Middle Eastern Finance and Economics

ISSN: 1450-2889 Issue 6 (2010)

© EuroJournals Publishing, Inc. 2010
http://www.eurojournals.com/MEFE.htm

Islamic Housing Finance A Critical Analysis and Comparison

with Conventional Mortgage

Muhammad Hanif
Assistant Professor, FAST School of Business
National University of Computer & Emerging Sciences, Islamabad
E-mail: hanifacma@gmail.com

Syed Tahir Hijazi

Professor, Social Sciences Department, International Islamic University, Islamabad
E-mail:hijazisyd@yahoo.com

Abstract

Housing is considered the basic necessity of human being and its shortage is a
major problem worldwide especially in less developed countries including Pakistan.
Recently the commercial banks in Pakistan have started looking for housing finance. In
addition to conventional banks Islamic banks are also providing housing finance. This
paper is focusing on house financing needs in Pakistan and critically analyzes the existing
model of Islamic housing finance (in practice) along with comparison of conventional
mortgage. As per findings of this study huge potential for financing exists in local market.
Current model of Islamic housing finance (in practice) is not matched with the principles of
Diminishing Musharaka however it suits in competing with conventional banks. The major
difference (risk and reward sharing) between Islamic and conventional finance is lacking in
operations of IFIs. At final pages of study a comparison of conventional housing finance
and Islamic housing finance is provided which concludes that in conventional return is
fixed while in Islamic return is variable taking into account value appreciation /
depreciation in addition to rentals.

Keywords: Housing, returns, Islamic housing finance, Diminishing Musharaka, Pakistan

JEL Classification Codes: R 11, G 15, G 21

1. Introduction
Housing is considered the basic necessity of human being. However the basic phenomenon is that
wants are unlimited and resources to fulfill the wants are limited. (Robins 1932). In order to get
maximum possible satisfaction we are prioritizing our needs/wants. Scholars have contributed for
prioritization of needs (e.g. Maslow, 1954). Housing is basic need and its shortage is a major problem
worldwide especially in less developed countries including Pakistan. Recently the commercial banks in
Pakistan have started looking for housing finance. In addition to conventional banks Islamic Financial
Institutions (IFIs) are also providing housing finance. This paper is focusing on house financing needs
in Pakistan and critically analyzes the existing model of Islamic housing finance (in practice) along
with comparison of conventional mortgage. We collected the data through primary and secondary
sources.
100 Middle Eastern Finance and Economics - Issue 6 (2010)

As per findings of this study huge potential for house financing exists in local market. Current
model of Islamic housing finance (in practice) is not matched with the principles of Musharaka
however it suits in competing with conventional banks. The major difference (risk and reward sharing)
between Islamic and conventional finance is lacking in operations of IFIs. At final pages of the study a
comparison of conventional mortgage and Islamic housing finance is provided which concludes that
under conventional mortgage system return is fixed while under Islamic housing finance return is
variable taking into account value appreciation / depreciation in addition to rentals. Rest of the study is
in following order. Section II states the back ground of study followed by purpose and methodology in
section III. In section IV Islamic housing finance model is explained followed by differences in
practice and theory in section V. Section VI documents differences in conventional and Islamic models
of mortgages and section VII concludes the study.

