Raising of CPF Withdrawal Age to 70

Let's hear it from some veterans, past and present, and the public in general. Some names of authors are not given basically to protect them from any persecution by the dictator government.

This is the words of our great leader of the founding generation, ex-Deputy PM Mr. Toh Chin Chye on why raising the withdrawal age is a breach of trust by the dictator government.

"Dr Toh Chin Chye: We need to clearly define the boundaries within which the CPF will be used for retirement. We must spell that out. You just cannot say, “Let us raise the withdrawal age to 60 or 65.” It must be 60. It must be 65. Now, at which age?

This Paper does not contain any calculation at all to say what will happen if it is withdrawn at 60, or what will happen if it is withdrawn at 65. If I were a person who has no relatives, if I were a widower with no children, all the assumptions made by this Committee – that you will be looked after by your children – then I do not qualify under any of these grounds.

Mr Speaker, I think fundamental principles are being breached. The fundamental principle is this. The CPF is really a fixed deposit or a loan to Government, which can be redeemed at a fixed date when the contributor is 55 years old.

If I were to put this sum of money in a commercial bank and, on the due date I go to the bank to withdraw the money, the manager says, “I am sorry, Dr Toh, you will have to come next year”, there will be a run on the bank! It is as simple as this, that the CPF has lost its credibility, the management of it.

This is fundamental…This is the nub of the problem – the credibility of the management, gradual encroachment into the purpose of the CPF which was instituted really to provide for retirement."

------------------------------------------------
Anonymous:

Imagine you put your money in a bank as 1yr fixed deposit.

After one year you go to the bank to collect the $$. Banker say cannot auto extend for 10yrs. You ask why banker say we worry about you people have bad habits take tge money will go anyhow spend so i am doing it for your own good. In any case i think you need insurance and annuities I think it is good for you so i already enroll you. If you want you can use the money to service housing loan with us...otherwise cannot touch until 10yrs later for your own good.

That is essentially what has happened to CPF....

Just like banker, those in control wont tell the real reasons why they do this instead they use a pretext and claim they are doing for your own good.

There are many reasons why the govt delays. and control access to your own fund:..

1. They can lower their own expeditures by enrolling you on various insurance and scheme using your CPF for programmes that should be supported by govt revenues.

2. Second is the the CPF funds is loaned to sovereign wealth funds GIC/Temasek for investment purposes and they keep the excess returns. This create a big conflict of interest because the more they delay your access the more they can exploit your funds. In fact of you go read the early speeches of Goh Keng Swee, such an arrangement was used to build up reserves when Singapore was poorer.

I proposed 2 serious reforms:

1. To require all excess returns from use of CPF for sovereign wealth investment to be returned to account holders....all countries and major pension do this. The current practice create a conflict of interest in policy making should be stopped.

2. Stop compulsory insurance schemes that potentially drain cpf accounts over time.
------------------------------------------------
Anonymous:

Its a slipppery slope.

But its not just delay, CPF now forciby used for insurance like careshield and converted into annuities etc...so the govt now is forcing this money into schemes they created so they do not need to spend from their budget

Once you allow govt to use the argument that you cannot be trusted to have access to your own money....you cede controlto on what they can do....

You basically go onto that slippery slope...they can create various schemes to use CPF to reduce their budget expenditure on healthcare and elderly care etc by tapping CPF into various schemes.
------------------------------------------------

Today the govt raise withdrawal age and included all sort of scheme and insurance etc so that they are not indebted to people.
They drained everything.

They already got 70% votes and monopolize Parliament for so many years
Why should they care about trust ?

------------------------------------------------
Anonymous:

Imo, they cannot simply just push the cpf withdrawal age up and up and up .....

They should take into the consideration of people's life span and the enjoyment we needed.

If they push it up to eg 65, we have less than 10 years to enjoy our fruits.....supposing we kick the bucket average 75 yr old , not to factor in before kick the bucket, we probably spend another 1 to few years struggling in the hospital waiting to die....

Their computation is based on how to accumulate as much at the govt side from the people.

