Leong Sze Hian /
I refer to the article ‘Why do it without my permission?‘ (New Paper, Jul 17).
OA transfer to MA?
The article states that “(Jerry Low, age 58) a retired bank trader got a surprise when the CPF Board transferred $10,000 into his Medisave Account (MA) without his permission, after he applied to withdraw $37,000 from his Ordinary Account (OA) in June this year.
Mr Low had chosen to not withdraw all his money from his OA when he turned 55.
He opted for a partial withdrawal, leaving some money in his OA as the CPF interest rate of 2.5 per cent was higher than what the banks were offering.
He could do this as his Medisave Account and Retirement Account (RA) had the required amount.
Since 2008, Mr Low had used his Medisave to pay for some medical expenses, whittling away his Medisave Required Amount (MRA), which was $14,000 as of Jan 1, 2008.
However, the required amount was raised to $27,500 as of Jan 1 this year.”
Another COF change nobody knows about?
This is not the first time that CPF policies have been changed without anyone knowing about it – no announcement in Parliament or the media.
For example, the change in the CPF Minimum Sum (MS) property pledge rule at age 55 was changed so that it no longer helps you to withdraw more money at 55, but only to be pledged automatically against any shortfall in the MS.
Therefore, if one wants to avoid what happened to Mr Jerry Low, any CPF funds that can be withdrawn at 55, should not be left with CPF. Otherwise, as the MRA is raised annually in the future, the OA monies left at 55 may automatically be transferred to the Medisave account to make up for any MRA shortfall.
Since the MRA was increased by $5,000 this year (from $22,500 to $27,500), if this rate of increase continues, the OA monies which, in the past, could be withdrawn at any time, may gradually be eroded as a non-cashable asset – kind of like more and more money that may be stuck in your CPF that you may only be able to use when you are sick!
I would like to thank Jane (not her real name) for bringing the above issue to The Online Citizen.
I am also reproducing part of Jane’s email on other problems that she has encountered with CPF below.
Parents divorce – no more 1st-timer?
“In year 2007, my fiancé’s parents divorced; and in order to still have a roof over their heads, my fiancé decided to buy over half the house’s share from his father, so that my fiancé and his mother could continue living in the home which they had lived in for 20 odd years.
As his father sold his share of the house to my fiancé, my fiancé and his mother would need to re-finance the HDB loan.
When applying for a new HDB loan, I believe HDB will review both parties’ income and age as well. Due to the fact that my fiance’s mum is working in a factory, her income is approximately $700 per month and as a result, her CPF contribution would not be enough to pay for the monthly home loan instalment Therefore, my fiancé decided to let HDB deduct the monthly instalments partially from his mother’s CPF, and a bigger portion from his.
My fiancé was only 22 at that time, and by getting a HDB loan with his mother, and buying over the share of the house from his father, his CPF was wiped out. Also, he won’t be considered a 1st timer should he want to ballot for a new BTO, as he’s now considered a co-owner of the flat.
Early this year, me and my fiancé decided to get a flat on our own, so that we could settle down. But I realized we wouldn’t be able to do so after all, unless we have at least $50k of spare cash. I checked with HDB, as well as my property agent, and I realized that our chances of getting a flat is lower than others as my fiancé is considered a 2nd timer, and chances are very low as HDB balloting would award more chances (95%) to first timers instead of 2nd timers. However, even if we are that lucky to manage to get a balloting number, I realized that by getting a new flat, and a new HDB loan with me, my fiancé would need to remove his name from the current flat he shares with his mother.
I understand fully the rationale of this as each individual is not allowed to hold on to ownership of more then one HDB flat.
We enquired with both HDB and my property agent friend about removing of his name, and what I found out makes me realize that getting a new flat for our future home is nearly impossible.
By removing his name from his current flat, whatever amount that he has used his CPF to pay for the flat – his mother would have to top up back in CASH, together with accrued interest. That’s hurdle number one, as it amounts to close to $40k already. However, even if we managed to top up the $40k back in CPF eventually, his mother might not be able to get a new HDB loan on her own, due to her age & income.
