Closed scheme
SourceEnterprise Singapore's own Temporary Bridging Loan Programme FAQ. Read 2026-08-18.
The FAQ document
How precise this claim isThat document does not contain a sentence saying the programme was terminated. What it shows is a series of extensions ending 30 September 2022 with no later one, and the scheme does not appear among the eight current facilities on the Enterprise Financing Scheme page. So we say the final extension ended, not that it was cancelled.
The Temporary Bridging Loan stopped taking applications in 2022.
If a website offered you this scheme, that page has not been checked in years. Its final extension ran to 30 September 2022. It is a COVID-era programme and it is not part of the current government financing schemes.
The full timeline, from the government's own document
Worth reading if only to see how the terms tightened each time. The risk share fell and the maximum loan shrank as the emergency receded.
Announced Solidarity Budget, 6 April 2020. Government enhanced the scheme to a 90% risk share.
Announced 12 October 2020. Risk share lowered to 70% and quantum lowered to S$3 million, to calibrate support as the economy recovered.
Announced 5 July 2021. Extended six months on the same parameters.
Announced Budget 2022. Final extension. Risk share remained 70%, quantum lowered to S$1 million.
What exists instead
The current government-backed working capital facility is the SME Working Capital Loan, up to S$500,000 per borrower over a maximum of 5 years. The government carries 50% of the risk as standard and 70% for young enterprises. There is no interest rate cap on it.
Two things owners get backwards about government backing
Both of these are quoted word for word from Enterprise Singapore. They applied to the bridging loan and they apply to the current schemes too. Getting them wrong is expensive.
Since Enterprise Singapore provides 70%/90% risk share on the loan, does it mean that the borrower/guarantors are only responsible for the remaining percentage of the loan?
No. The borrower and guarantors are responsible to repay 100% of the loan amount. When defaults occur, PFIs are obligated to follow their standard commercial recovery procedure, including the realisation of security, before they can make a claim against Enterprise Singapore for the unrecovered amount in proportion to risk-share.
Why do banks require a 100% Personal Guarantee (PG) when the government covers 70% of the loan amount?
A PG is not only a means of security but signals a commitment by the guarantor(s) that they are committed to the loan obligation.
In plain terms: a government risk share protects the bank, not you. You still owe the whole loan, and a personal guarantee still puts you on the hook. Anyone implying otherwise is either careless or selling something.