Whether you have quality of life or lying in hospital when your cpf money finally come is not their concern.

They only concern is how to keep the money from us.

I have a friend, her mother passed away at the age of 79 yr old.

She started dementia around 75 yr old. Struggling for 4 years in and out of hospital, coma, liver not functioning, etc...

Just imagine, if push to 65, only have 5 years to enjoy and probably more than 40 years of hardship.

------------------------------------------------
Anonymous:

You seriously think they are in politics because they love the masses and public? You are a politician because you love to control, love to come up with policies and rules for the masses. The handshake and walkabout are just ways to PR. Try having them walk the ground everyday and without any media coverage. You think it will happen?

They rather be playing golf somewhere.

------------------------------------------------

“I want to get my money back,” said Mr Weng. “The government should not lock up our money. I have 40% of my CPF locked up (in the Minumum Sum). I mean, I’m a retiree now, and I tried asking the CPF front office for it, but they didn’t do anything.”

Ibrahim, 60, shared similar sentiments. “I am old enough to know how to spend my own money, so why does the government want to control my CPF? I want to use it to help support my daughter who is studying in Australia. I also need to spend some on my Hajj, as this is a very important religious obligation for me.”

“I tried speaking to my Member of Parliament, but he did not help. I’m not happy with it,” he added.

CPF Retirement Sum increased to $166,000. CPF Life to start at 67?

Singapore’s Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board has just increased the CPF Retirement Sum (previously known as the Minimum Sum, name was changed due to negative connotations) to S$166,000 as of 1 Jan 2017. The S$5,000 from the previous year is a 3.1% increase – higher than the 1.3% core inflation rate as of November 2016.

At the same time, re-employment age has been increased from 65 to 67. This move will likely increase the CPF Life annuity payout age from 65 to 67, delaying Singaporeans’ retirement age by a further 2 years. Since the re-employment age was raised from 55, the CPF payout age always increase and follow suit.

During Parliament’s session on Monday (Jan 9), all ruling party MPs expressed support for the increase in re-employment age.

Raising the re-employment age however is at best a public relation stunt as employers reserve the rights to retrench older employees indirectly via lowering of salaries, placing them on short-term contracts and increasing of workload. According Nominated MP Randolph Tan, more employers are circumventing the re-employment law by introducing term contracts.

“In June 2007, 25 per cent of resident employees aged 60 and over were on term contracts. Almost a decade later, in June 2015, we still have 21 per cent of resident employees aged 60 and above (who) were on term contracts. The regulatory burden of the new legislation may drive more employers to place older employees on term contracts.”

Opposition NCMP Daniel Goh outright rejected and dismissed the re-employment age law:

“The one-year term contract, or a three-year contract, to be reviewed yearly, sustains a sense of insecurity (around) contract review and renewal, which is not the right way to treat a senior employee and colleague.”

Most elderly in Singapore work in low income jobs like cleaners and security guards, taking home around S$9,00 a month after CPF tax deductions.

The Singapore government is currently delaying withdrawal age, withdrawal limit and depressing interest rates of the CPF sum for undisclosed reasons. Public speculations are however rife that the two sovereign wealth fund companies, Temasek Holdings headed by the Prime Minister’s wife, and GIC, headed by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, are losing billions in overseas investments.

- The StatesTimes.

PAP Tricks Singaporeans Into Paying Additional Interest Rates For Nothing

What do you mean I have to pay more than the down-payment and mortgage that I have already finished paying off? How can there be any more money that I need to pay? This is because there are some things that the PAP has not told you upfront (or you might have missed amidst all the confusion that they have intentionally created).

 When you take money out from your CPF to pay for the mortgage, when this money is taken out, you wouldn’t be able to earn interest on this money since the money is taken out, right? – which is understandable.

What this means is that the government won’t need to pay you this interest and you won’t be able to earn interest. So, that’s the easy part. Here is what you have not been told. Now, what the PAP has then said is this – since you have taken this money out and are not able to earn the interest, you will now have to pay the interest back into your CPF. You will have to pay the 2.5% interest that is “lost” back into the CPF. The PAP calls this the CPF accrued interest.