All these limitations and rules makes me feel that it’s a big burden which I definitely don’t deserve.
Since CPF is required to be contributed monthly so that we can use it for housing payments/purchase and even to use it when we are old, such regulations are forbidding young couples to get a new flat should he be so unfortunate that his parents get divorced.
At the rate that housing prices are rising, and the shortage of the supply, I really really pray that I could get a flat soon and then start my own family. But unless we have the cash ready to top up back into my finace’s CPF account, I think we wouldn’t be able to start a family on our own. Even if we did eventually manage to save $40k , by topping up into CPF, we might not have money for renovations or the purchase of furniture.
In this generation, I’m 24 this year, my fiancé is 26. I believe most of us believe that starting a family, means having our own home, and be financially stable. That’s why I feel that when one of the ministers mentioned that starting a family doesn’t necessary mean you need to have a home or be financially stable, I think that’s rubbish.
So I have a question, what’s the use of contributing to CPF, 36% per month, yet when we use it, end of day we have to top it back up, and the age for withdrawal of CPF is getting higher and higher.
I feel that, at the end of the day, when my life comes to an end, maybe all I could see and bring to my grave, is the yearly CPF statement only…
I hope to highlight to the public as well, about topping up of medisave account which happened to my father.”
No Medisave, no hawker license?
“My father turned 55 in 2005. During that time, he was allowed to withdraw the full amount of CPF he had in his ordinary account, which he did. However after doing so, CPF board has been constantly sending him letters asking him to top up his Medisave account. My Father refused to as he felt that the money would not be useful. Because, even if you maintained the minimum sum required for the MA, at any point if you were to use it for medical purposes, you would have to put in cash to top it up to the minimum sum. Which is why my Father feels that it is not necessary to top up his MA Acc.
I feel that CPF board ought to explain all this clearly to the public.
To add on: my father owns a hawker stall, and the government refused to let him renew the rental unless my father’s MA Acc is topped up to meet the minimum sum required.
I really do hope the government could do a detailed report on how exactly CPF works.
I’m now a working adult contributing to CPF monthly, and I’m contributing a lot, but I feel the uncertainty of making CPF contributions.”
P.S. Leong Sze Hian (and TOC) would like to thank Jane for sharing the New Paper article with us, as well as sharing her story.
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
The lack of prominent information or announcement about the changes the CPF smacks of disrespect to the Singaporeans who are propping it up. Worse still, we can’t debate or oppose the changes.
The facts that 60% Sporean has given the “Party Against People” the mandate has make many irrepsonsible decision huge salary for themselves by sucking on Sporean. Only by get the top man to be change hopefully the time is sooner then the next election for new president and maybe the next PM.
Case #1: Having your CPF OA money being exposed to the risk of being transferred to the MRA is something that should be publicized. The process by which CPF board raises its various minimum sums should also be made more transparent.
Case #2: Tough. I don’t think the system can be made so flexible as to cover all cases. The reason why the husband isn’t a first timer is totally valid – he is already the owner of a flat. The obvious solution is to marry, move into this existing flat, and live with the mother. They can do this right now, no need to wait.
Case #3: If true, IMO this constitutes a misuse of power. How can rental approval be subject to topping up MRA?
Jason 30 July 2011
Case #3: If true, IMO this constitutes a misuse of power. How can rental approval be subject to topping up MRA?
———————————————–
See the problem !!! All the constraints and can still call us daft or complacent. And still want us to leave enough for retirement. What a way to go.
They could tell you that they have done nothing wrong as everything is in accordance to “procedures or regulations”.
just vote them out!!!!!!
Another of PAP classic work – whims and fancies. It is not our money but theirs to do what they wish. Gosh! is there no law in singapore to protect the citizen money?
I was very sorry to see Jane and her fiance’s predicament. CPF had likely closed this alternative but I was just wondering whether it is possible for the son’s share of the home to be sold to the mom for a token sum? There will then of course be the issue of how the mum will be able to continue servicing the home. Would the mum be open to downgrading the home too? Perhaps to buy a 2-room flat hdb bto while staying with Jane and her fiance in their new place temporarily?