2. Background
Housing is considered the basic necessity of human being (Maslow, 1954) However due to limitations
of resources this necessity, in addition to other basic needs has not been fulfilled for all human being so
for. The condition of housing is worst in less developed countries including Pakistan. According to
economic survey of Pakistan (2004-05) the ratio of housing units to population is not acceptable by any
standard. At average eight Pakistanis are living in one housing unit. 35% of housing units available are
consisting of single room. According to 1998 census, the total number of housing units throughout the
country was 19.3 millions. The housing backlog, as estimated according to 1998 census was 4.3
millions units, which is now projected to 6 millions units. The annual additional requirement is
estimated around 570,000 units whereas the annual production is estimated around 300,000 units
resulting in a recurring shortfall of 270,000 housing units annually. It is estimated that in order to
address the backlog and to meet the housing shortfall in the next 20 years the overall housing
production will have to be increased to 820,000 units annually. (Economic Survey, 2004-05).
As per the survey report shortage of housing is clear and Pakistan is a potential financial market
for housing sector. In Pakistan until recently commercial banks ignored the provision of housing
finance. With the establishment of Islamic Financial Institutions (IFIs) one can expect improvement
and expansion in financial disbursements in housing sector of this underserved market. Housing
finance is not mature in local market. Until 2002 commercial banks were not interested in housing
finance at all. The only specialized institution owned by public sector (i.e. HBFC) was providing
housing finance in Pakistan. All inefficiencies of public sector could be seen in operations of HBFC.
So shortage of housing finance could not be met. In developed countries availability of housing finance
is much higher as compare to underdeveloped countries.
Government of Pakistan in this regard including following has taken certain measures. Firstly
the ratio of housing loans by banks is increased from 5% to 10% of total loans disbursement. Secondly
the maximum per party limit of loan is increased from 5 million to 10 million. Thirdly the maximum
debt equity ratio is increased from 70% to 80%, which means that if owner can contribute up to 20%
the rest can be arranged through loan. Fourthly banks are allowed to crate reserve up to 3% of
consumer loans for bad debts under housing finance, which is a tax incentive, and finally loan tenure is
extended up to 20 years (economic survey 2004-05). One can expect more flow of capital towards
housing sector at maturity of these steps. Another issue prevailing at the moment, banks are focusing
on city centers and ignoring surroundings, which constitute reasonably large potential market.

3. Purpose & Methodology

Islamic financial system is getting momentum and expanding world over including For Eastern
Countries, South Asia, Middle East (the centre), Europe and America. Although Islamic banking is at
infant stage yet results achieved so for are very encouraging. IFIs are operating with 250 banks in
Middle Eastern Finance and Economics - Issue 6 (2010) 101

above said countries with the volume of US$ 700 Billions1. Recently IFIs have entered in housing
finance under the scheme of Diminishing Musharaka with a positive response from the market. This
paper is intended to examine the existing Islamic housing finance model (being practiced) in detail and
test the validity of model in the light of Sharia principles. The focus of the study is to evaluate the
current Islamic housing finance model in the light of Musharaka principles and find the answers to
following questions: -
a) An understanding of Islamic housing finance model in the light of Diminishing Musharaka
principles
b) Whether house financing practices of IFIs are matching with the underlying theory of Islamic
housing finance
c) How Islamic housing finance is different from conventional mortgages?
To answer these questions, we collected data through primary and secondary sources. Primary
data tools include the personal observations, interviews with bankers, property dealers and
academicians. Secondary sources include publications, journals and periodic reports.

4. Islamic Housing Finance

“If Muslims have the same orientation and motivation in finance as everybody else, they will end up
having the system that has resulted from other people’s choices, the one we call conventional financial
system. A genuinely distinctive system can emerge only out of a genuinely distinct orientation and
motivation, a different set of norms. If Muslims don’t have one, they do not need a different financial
system” (Siddiqi, 2006)
Islamic banking/ finance is different from conventional counterpart in its mechanism and
principles. Islamic banking, like any other sphere of life, is governed and regulated by the principles
laid down by Islamic Sharia. Under Islamic financial system interest is forbidden. Interest based
transactions are haram (forbidden). According to Quran riba (interest and usury) is prohibited [Al-
Baqarah 2:275-281]. As per the Supreme Court of Pakistan judgment (1999), any additional amount
over the principal in a contract of loan or debt is the riba prohibited by the Holy Qur'an. The same
judgment is defining the Riba (interest) as demanding the pre determined return on loan irrespective of
the purpose; and actual outcome of the project under taken by using that loan. As under Islamic
financial system interest based financing is prohibited, so Muslim jurists and scholars have designed
financing and trade mechanisms within Sharia (Islamic law) boundaries. The most popular financing
tools used by IFIs include Musharaka (partnership in capital), Mudaraba (partnership of capital and
skill), Murabaha (cost plus profit) and Ijara (leasing).
Housing finance is provided under the principles of a special purpose partnership generally
known as Diminishing Musharaka. According to Sharia standard 12 “Diminishing Musharaka is a form
of partnership in which one of the partner promises to buy the equity share of the other partner
gradually until the title to the equity is completely transferred to him” Under Diminishing Musharaka
arrangement agreement is required; verbal or written; capital is contributed by both parties in cash or in
kind; profit is shared as per agreement while loss is shared according to share in equity; cost of repair
and maintenance, insurance etc are shared by both parties; one partner (IFI) leases his share in asset to
other (client) for a consideration. Contract of buying and selling of equity units between partners
cannot be stipulated in Diminishing Musharaka contract; price of units to be sold /purchased is fair
value or else as agreed between parties but face value of units cannot be stipulated (Sharia Standard
12). To put the concept in practice following example would clarify the working under diminishing
Musharaka2.

