be flexibility can also be seen as inconsistency.

If major proposals repeatedly require substantial revision only after public opposition erupts, questions inevitably arise over whether their potential consequences were sufficiently examined before they were announced.

The main opposition People Power Party seized on precisely that point after Lee ordered the ISA proposal reconsidered.

“Immediately stop the hasty style of governance in which policies are announced first and corrected after the public protests,” the party said, arguing that the repeated revisions showed the government had failed to adequately examine the potential repercussions and side effects of its policies before unveiling them.

Listening to public opinion is an essential part of democratic governance. No administration should stubbornly pursue a policy simply to avoid admitting that its original proposal was flawed.

But flexibility works best when it follows careful policymaking rather than substitutes for it.