Inorder for us citizen to be treated fairly, we need to have all these unfair policies changed. We need to vote them out. Only then will the much required change occured.
For a start do not vote for Tony Tan.
Me too, overnight found my minimum sum increased from $90,000 to $111,000 at age 61 years, without even an official notice to me.
So folks, better withdraw as soon as possible whatever permitted. CPF is desperate for money, to fill the gaping hole lost by our 2 Sovereign Funds.
CPF is a forced saving but the policy of low interest rate of below inflation rate is like a tax. Malaysia EPF offer dividend which depends on the investment return of the fund. We all know that the only way to ensure that our savings are not eroded by inflation, investment versus fixed deposit is a better choice. In other countries that practice annuity, they are allowed to invest to get higher return. If CPF is channelling our savings to GIC or Temasek, then we should be given dividends. In all fairness the money belongs to us and we should be given choices to select what we want instead of forced to accept what they think is best for us.
Curse the government and the one who implement these unfair policies. We can’t do anything but curse their families.
singaporeans this is the govt style that you had voted for. please bear with it for the next 5 years. afterall, unless there is a regime change which can promise to give singaporeans more advantage against Fts, we native singaporeans stand no chance in this country of birth of ours.
The main problem is that Singapore has too much public debt which it owes to its citizen through the CPF.
According to CIA report, we are rank 9th in the world on public debt.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2186rank.html?countryName=Singapore&countryCode=sn®ionCode=eas&rank=9#sn
In order to ensure that the government does not have cashflow problem in a ageing population, they will need to reduce the payout from CPF as much as possible. Some of the ways to do so are:-
1. Increase the minimum sum for CPF at retirement.
2. Increase minimum for medisave.
3. Increase HDB prices.
4. Do not allow medisave to be withdrawn in cash when a person dies but be transferred to beneficiary’s account.
5. Delay the payout of CPF.
It will get worse in the future. The only way to get out of the cycle is to have a change of the ruling party. Then the citizen may have a chance to change the direction by privatising all our GLCs and taking back our money from the 2 SWFs which are performing poorly when compared to its peers. Think about it; why does GIC report its profit based on USD? The truth is that the 1 year return in SGD is negative since SGD strengthened against USD by approx 10% over the last 1 year.
As a hawker is self employed, there is min top up to medisave, which is linked to ACRA, if no top up, no renewal, they die die want your money.
The renewal of hawker license is subject to sufficient contributions to Medisave Account based on the income earned by the hawker. This is not related to MRA.
Hawkers do not need to contribute to CPF every month like employees. Instead, a specific amount of Medisave contribution is calculated based on their income declared to IRAS yearly (http://ask-us.cpf.gov.sg/Home/Hybrid/themes/CPF/Uploads/SE/MA%20Rates%20-%202011.pdf).
Therefore, hawkers cannot choose not to make Medisave contributions for the same reason that employees cannot choose not to make CPF contributions.
———————————————–
“Because, even if you maintained the minimum sum required for the MA, at any point if you were to use it for medical purposes, you would have to put in cash to top it up to the minimum sum.”
This is incorrect. You need not top-up cash to Medisave after using it for medical purposes. You are only required to top-up upon making yearly withdrawal after age 55 and fulfilling both the following conditions:
1. You have met the Minimum Sum in your Retirement Account
2. You have less than the Medisave Required Amount (MRA) in your Medisave Account. (http://bit.ly/rrYFFO)
.” Do not allow medisave to be withdrawn in cash when a person dies but be transferred to beneficiary’s account.”
If the above is true, then the govt will never need to pay us back the $$$ …cause when one dies $$$ in medisave go to account of beneficiary. And if this person dies, any balance in medisave goes to his/her beneficiary. $$$$ in CPF/Medisave keeps on rolling..in Govt’s pocket. WTF
The present garment does thing behind the peoples back all the time. This sort of garment can be thrown out by the peoples power. You just have to be very firmed or they would just suck and suck you dry till you goes to your graves.
when someone thinks he did a lot for singapore, he thinks that he owns singapore. but he forgot he was paid well and his children are also paid well. he also forgot that without singaporeans voting for him, he would not have accomplished much in his life. he owes singapore not singapore owes him.