1
(http://www.ifsl.org.uk/output/ReportItem.aspx?NewsID=32, accessed on February 11, 2009).
2
[We presented a very simple example here to demonstrate the concept ignoring any appreciation (depreciation) in value
of property; further we kept the rentals fixed]
102 Middle Eastern Finance and Economics - Issue 6 (2010)

Mr. A want to purchase a house amounting to Rs; 1,000,000 and requesting an IFI for financing
to be repaid in eight years through eight equal installments. Under Diminishing Musharaka
arrangement the equity of Bank shall be divided in eight units which A will acquire annually. Certain
portion (e.g. 20%) of the total price is to be contributed by A and rest (80%) is provided by IFI at the
time of acquisition. House is the joint property of IFI and A. After acquisition, house is handed over to
A and IFI is renting his share in property to A. suppose annual rent of property is Rs; 1, 00,000 net of
repair and insurance etc. For first year the share in rent of IFI is Rs; 80,000 being the owner of 80% of
property. The first installment is Rs; 180,000 consisting of purchase price of an equity unit and rent.
For every subsequent year as the share of IFI is decreasing in property, hence the amount of rent
payable is also decreasing as shown in table 1. According to this model the owner and the IFI both are
contributing capitals and enter into Musharaka. The reward sharing is according to capital contribution
or as agreed. However this is Diminishing Musharaka, by the time client is purchasing equity units of
IFI the share in rent is also decreasing. The installment payment includes share of rent and purchase
price of an equity unit. Over the time equity of IFI is decreasing and share in rentals is also decreasing.

Table 1: Displays payment schedule under Diminishing Musharaka mechanism

End of Years Principal Payment Rental Payment Amount of Installments Balance

0 0 0 0 800,000
1 100,000 80,000 180,000 700,000
2 100,000 70,000 170,000 600,000
3 100,000 60,000 160,000 500,000
4 100,000 50,000 150,000 400,000
5 100,000 40,000 140,000 300,000
6 100,000 30,000 130,000 200,000
7 100,000 20,000 120,000 100,000
8 100,000 10,000 110,000 0
Total 800,000 360,000 1,160,000 0

With the purchase of last equity unit the share of IFI comes to an end and property as a whole is
transferred in the name of owner. Second is the case of construction of property by the client instead of
purchase. As a principle of Musharaka return (rentals) for IFI will due once the property is useable. As
a general practice value of the constructed house is higher than its cost under normal circumstances. IFI
and client can conclude a price covering the profit for IFI at the time of completion of property. In this
case IFI shall receive the return in form of rent after completion of house and also profit over cost,
being partner in the construction.
In practice, IFIs are calculating the IRR on their share (payable balance) and state as a
percentage return along with principal.3 This method of calculation makes it easier for customers to
understand liability and make comparison of various financing agencies in the process of reaching
conclusion. This method is also assisting IFIs to offer competitive rates to customers because (as it is
said) Islamic banking is at infant stage in this country and have to compete with established
conventional banking.