This is what the PAP says: “If you sell your HDB flat, you need to refund the principal amount you had earlier withdrawn for the purchase of the flat, including the accrued interest, to your CPF account. This interest is the amount you would have earned, had the savings not been taken out.” Wait, no one ever told me about this! I thought it’s only the mortgage! So, see if you get this – if you had left your money inside the CPF, the government will pay the interest.

But when you take the money out, the government wants you to pay the interest back. In the first place, since you have taken the money out, the interest can no longer be earned and even if the government wants you to earn the interest, they should be the one paying the interest, right? Well, you are right. The basic principle works like this – if you decide to put your money into a bank, it is the bank that would pay you interest.

And if you take your money out, the bank doesn’t pay anymore interest to you. Obviously, you don’t have to pay interest to the bank on money that is no longer there. So, similarly, if we had taken our money out from CPF, the government stops paying interest to you. But why is the PAP then making you pay “back” the 2.5% interest that they should be paying?

Now, note this – what this means is that you are paying an interest of 2.5% on money that is no longer in the CPF. You are paying an interest into the CPF on nothing (Chart 12). You have to fork out money from your own pockets to put into the CPF for the government.

Min sum for medsave UP 22%

AleXX
What this MRA increase means is that for example, if a CPF account holder
has $150,500 in his Ordinary and Special accounts but zero in his medisave
account, he can only withdraw $24,600 (20 per cent withdrawal rule from 1
January, 2011 on current Minimum Sum (MS) of $123,000), at age 55,
regardless of any MS property pledge.

At the current rate of annual increase in the MS and MRA totalling $11,000 a
year (MS $6,000 plus MRA $5,000), when the MS withdrawal rule is phased out
to zero in 2013, those who have less than $183,500 (current $150,500 plus
$11,000 times 3 years), may not be able to withdraw anything at all at 55.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

In the near future, even if you have $200K in your supposedly CPF account,
you will never get the chance to kiss your money when you turn 55.

Remember to vote for all your money to be locked up in your CPF which many
think has no cash at all. Ho Jinx may have a very clear picture of where
those citizens' monies were. All converted to L$ (Lee dollars?)

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Retirement Age : Shifting The Goal Posts

Majority of establishments keep workers beyond the age of 62
AsiaOne

A majority of employees surveyed by the Ministry of Manpower have allowed their local employees to work beyond 62 - and most of these employees have stayed on.

The survey, which was conducted on a sample of 3,200 private establishments (each with at least 25 employees) employing over 800,000 employees, showed that nearly two thirds of private companies have implemented measures to allow employees to work beyond the statutory retirement age.

This includes allowing them to continue with their existing contract, or by offering re-employment. Due to this, nearly eight in 10 employees worked in these establishments.

Of those companies that have not implemented any such measures, only 22 per cent employ locals. Majority of these companies said they have not done anything because none of their employees have approached retirement age, while a quarter admitted that they have simply not thought of doing so.

A small percentage of this group (12 per cent) said they do not see the need to do anything. An even smaller percentage (8 per cent) will devise a plan in the next one to three years.

Seven out of 10 employers who offered re-employment indicated that the workers could be redeployed to another job. While most contracts offered are on a one-year basis, these employers also said the contracts were renewable, with no maximum age limit for the extension of employment.

Companies with re-employment policies who did not offer re-employment to qualified employees beyond 62 cited lack of suitable jobs as well as employees indicating that they did not want to work beyond this age, as the reasons for doing so.
--------------------------------------------
AleXX wrote:
> Now it is 62 years old, next year would be 65, then graduating to 67, 72,
> 80, 85 and 90 years old. So those who are born in 1962 will be 55 years old
> in year 2017. These unlucky Singaporeans will only start to see their
> retirement money (if any) trickling in when they are 90 years old in year
> 2052. Most of these people will be either dead or seriously ill and been bed
> ridden or in a state of comatose.
> Papist government will then rubber stamp a law in pariahment and "Chong-Kon"
> all the monies left behind :)
--------------------------------------------
From: Pubic Hair
Subject: Re: Good reasons for CPF to push further back the retirement withdrawal age

It's not only in Singapore, in the US is no difference. The reason why
is because many Singaporeans live longer, not shorter. And these older
Singaporeans who are still alive when they should have been dead long
time ago are expensive to take care of for another 20 or 30 years.