Let’s look at the big picture. It is only right for the government to hold on to our CPF money after 55, as there are many who will squander it all. Also, as cost of living increase, it is necessary to increase CPF OA minimum sum so that we have enough in retirement.
It is also necessary to transfer ever more amounts to Medisave because of longer life expectancy, and higher cost of healthcare. Minimum Medisave sum of $30,000 is not a lot. One major illness and it will be wiped out. So it’s necessary to keep increasing Medisave minimum sum.
As for the Jane’s issue with her fiance, she just have to follow HDB rule. Nobody is allowed to own more than 1 HDB flat, so it’s her own responsibility to sort that out. Also, $40,000-50,000 is not a lot these days, I can’t understand why the finace can’t afford to top up this amount, especially since the couple is working.
60% have voted for their CPF to be locked in this way. Will you still vote for Tony Tan to seal them up completely and never live to smell your own savings?
Given the facts of her story, I feel that Jane and her fiancé’s decision to own a flat in order to start a new family is not a wise decision..
It does not necessarily mean that you need a new flat to start a family. Best solution in her case is to get her name registered with HDB as an approved occupant and live with her fiance’s mother in the flat which is co-owned by her fiancé.
One has to remember that rules and regulations thought out by our clever technocrats by statutory boards like CPF and HDB are generally a “one size fits all” without due considerations to special circumstances. Rules and regulations are constantly changed when they find there is a loophole in their original concept.
The mindset of our young is to own their own flat and to live independently of in-laws. But, in Jane’s case, given their financial situation, why start married life with a 30-year debt which is a heavy financial burden.
A Ponzi scheme lah! Singaporeans are sleep-walking.
Something is very wrong. Why is the govt desperately after every cent of our CPF money ? They created so many different types of CPF accounts, change the rules so often and then this compulsory annuality thing – all our hard earn savings tie down.
We don;t have pension to see us through. Every thing comes from our own saving.
They are abusing their power again by using the law to retain our money against our will.
This is corruption.
The Malaysia EPF system is still the best, never heard them complaining in my 9 years (1999 − 2008) working in KL as an expatriate. Singapore should copy Malaysia’s EPF system.
40% LL bcos 60% gave mandate.
400k per million wants them out but can only LL .
Democracy.
How would you run a country if the top 40% of the population with the most wealth withdraw every cent in their CPF and sell off all their property and migrate to another country living behind the poorest population?
man in pink 30 July 2011
Huh ? Does it need to be cpf money. Why do the top 40% need or have to do what you have mentioned if their very wealth (so much more than cpf contribution which has a ceiling) is derived because of what they are capable of doing in this country or their retirement needs can come from other sources other than relying solely on cpf other than the average people.
Besides, don’t you think that the liquidity of the funds should be designed / timed to allow for such sudden withdrawals, if any, comes retirement time.
From the day you start contributing when you start working when young, the funds people have many years to hold on to your cpf money and do their mathematics. So what is wrong if there is a sudden withdrawal.
Is the CPF the old CPF or is CPF gone through many changes?
Citizens approved?
Well, without cooperative citizens, how can have today?
Its really all because of the People.
This constant changing of CPF may not be acceptable in anywhere else in the world and some say batam.
Don’t learn to Question.
Accept and Trust.
Jimmy, you don’t get the point. if everyone is allow to withdraw everything in CPF once they reach 55 than you have to calculate what will happen to Singapore next. I think you don’t have the brain to think that far…. sorry. i wrote a thesis on this during my Cambridge days.
Ha,ha, Steven Kho here again ,after being “screwed” upside down in TRE.
As usual , talking as if he is all so “clever”.
Sit boy ! Go fetch boy !