5. Issues in Existing Practices

As a principle, under Musharaka mode of financing risks and rewards are shared by the partners
(Sharia Standard 12). Reward or return is income received on an investment plus any change in market
price (Van Horne 07). The existing model of Islamic housing finance (being practiced) gives rise to
certain questions; the first and foremost; it ignores the appreciation /depreciation in value of the
property. After all how it can be justified that any appreciation /depreciation in the value of property
belongs to one partner (owner) and nothing for other (financier); while in majority cases financier

3
Generally in line with KIBOR (Karachi Inter Bank Offered Rate)
Middle Eastern Finance and Economics - Issue 6 (2010) 103

provides larger part of capital. This is clearly against the principles of Musharaka. One can argue that if
financier wants to gift his share in appreciation, or surrender his share in favor of other partner, then
nothing against justice. However the financier in question is IFI who is not the sole owner of capital
invested. Capital is provided by depositors on profit and loss sharing basis and they too are owners. So
any surrender in share of return by IFI would mean gifting the property of others, without their
consent. In fact what is practically going on that is due to a particular fear ;(i.e. probable loss of
customers). IFIs are trying to be competitive with conventional banks in order to attract and retain
customers. This is a valid business trick but this is a hurdle in promotion of true Islamic financial
system, which differentiates itself through sharing of risks and rewards.
The second question is determination of rental value in advance or linking with KIBOR
(Karachi Inter Banks Offered Rate). In this era of paper currency, inflation is hitting almost every
country. In Pakistan, official figures of inflation, for last three years are more than 7%. The house rent
inflation was 11% in year 2004-05 (Economic survey of Pakistan 04-05). It means rental value is
varying (increasing) every year. How can we determine the return rate in advance assuming an
artificial rental value instead of actual? Third question; what IFIs are demanding from customers is
rental of capital (payable balance) determined on the basis of KIBOR and not the share of rentals based
on actual rent of the property. As a matter of fact Diminishing Musharaka explicitly states the sharing
of risk and reward associated with underlying property and not the rent of capital. KIBOR is
determining rent of capital used under conventional financial system and not the rent of property.
Another severe criticism on IFIs raised by certain quarters is the linkage of profit percentage
with KIBOR. This objection is not only limited to housing finance rather it is on all financing tools of
IFIs. IFIs are of the view that they are competing with conventional banks which are dominating the
financial markets with a share of 96%. Any other bench mark might turn the operations of IFIs
uncompetitive with conventional banks. If products of IFIs would be costly than conventional banks
they (IFIs) might lose the customers. The view point of IFIs does carry weight however it adds in
negative perception among masses about their operations. This negative perception is required to be
changed as the chief motivating factor for customers to transect business with IFIs is their Sharia
compliant operations and of course sole reason of existence.
Finally fixation of prices of equity units to be purchased by client guarantees return of
investment to the financier irrespective of increase /decrease in the value of underlying project which is
against the very nature of Musharaka financing. After the financial crisis of 2007-08 this aspect
demands more consideration by experts of Islamic financial system and IFIs. Fixation of prices of
equity units (normally historical cost) narrows the difference between Islamic housing finance
transactions and those of conventional mortgages in substance if not in form.
To conclude, IFIs have to take into account the appreciation /depreciation in property value as
well as actual rental value of the property. Liability of prospective owner cannot be determined in
advance, which is the essence of Musharaka business. Any increase /decrease in value should be shared
by both parties. As for practice is concerned, two frameworks are suggested. First is to value the house
at the time all principal is discharged an adjustment for appreciation /depreciation should be made.
Second method the most accurate is to revalue the house every year and determine the rental value
accordingly, to calculate installment payable for the year and so on. A worked example on these
parameters is given at the end of section VI.