Who pays for them? Who else, the Singaporean government, right? And
where does the government get the money from to pay? Must be from you
and your children :)

Somebody old whom I know was admitted to the hospital for about one week
for tests and observation. Her hospital bill was about US$70,000.00
Medicare and Medicaid paid, and she paid not a nickel.

And do you know how many sick old people go and leave the hospital
daily? Thousands if not more, and they paid nothing. Their payroll
contribution (Medicare) is worthless (very minimal), but when they get
old and sick the government has to pay whatever the hospital charges
them.

I suggest that when you wake up in the morning or before going to bed at
night post the good things about your government, and not about what you
perceive as bad only...because your government is a good government...

Wake Up & Get Real! Your CPF Money is No Longer Yours

This CPF thingy is an absolute exploitation of human rights in Singapore. It is totally unacceptable for people who have no rights in our savings, meddle with it and even tweaked it without our approval. CPF law = PAP law, under such defintion we are doomed and Singaporeans will have no money for old age. I can’t imagine Singaporeans when they reached the age of retirement with money in the CPF savings, still seen picking cans and carton boxes in the street. I wonder how does PAP ministers sleep at night when the people sleep in the street with money in CPF controlled by PAP. - David

-----------------------------------------------
According to the CPF’s web site, the property pledge for the CPF MS at age 55, has been changed to the following: “If you are unable to set aside your full Minimum Sum in cash, your property, bought with your CPF savings, will be automatically pledged for up to half of the Minimum Sum”.

The important thing to note with this rule is that if the shortfall is less than half of the MS (or $58,500, at the current level), the remaining value of the property ($58,500 less the MS shortfall) becomes irrelevant.

This is different from a previous “property pledge” rule, as seen in this 2003 CPF Board press release, which allows members to choose to pledge their property for up to half the MS.

Under this rule, members who are unable to meet the MS are allowed to pledge their property for up to the full 50 per cent of the MS – rather than just making up for the shortfall. Therefore, if their MS shortfall is less than the 50 per cent of the required amount, the remainder from the property pledge would translate into funds available for withdrawal.

Here’s an illustration. Currently, in the example given in the new CPF booklet “Reaching 55”, a person with $100,000 in the CPF Ordinary (OA) and Special Accounts (SA) can withdraw 30 per cent, which is $30,000.[1]

Under the new “property pledge” rule, the MS shortfall of $47,000 (current MS of $117,000 less the $70,000 retained in the RA) will automatically be pledged with property.

Under the old “property pledge”rule, this person would have been able to pledge the full 50 per cent of the MS, which is $58,500. This means he or she would be able to withdraw $41,500 (from the $100,000 in his or her OA and SA, less $58,500), as compared to just $30,000 under the new rule.

Another implication of this new rule will take effect in 2013. For members who turn 55 on or after 1 January 2013, the CPF cash balance can only be withdrawn after setting aside both the CPF MS and Medisave Minimum Sum. If this is not met, they can withdraw only $5,000 from their CPF account, regardless of any property pledge.

With the MS in 2013 being likely to be $135,000, assuming the current rate of increase of $6,000 per year remains constant, there may be more people who will face an MS shortfall when they turn 55.

Furthermore, since February 2009 , property sale proceeds must be retained in the RA if there is a shortfall in the MS. In some cases, where the member’s MS shortfall is too great, the property sale proceeds retained may be even more than 50 per cent of the MS. Part or even all of the net sale proceeds may not be available for the member to buy another property.

The view that one’s HDB flat is an asset enhancement – something one can monetised for retirement – may increasingly become less valid, with the MS increasing every year.