The Govt is doing a wonderful job retaininbg people’s money (CPF) and in increasingly obscene revised amount every year. The year 2010 the MS was 117k, an increase of about 17k in the OA whereas for this year it is about 8k increase. So where is the rationale for the increase? Lost investments in SWF by GIC/TH means more CPF monies to be retained? Don’t give the bullshit of factoring in inflation, currency depreciation and all that jazz…I don’t buy all that! And don’t act like God telling Singaporeans that they live longer cos of better lifestyle and medical care. Even God also can’t guarantee every one of us that we can live a very long life unless we can alter our genes/chromosomes and mutate into another form of life. I can even say that we die younger in this modern society cos of the more stressful lifestyle. So what’s it going to be? Reduce the drawdown age from 62 to 55 cos people die younger? I only want Govt
to be honest and show care and concern for our own money! Change the policies so that Singaporean can withdraw all their CPF monies at age 55. If a person cannot think for himself/herself at that age, what age would the Govt think that Singaporeans can think for themselves? If you are really honest with our monies and is afraid that we squandered them, make each and every one of us sign a memo
of understanding for non governmental financial aid on the number of years the withdrawn money can sustain the lifestyle based on the amount that is withdrawn at age 55. That way, the Govt can sleep easy.
Right now the whole thing smacks of dishonesty and our CPF monies are treated as Govt monies and we have to abide to every whims and fancies of their hidden agenda. Also, please give us an option whether we want to withdraw all our CPF monies or not at age 55. If not, especially those who feel so rich whenever they look at their CPF statements every month can choose to leave it there to earn the ‘so-called attractive’ interest rates. The CPF Board can also promote to the members any useful insurance schemes (not schemes to retain more of our CPF monies please) to help them feel more secure at the time of withdrawing the CPF monies. So please give us an option for any schemes which the Board may introduce from time to time and not force them down into our throats like it is your own money!
Like the CPF Life, there should be an option to opt IN in the first place, not the other way round treating it like it is Govt’s money. Meanwhile, let Singaporeans have back their CPF monies at age 55 and let the seniors help make Singapore the most vibrant city in the world with the billions tied up! Please don’t retard our economy and give silly excuses that we would squander our CPF monies!
CPF aka Conned People Fund. Wait till 2016.
I am facing a situation similar to what the financee and fiance faced related to the removal of his name in the flat previously taken over by him. I only learnt in 2009, when I tried to remove my name as one of co-owners of my current flat bought with my father and sister, that this is caled “transfer of flat ownership”. This was heard of in the year 1998 i signed on the sales and purchase agreement. I only can discover a corporate publication on a little detail dated July 2004 on the HDB website. The HDB did not announce anything it before 2004 and I only signed to agree whatever is in the agreement that contain no details about refinancing upon removal of name. I believe this an unfair case of mine like the coule here. I had appealed to the HDB many times and was told that all along there is a rule but then they have no evidence showing I am informed. I am considering legal actions with my own evidence should the HDB reject my appeal again with no valid reason stated. This is the second time i had experienced dodgy practices of govt statutory boards. The first one is CPF Board.
man in pink 30 July 2011
Thesis on this during your Cambridge days ? Who cares about your thesis. I only care about my own cpf comes my own retirement. It’s my money. PERIOD. I believe most people reaching retirement age will think likewise.
By all means, no one is going to complain if you or some others prefer to leave yours in the funds for a much longer period & for some bigger national altruistic reason. At least, that may invalidate your assumption (in your thesis) that all will withdraw
My brain is to think what is right for me not about how good or solid your thesis is.
Again, what is so wrong about letting everyone draws comes their retirement time. There is always new cohorts of contributors year by year when they start work to smoothen the effect of new withdrawing cohorts comes retirement time. Now did your thesis factor this ?
Someone told me even if your CPF had been willed to your loved ones, the portion Medisave S/A is NOT automatically
included.
This happened when the loved ones want to claim the portion of medisave A/C as according to the % CPF portion the loved ones are willed to claim.
Can you theonlinecitizen clarify with CFP board.
I wrote to CPF , there is no response at all after many weeks.
Rgds
John Lim
CPF stands for Central Prisoned Fund.
What I find it hard to believe is that there still some people in this forum who staunchly defended this “official robbery” claiming “government is protecting us from squandering our own blood n sweat money”. Knn, they have read so much evidences here and still buried their heads in the sand. I can understand if they are ignorant like many citizens who do not read TOC or TRE.