6. Conventional Vs Islamic Mortgage

In this section we are highlighting the difference between conventional and Islamic housing finance.
Firstly under conventional financial system interest is charged which is determined on the basis of
demand and supply of the capital while under Islamic financial system rent of the property is charged,
determined through demand and supply of real asset. Secondly as conventional banks do not own the
underlying asset, hence sharing of risk and reward of property is not required while IFIs are co owner
of the property and share risk and rewards attached with ownership. Thirdly return for conventional
104 Middle Eastern Finance and Economics - Issue 6 (2010)

banks starts from the date of loan extension facility which is not the case in IFIs. Under Diminishing
Musharaka model return is due when the property is ready for use either through acquisition or through
construction.
Fourthly conventional banks are not required to share any loss occurred to the underlying
property while IFIs being co owner will share any damage occurred to the house. Fifthly conventional
banks will continuously receive the installments (containing interest & principal) even if property is
not use able and needs some repair. During the repair period IFIs cannot receive the rent. Sixthly return
of conventional banks is fixed as interest while IFIs will receive rentals as well as share any
appreciation (depreciation). Graphic presentation of comparative returns is shown in figure 1. In figure
1 on x-axis time period and on y-axis returns are shown. Curve bd is representing return under
conventional financial system and curve ae is representing return under Diminishing Musharaka. In
initial period return under Diminishing Musharaka is low (abc) as compare to conventional system and
increases with the increase in value of property (cde) while return under conventional mortgage it is
fixed irrespective of value appreciation (depreciation) of property (obxd).The lower return in earlier
period and higher return later on under Diminishing Musharaka is justified on the basis of outcome of
the underlying project.

Figure 1: displays conceptual frame work (comparative returns).

y e

Share of financier
Under IHF

R
e
t
u c d
r b
n
s Share of financier
a Under CHF conventional

o
Duration x

In recent years there is a booming increase in rentals as well as in value of property in local
market. Take the example of property prices and rental values of any city center, you will see manifold
increase. In certain instances like Islamabad city prices are gone up to (50-60) times approximately in
20 to 25 years. In case of conventional banking the return is fixed irrespective of rental value and value
appreciation. In case of Islamic housing finance any increase in value and rental is shared with
financier. The following tables and graph will explain the phenomenon of housing values boom in
Islamabad. These figures are relating to an average house in Islamabad.
1. A house purchased in 1981 with amount of Rs; 600,000 and rental value at that time 30,000 per
annum. At present 2007 the same house is carrying value of 41,000,000 with rental value of Rs;
1,200,000.4
2. 50% contributed by bank and rest by owner.
3. Owner till does not return principal.
4. Interest rate is 15% fixed.
Although practically increase in property value is taken place in phases however for ease of
calculation and understanding we calculated internal rate of return that becomes around 17%.
Complete working is shown in appendix. Figure 2, table 2 & 3 display return on investment (rental
4
The values are taken from market with personal observation and interviews with property dealers
Middle Eastern Finance and Economics - Issue 6 (2010) 105

value and appreciation) which starts from Rs; 132,000 p.a. and reaches to Rs; seven millions p.a. in
27th year. Share of investor under Islamic banking is increasing accordingly while under conventional
banking it is fixed of Rs; 45,000 irrespective of return.
In figure 2 on x-axis years and on y-axis returns are measured. Under Islamic mortgage return
is increasing with the increase in value of property. Blue line is representing total return on property
which has crossed the figure of Rs; 7 millions and red curve depicts the return for IFI which is reached
to Rs; 3.5 millions in 27th year while green line is representing return under conventional system which
is fixed of Rs; 45,000 per annum. Percentage return under Islamic housing finance is higher (average
21%) as compare to conventional (15%). By looking at graph and tables certain points worth
mentioning, are as follow: Firstly in Islamic banking the return of financier is low in early years and
higher in later years (according to value of property) as compared to conventional banking. However it
varies with the actual return on property hence, justified. It is not putting the owner into trouble by
asking for a fixed return irrespective of actual outcome of the underlying project. So by applying the
practice of Diminishing Musharaka, banks can earn more than conventional financing system. Under
this system bank will earn more and share accordingly with depositors as deposits are taken under
profit and loss sharing system. This will result shifting of capital and savings from conventional to
Islamic banking.

Figure 2: Total return (rental +appreciation) and distribution in Islamic finance

Secondly if we look at the total return under conventional banking one can earn in 27 years Rs;
1.2 million while under Islamic banking the return in the same period is around Rs; 4 million in rentals
and cumulative share in appreciation is Rs; 20 million. So the IFIs are earning approximately Rs; 22
million more than conventional banks which is justified as there is appreciation, in the property value,
of Rs; 41 millions in 27 years.