Given all the significance this “property pledge” rule change has on CPF members, it should be asked as to why there was no announcement made in Parliament or to the media?

To be sure, even the previous CPF booklet “Reaching 55” (attached) covering the period 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010 showed the new “property pledge” rule.

So when exactly was this rule changed?

-TOC
---------------------------------------------
Fear tactics has always worked here. People dare not vote against the ruling party because of fear. Fear that they and their children will be marked.(not so effective lately. Fear that their estates will become a slum and thus their property value will drop. Fear that the the economy will fail and moms, wifes & sisters become maids overseas. Well its about time the opposition used the same tactics. Instill fear in the people that all their savings in the CPF is being taken away, that the HDB houses have only paper value, that our billions are being lost by brilliant lady. Instill fear that we their children will become labourers in their own country, that their children cannot afford homes. That the country is being overtaken by foriegners. Soon we will have super rich foriegners staying in Sentosa, Marina & Orchards.
---------------------------------------------
PAP government linked companies like Temasek Holdings headed by Ho Ching and GIC headed by MM Lee had borrowed heavily from CPF Fund and made huge losses of more than S$58 billions Singapore dollars in bailing out US banks and speculative tradings especially in 2007. So need to constrain local citizens from withdrawing their CPF monies.
Better still if our citizens die intestate and the whole of their assets including CPF monies will belongs to the government and also to sustain the multi-millionaires PAP ministers pay and increments. -Benson
-----------------------------------------------
Uncle Leong wrote on this CPF Life thing some months ago, at this very site TOC – u do a search and could locate it.
Indeed, there is NO GUARANTEE that CPF life Fund will be solvent. And this Gan already said very very clearly in reply when Halimah raised a question IN PARLIAMENT why CPF Life payments ARE NOT Guaranteed. Halimah questioned, ‘how come, this is not a commercial contract (and even commercial contracts can have guarantee), how come as a government CANNOT guarantee’.
You know WHAT Gan answered, ‘be rest assured’, haha really serious that was his repy. And you know of late, ONE INDIAN Minister said, “this is a government of trust”
So guys – tan koo koo IF CONTINUE to vote for pap bastards!!!
----------------------------------------------
The whole revised CPF withdrawal scheme will become a sort of monster nightmare to many of us, courtesy of PAP.

Just imagine CPF as our National Savings Bank, telling its depositors that they can’t withdraw their savings in full at age 55 but withdrawal will be deferred only with monthly payouts starting at age 65.

If you happen to die between 55 to 65, you don’t even have a chance to smell your hard earned savings and good luck to you, thanks again to PAP. Why force this destined age group to leave their minimum CPF sum to their heirs ?

I think this must be the most restrictive and unequitable policy implemented by PAP as it seems to penalise those whose lifespan is between 55 & 65.

Can we ever forgive PAP for implementing such a damn policy ?
- Alan Wong
--------------------------------------------
CPF is getting as complicated as taxi charges. If you do not may a trip to CPF office,you will never understand CPF withdrawals etc. Unlike the good old days when you reach 55, you can withdraw the whole amount and do what you always dreamed about.

I am just wondering what the Government or CPF is doing with our money forcefully withheld under minimum sum, special account, medi-save etc.

Does CPF Board publish an annual report on what it does with the withheld sums/investment besides reporting on amount withdrawn for housing etc.? - Ram
---------------------------------------------

Beware of CPF Life Scam

From: yansimon52
On May 3, 8:32 pm, zero wrote:

> This is to inform all CPF members should be very cautious when signing
> up for the so called CPF Life Scheme.

> It is a big con scam.

> I recently found out some elderly CPF members had money from their CPF
> retirement account deducted as "Annual Life Premium Deduction" ranging
> from hundreds to almost a thousands of dollars but the actual payout
> from the scheme is less than S$50 per month.

> This is quite shocking because through out the whole CPF Life
> consultation exercise last year, the idea of having a annual premium
> deduction from CPF member's RA account as well as its quantum were not
> raised and consulted at all.

> In addition, all CPF Life members were not informed of this "Annual Life
> Premium Deduction" when they sign up for it.