Jane’s case
Yr fiance’s mother may face when yr bf name is removed as co owner as the mother by herself can not formed.
The best way out is to apply for new bigger flat together with yr fiance’s mother(3 together) and sell the old flat to collect some profit which is handy for renovation.
The only setback is you hv to live with yr mother-in-law which I assumed you could managed.
CPF is like a tax on Singaporeans, the PAP govt force you to contribute and failing to contribute the govt will fine you first then jail you if you still can’t . But when you are old the govt will try all ways to stop you from withdrawal as if the money belong to PAP govt. I knew the problems you need to top up your medisave a/c after 55 when you leave your money in ordinary a/c 2 years ago when I talked to CPF officer then so I advised my friends not to leave the money in ordinary a/c after 55. It is high time the opposition MPs bring up this problem in Paliament. On one hand govt gives free scholarship to foreign students without serving NS and yet restricting singaporeans to withdraw CPF money after 55. In actual fact PAP govt is using our CPF money to subsidise the foreigners and we Singaporeans become 2nd class citizens in our own land
Pick from one of the following: Coffin Payment Fraud, Central Prisoned Fund, Con People Fund or Corrupted Pensions Fund
CPF – sorry but ppl who can manage their $$ dun have issues with CPF..
hence i believe CPF is still good to manage $$ for ppl who cannot mange their own $$
what i really do not understand is that, since CPF is our own money, like what some people whom commented mentioned, and CPF is ‘REALLY’ good for us, why do we still need to pay interest if we were to use our CPF in anyway? like in Jane’s case, when her finance remove his name as co-owner, the need to top back the full amount utilize in his CPF is one thing, but since its his CPF, why cant he choose to sell the shares to his mother at a token sum like what some commentors mentions? and the most baffling thing is, why must they pay 4/6% of interest back when CPF is only paying us 2.5% of interest for the money inside?
i believe most people face such issues, not about the housing issues… i have frens whom studied at poly, or arts school etc, they used their parents CPF to pay for the school fees, and when they start working, they would need to top up the money into their parents CPF with interest, but they are allowed to pay back by fixed instalments every month . so i don’t understand why for jane’s issue, they need to top back up in full upon removal of their name, and not allowed to pay back in instalments.
CPF is our own money, yet we will not be allowed to USE it until we turn 55/60/65. with the increase of the age to withdraw our CPF monies, it will come one day, when CPF monies, will become something that we can see, but never own…
I tell you why.
The people elected a bunch of people to run the show.
Again and again they give the mandate.
They kpkb everyday.
Yet they still continue to give the mandate.
The team do what it wants or can.
They may have more ideas or run out of ideas.
But Its the people who continue to use them and many never dare to Question.
1st world.
Well-educated.
Well-travelled.
A success model.
locals are DAFT as mm said,
borders on “STUPID”
by letting mm get away with all their money in cpf.
the thieves and robbers are in ACTION since day one, and it never lets up, that is why today, they pay themselves millions and get, repeat, GET, pension at 55, while your money stays in THEIR PIGGY BANK, FOR THEIR OWN USED.
COLLECT PENSION AT 5 AND COLLECT MILLIONS IN WAGES, ALSO ????
LOCALS ARE REAL “STUPID”
locals are DAFT as mm said,
borders on “STUPID”
by letting mm get away with all their money in cpf.
the thieves and robbers are in “ACTION” since day one, and it never lets up, that is why today, they pay themselves millions and COLLECT, repeat, COLLECT, pension at 55, while your money stays in THEIR PIGGY BANK, FOR THEIR OWN USED.
“COLLECT PENSION AT 55,
AND COLLECT MILLIONS IN WAGES, ALSO” ????
LOCALS ARE REAL “STUPID”
it’s suppose to be OUR retirement saving, i.e, when u retire at 55, u get every cents back with interests. by branding it CPF, our life saving becomes THEIR money and we totally have no rights over it, how do we use it and when we suppose to withdraw, the rules are changed again.
so what is CPF? it’s a left pocket of the gov which transfers it from right pocket: CPF going to exhorbitant hdb flats, to medisave, to dunno what special account….to anywhere except conveniently back to us the account holder to be used during retirement.
how many realise that CPF is approved to be used in “gov approved”stocks called trustee stocks. and how many of such trustee stocks are hanging in limbo now?