Table 2: showing the comparative return- (rental plus appreciation) under both schemes

Financing scheme 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 2007

Value of property 702,000 1,539,099 3,374,394 7,398,182 16,220,131 35,561,794 41,607,298
Total Return on Property 132,000 284,000 611,000 1,320,000 2,847,000 6,000,000 7,000,000
Return under Islamic banking 66,000 140,000 305,000 660,000 1,423,000 3,000,000 3,500,000
Return under conventional 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000
banking

As a matter of fact this will shift the depositors to IFIs and customers—borrowers-- towards
conventional banking and leaving the IFIs with more funds and fewer customers-borrowers-. Here the
economic principle of demand and supply will come to play i.e. determination of return for IFIs
through demand supply forces. Under such circumstances return can be shared under any acceptable
106 Middle Eastern Finance and Economics - Issue 6 (2010)

ratio-favoring customers as profit sharing can be decided through mutual agreement under Musharaka.
However if things move in opposite direction as happened in financial crisis 2007-08, customer is
relatively secured because loss is shared according to equity under Islamic financial system.

Table 3: showing the % return- (rental plus appreciation) under both schemes

Financing scheme 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 2007

Return under Islamic bank 22% 22% 21% 21% 21% 20% 20%
Return under conventional bank 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15%

7. Conclusion
There is a huge potential for housing finance in local market. The existing model (in practice) of
Islamic housing finance is lacking the consideration of appreciation /depreciation in value and variable
rentals, so demands change. IFIs while competing with conventional banks are trying to remain very
close to them in products as well as total cost to customers. This practice raises questions in the minds
of people and ads to negative perception about operations of IFIs. Islamic finance is not based on the
principal of capitalism and should be looked and practiced keeping this fact in mind. It cannot be
comparative in practice with capitalism. It has its own principles, which create a different economic
system based on justice and equity. If IFIs want to be closer to conventional banking in serving the
depositors and customers then certainly they have to depart with certain principles and practices, which
cannot be appreciated. After all what is the essence of Islamic financial system? It is Sharing; sharing
of risks and rewards by both parties. Islamic housing finance is unique and unmatched with traditional
mortgages. IRR cannot be determined in advance. It is true Musharaka, which demands the sharing of
risk and reward by both partners. under Islamic banking financier is earning more as compare to
conventional banking (in case of appreciation) but after capacity building of customer, while under
conventional financial system return is fixed which put the client in trouble in early years and lead to
prosperity in following years if property value appraises and vice versa.

References
[1] AAOIFI. (2003). Accounting and Auditing Standards for Islamic Financial Institutions,
International Institute of Islamic Economics, Islamabad, Pakistan.
[2] AAOIFI. (2004). Shari’a Standards. P.O. Box 1176, Bahrain.
[3] Ahmed, A., (1992). Islami Bakari (Urdu). Institute of Policy Studies, Islamabad.
[4] C.I.I., (1992). Report on Elimination of Interest from Economy. Council of Islamic Ideology,
Islamabad.
[5] G.O.P., (2004-07).Economic Survey of Pakistan. Finance Ministry, Islamabad
[6] Hijazi, S.T., (1997). Profit and loss sharing system and community savings and investment
scheme. The Lahore Journal of economics 4:2, pages 111- 119.
[7] Hijazi, S.T., and Khan, A., (1997). Profit sharing. Macmillan publishers, Lahore.
[8] Modoodi S.A.A., (1961) Sood (Urdu). Islamic publications Pvt. Ltd. Lahore.
[9] Maslow, A., (1954). Motivation and Personality. Haper and Row, New York.
[10] Qarzawi, y., (……).Islam Main Halal and Haram (Urdu). Islamic publications Private limited,
Lahore.
[11] Rehman. Y, Tug.A.S, (……).Towards a LARIBA (Islamic) mortgage financing in the United
States providing an alternative to traditional mortgages. International Journal of Islamic
Financial Services Vol. 1 No. 2.
[12] Robins, (1932). Nature and Significance of Economic Science.
[13] Siddiqi, M. N., (2006). Islamic banking and finance in theory and practice: a survey of state of
the art. Islamic Economic Studies.Vol. 13, No. 2, page 1-48.
Middle Eastern Finance and Economics - Issue 6 (2010) 107