> And the funniest thing is how could the quantum of CPF Life annual
> premium deduction be 10-100X more than its monthly payout ?

> Logically, if the yearly premium is so high while the monthly payout is
> so low, though the scheme will run for 20 years or more, all 30,000 CPF
> Life members will eventually exhaust their RA account after several
> years of premium deductions where and how would CPF Life member received
> their monthly payout ?

> To conclude, CPF Life is another screwed up money sucking game.

As I said....this is their (MIWs) con job of screwing you rubbish
ppl...those with low CPF saving......to either give up your
citizenship and stay elsewhere and die elsewhere...or you just lan lan
let the govt siphon away your CPF over time...until you up the lorry.
Don't ever dream of getting a well deserved 'rest and relax' twilight
years after all those years of hard work you did for the country.
In fact, this CPF Life scheme has hurt alot of those low income
workers (whose saving range from $20K to $80K (with low CPF saving).
They (CPF/govt) still got the cheek to tell you that for those with
$80K cpf saving...you could used up 30K for your housing..to buy your
so-called 'studio apt' for old folk .LOL...LOL...

On average those 1 rm 1 hall studio apt are selling at 70K to
80K...HDB already con you with this sort of high prices...so your 30K
(plus need to top up in cash about 40K) plough into this studio apt
(LOL) will lead you high and dry in your twilight years....lan lan
until your up the lorry.

Well...our MIWs would tell you rubbish ppl that they wanted to make
sure or to take care of you of your well being right thru your old
age....they say they will give you $200 to $300 monthly allowance.
Wowww.....what can this $300 do for you in our Sg high cost of living?
I think social welfare give up higher allowance that this pathetic
monthly $200 to $300 CPF Life scheme.
Can say its another scam job created by our 'too smart alec' MIWs.

This time I bet you the ruling party PAP is gonna face an uphill task
in this coming erection....for their being 'too smart'.
Do you know that how many poor ppl fall into this low CPF saving
category?

Employers' CPF rate up 1% - but not now

Employer CPF Contribution Rate In Singapore To Go Up By 1%
Source: Government of Singapore Posted on: 2nd May 2010

Employer CPF contribution rate to go up by 1% to help workers build up retirement savings.

At the May Day Rally this morning, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced that the Government will raise the employers’ CPF contribution rate by 1 percentage point.

The increase will be done gradually in two steps to moderate the impact on employers.

The first 0.5 percentage point increase will be implemented on 1 September 2010, and be made into the Medisave Account (MA). The remaining 0.5 percentage point increase will be effected 6 months later on 1 March 2011, and will be made to the Special Account (SA).

Currently, self-employed persons (SEPs) with annual net trade income exceeding $6,000 are required to contribute to their MA. With the 0.5% increase in employer CPF contribution to MA, the Medisave contribution rates for SEPs will also be increased by 0.5% with effect from 1 September 2010.

Minister for Manpower Mr Gan Kim Yong said, “The 1% increase in employer’s CPF contribution is timely.

The increase, which will go to the Medisave and Special Accounts, will help Singaporeans save more for their medical and retirement needs. The Government’s phased approach also takes into account NTUC’s call as well as employers’ feedback.

I am heartened that employers have given their support for the move. Both employers and workers should see the CPF increase as part of the total wage package, while balancing overall competitiveness.”
---------------------------------------------
S'pore to raise employers' pension contribution by 1 pct Print E-mail
Sunday, 02 May 2010
Kevin Lim
Reuters

Bosses in Singapore will have to pay an additional 1 percent of salary to their employees' pension plan to raise the amount of savings available to people in their old age, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said on Saturday.

He said employers face a 0.5 percentage point increase in their contribution to the Central Provident Fund (CPF) in September, with the other 0.5 percentage point rise taking effect in March 2011, according to local media reports.