The root of the problem is that the gahmen treats CPF as THEIR money rather than OUR money. Eg self-employed get penalised (cannot renew hawker or taxior business licence, in theory can be jailed or fined – for owing Medisave, which is owing OURSELVES money.
If this mindset does not change, then we will need to change the gahmen.
“Another COF change nobody knows about?
This is not the first time that CPF policies have been changed without anyone knowing about it – no announcement in Parliament or the media”
They are not soppose to change till PAP talk to the Citizen and approved by the citizen , then they can change. Another
incident to show Singapore is not a free and democratic society
to @hello
You said:
quote:CPF – sorry but ppl who can manage their $$ dun have issues with CPF..
hence i believe CPF is still good to manage $$ for ppl who cannot mange their own $$\
unqoute
zero comments: You are absoultely correct. Rich people have no issue with CPF at all!! It’s ok for their cpf money to be used to purchased compulsory annuity (“CPF LIFE”) paying $1,100 a month for life after age 62. In the interim between now to age 62, rich people have numerous resources to fall back on, they don’t quabble with small sum of $131,000 used to buy the compuslry annuity, and they also don’t quabble with compuslory $27,500 in Medisave. Small change for them, no issue.
But the problem is that the mission statement of CPF is that is is supposed to help people have some dignity and money in their golden years. Not just RICH People. As we know rich people may form about 30-40% of the population.
How about the remaining 60%-70% of the citizens who are not so rich?\
Is it fair to force them to keep $30,000 in the cpf and $131,000 in the RA (to be topped up compulsorily as indicated in Case 1 of this article).
Of course not. But i would ask, so what if you let them withdraw their miserable $30,000 in their CPF. After 5 to 10 years all the money is gone, then what?
In the recent document released by the Accountant General, it is mentioned that CPF is “Singapore’s National Pension Fund”. THAT IS A LIE
Being a first world country, singapore ought to have a real national pension fund in which rich or poor, minister or non-minister, will be entitled to PENSION. Think of it simply as a version of CPF Life which begins payouts from age 55. It would have been ideal, but a lot of adjustments has to be made, and because PAP lost so much money in their investmetns, i think it is not possible to implement.
So, at the moment CPF is just a personal to holder private money. Hence there will always be people with not enough money. Some people argue that you have to force them to save otherwise if they withdraw all on day 1 they have no more money after 5 years.
BUT THAT DOES NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM.
It is a big problem with the entire system.
There is no use to complain that the money is frozen. Unfreeze it and the problem with still come back MONEY NO ENOUGH for 60% of people who don;t have too much money in their own cpf accounts.
Singapore Goverhment is a heartless goverhment which spends most of the time devising schemes to enrich themselves and ignoring the plight of the ordinary folk with limited funds. I think in a first world country with GDP as high as Singapore’s it is completely absurd that ordinary folks have no chance to enjoy pension. And the pension from their own funds is not even enough to cover daily expenses, and they have to wait till 62 (ministers are exempted – they can ask their entire pension in one lump sum!!)… for the common folk this is really unfair system.
It is hard to correct the system, even if workers party take over entirely. We’re dead ducks – those with little money in CPF. You die your business.
zero
The original intent of the CPF scheme designed by the old guards like Mr Goh Keng Swee, was already long forgotten. Now CPF money serves as the source of fund to feed the gambling of TH. That explains why from simple CPF idea it has developed into Special Account, Medisave Account, minimum sum, ever changing withdrawal age as more and more people reaching that age!
Look at what is up after GE? When will the 60.1% voters ever vote sensily and not for self interest? I only afraid all true blue singaporeans’ vote will be overruled by the more than double new citizens they bring in. This is also one of the agenda in the pro-foreigner policy. Heard what I say, not pro-FT but pro- foreigner!!!