[14] Task force, (2000). Experience in Islamic Banking, case study of Islamic Bank Bangla desh.
Institute of Policy Studies Islamabad
[15] Usmani, T. S., (1999). The Judgment on Riba. Supreme court of Pakistan cases, Pakistan Legal
Development (PLD) publishers Lahore
[16] Usmani, T. S., (2002). An Introduction to Islamic Finance. Maktaba Ma’arif Al Quran, Karachi
[17] Vanhorne, c. J., (2007). Fundamentals of financial management. Prenticehall New Delhi India

Appendix showing the calculation of return under Islamic housing finance and conventional
housing finance.

Return Return
return on share in share in
Years Value increase rentals Increase under under
property rent capital
Islamic conventional
1980 600000
1981 702,000 102,000 30,000 4,500 132,000 15,000 51,000 66,000 45000
1982 821,340 119,340 34,500 5,175 153,840 17,250 59,670 76,920 45000
1983 960,968 139,628 39,675 5,951 179,303 19,838 69,814 89,651 45000
1984 1,124,332 163,365 45,626 6,844 208,991 22,813 81,682 104,495 45000
1985 1,315,469 191,136 52,470 7,871 243,607 26,235 95,568 121,803 45000
1986 1,539,099 223,630 60,341 9,051 283,970 30,170 111,815 141,985 45000
1987 1,800,745 261,647 69,392 10,409 331,039 34,696 130,823 165,519 45000
1988 2,106,872 306,127 79,801 11,970 385,927 39,900 153,063 192,964 45000
1989 2,465,040 358,168 91,771 13,766 449,939 45,885 179,084 224,969 45000
1990 2,884,097 419,057 105,536 15,830 524,593 52,768 209,528 262,297 45000
1991 3,374,394 490,296 121,367 18,205 611,663 60,683 245,148 305,832 45000
1992 3,948,040 573,647 139,572 20,936 713,219 69,786 286,823 356,609 45000
1993 4,619,207 671,167 160,508 24,076 831,674 80,254 335,583 415,837 45000
1994 5,404,473 785,265 184,584 27,688 969,849 92,292 392,633 484,924 45000
1995 6,323,233 918,760 212,271 31,841 1,131,032 106,136 459,380 565,516 45000
1996 7,398,182 1,074,950 244,112 36,617 1,319,061 122,056 537,475 659,531 45000
1997 8,655,873 1,257,691 280,729 42,109 1,538,420 140,364 628,846 769,210 45000
1998 10,127,372 1,471,498 322,838 48,426 1,794,336 161,419 735,749 897,168 45000
1999 11,849,025 1,721,653 371,264 55,690 2,092,917 185,632 860,827 1,046,458 45000
2000 13,863,359 2,014,334 426,953 64,043 2,441,287 213,477 1,007,167 1,220,644 45000
2001 16,220,131 2,356,771 490,996 73,649 2,847,767 245,498 1,178,386 1,423,884 45000
2002 18,977,553 2,757,422 564,646 84,697 3,322,068 282,323 1,378,711 1,661,034 45000
2003 22,203,737 3,226,184 649,342 97,401 3,875,526 324,671 1,613,092 1,937,763 45000
2004 25,978,372 3,774,635 746,744 112,012 4,521,379 373,372 1,887,318 2,260,689 45000
2005 30,394,695 4,416,323 858,755 128,813 5,275,079 429,378 2,208,162 2,637,539 45000
2006 35,561,794 5,167,098 987,569 148,135 6,154,667 493,784 2,583,549 3,077,333 45000
2007 41,607,298 6,045,505 1,135,704 170,356 7,181,209 567,852 3,022,752 3,590,604 45000
Total 41,007,298 8,507,063 1,276,059 49,514,361 4,253,531 20,503,649 24,757,181 1215,000