Most Singaporeans are required to put aside 20 percent of their salary into the CPF, while employers are currently required to contribute an additional 14.5 percent on top of what they pay their staff. Employers' contribution to the CPF will rise further to 16 percent of salary if the economy continues to grow strongly in the next 1-2 years, Lee said at a Labour Day celebration, the Straits Times and Channel NewsAsia reported on their websites.

"When times were hard, workers made sacrifices to keep firms afloat. So in good times, it is fair to give back some to workers," the Straits Times quoted Lee as saying.

Singapore's economy grew by 13.1 percent in the first quarter from a year ago, helped by a recovery in manufacturing, and the government is projecting growth at 7-9 percent this year.
-----------------------------------------
CPF Contribution for Workers Raises in Singapore
Submitted by Senthil Kumar

Lee-Hsien-LoongAfter an impending wait, the Government, on the eve of May Day Rally in Singapore, finally announced to raise CPF contribution rate by 1% point. This would mean the employer’s contribution rate to go up by 14.5 to 15.5%.

In response to the recent labor movement that called for a reinstatement of employers’ CPF contribution rate to workers, this growth is a step taken by the Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong to enhance the call.

But looking at the employers’ fear over the rise, P. M. said, “Employers understand that when times were hard, workers made sacrifices to keep firms afloat, so in good times, it is fair to give back some to workers”.

This noticeable change would be ramped in two phases. A 0.5% point increase for first six months to be paid into Medisave Account constitutes the first step of the year; and, the remaining 0.5% point increase affected in the later six months to be paid into the Specila Account is the second.

A constant improvement in the economy of Singapore would ensure CPF contribution target rate of 36% within next year, ensured P. M. Lee. Till then, the companies would be given a time to adjust to this change of high rating.

Stop Meddling with our CPF contribution rate

From: zero
Subject: CPF contribution rate

In the old days, Lau Lee said the "right" CPF rate should be 50% for
workers in age group up to 55.

After the recession in the 80s, LHL mentioned the "correct" CPF rate
should be 40% because our wage cost was too high then.

Now our NTUC chief said the "correct" CPF rate is 36% when in reality,
it ranged from 34.5% to 10% depending on age of workers.

So what should be the "correct" CPF rate ? or are they making up the
numbers as they go along ? or they have no idea what is the right CPF
rate but too afraid to admit it ?

For one thing, Ngiam Tong Dow was right about the CPF rate, it should be
fix at 30% and leave it at that because constantly meddling create too
much uncertainty.

Don't forget, a high CPF contribution rate will cause over consumption
in housing, medical and education needs.

This is why Sgian should stop voting for PAP, because the more they
meddle, the more they create.

All CPF interests to be 2.5% after 2010

"To help members cope with the current economic climate, the Government will maintain the 4% floor rate for interest earned on all Special and Medisave Accounts (SMA) monies and Retirement Account (RA) monies for another year until 31 December 2010. After which, a 2.5% floor rate will apply for all CPF accounts."

Can anyone explain help to explain this.

Meaning after this year all the account in the CPF will be only 2.5 % yearly, including Retirement, Special, medisave.

Then in previous ads still ask us to put our ordinary money to special, now who put all stuck liao, interest same, only thing is money cannot touch anymore.

----------------------------------------
Utopia
Ya... feel like a trap. It's one-directional OA to SA.
Now everyone who do that stuck there and can not use the money to earn extra 2% interest.

You can't do much with SA, and lose the flexibility to use OA to buy HDB or study.
----------------------------------------

Lasagnia
Post subject: Re: All CPF interest to be 2.5 % after 2010
Oppostion wrote:
"To help members cope with the current economic climate, the Government will maintain the 4% floor rate for interest earned on all Special and Medisave Accounts (SMA) monies and Retirement Account (RA) monies for another year until 31 December 2010. After which, a 2.5% floor rate will apply for all CPF accounts."

Can anyone explain help to explain this.

Meaning after this year all the account in the CPF will be only 2.5 % yearly, including Retirement, Special, medisave.

Then in previous ads still ask us to put our ordinary money to special, now who put all stuck liao, interest same, only thing is money cannot touch anymore.

This is like carry trade lah!
Use cheap cheap money to make
large profit you keep for interest group.
-------------------------------------------
sgxnewbie

the question here is why they cannot give 4% anymore. what happen??
--------------------------------------------
Utopia
GIC investment setback could be one of the reason.

Another Flawed CPF Policy

From: yansimon52
Subject: Another Flawed policy by PAP govt.

Previously I was referring those flawed polices of the Public Housing
Scheme by HDB.

Today its another flawed policy of CPF.

CPF is now telling us that once you reach 55 yrs old....you must have
at least $80K putin as Retirement fund...the rest that exceed $80 K
then you can draw out as cash for you to spend.

Ok...let say those lower income ppl only with a lifetime CPF saving of
$70K...and need money to spend afterall his own money what?..and
according to CPF new policy....he is not allowed to withdraw the
$70K....from this $70 K..a $30K is alloted as standby for him to buy
HDB flat....anyway $30 K buy what?....if want to buy...bank oso don't
lend...too old oledi la.'
So, the $70K hold by CPF as retirement fund for old age. From there,
CPF will give out $200 to $300 monthly to you until you 'up the
lorry'.

Alamak...when you look at it hor......what can a $200 to $300 do for
you?...knowing that $70K locked by CPF....the money that is your life
saving being locked now. If only got $200 to $300 given by CPF
monthly....Halo might as well forget it la.....better apply for Social
welfare better...cos, social welfare may give out more money than the
$200 to $300 la. So, where is the logics?

CPF has failed Singaporeans

From: "icon"
Subject: Re: CPF has failed Singaporeans

Do you have CPF? Bonus from government for surpluses? Tax exemption for NS?
What type of benefits do you have?

"truth" wrote in message

> But tourists arrival are sharply down from last year.
> I have having such a wonderful time in Australia.
> My standard and quality of life, Singaporeans can
> only dream at.

> "icon" wrote in message
>> We have plenty of tourists who love visiting Singapore every years but
>> you are such a pitiful person, carrying past baggage for the whole life.
>> It is time for you to let go and live a more meaningful life.

>> "truth" wrote in message
>>>I was in Singapore recently while enroute to other destinations.
>>> The hot and humid weather in Singapore sucks and I don't like
>>> to stay too long in Singapore.
>>> The money face Singaporeans are also very sickening. Any
>>> discussion evolves around how successful u r in making money.
>>> All other considerations like your ideas, logic, kindness,
>>> character are irrelevant.
>>> How rich u appear and project will determine what they think of u.
>>> Pathetic.

>>> "icon" wrote in message
>>>> Which year that you are in Singapore to see that? Actually which hawker
>>>> center?

>>>> "truth" wrote in message
>>>>> In Australia the government give $ to the poor, so there is
>>>>> not need for the people to eat leftovers.
>>>>> In Singapore the government only give themselves $millions
>>>>> and left the poor to defend for themselves. That is why
>>>>> some end up eating scraps to survive. I saw it with my own
>>>>> eyes in Singapore.

>>>>> "icon" wrote in message
>>>>>> You not here in Singapore and not seen such incident personally, how
>>>>>> can you say such thing happen. Have you seen this in Australia?

>>>>>> "truth" wrote in message
>>>>>>>U too busy licking pap arses and sucking their cocks
>>>>>>> to know what is really happening in Singapore.

>>>>>>> "icon" wrote in message
>>>>>>>> When is the last time you are here in Singapore to see people
>>>>>>>> eating leftovers at hawker centre? Probably this only happen in
>>>>>>>> Australia.

>>>>>>>> "truth" wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:uJoPm.57645$ze1.13022@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>>>>>>> The CPF does not provide enough for retirement. That is why
>>>>>>>>> as a retirement fund it has failed miserably.
>>>>>>>>> What the CPF has succeeded is that it has brought plenty of
>>>>>>>>> benefits to the papist leegime.
>>>>>>>>> First, they have a cheap source of funds to develop Singapore
>>>>>>>>> and to invest thru GIC to earn higher returns. The higher returns
>>>>>>>>> of 8% was not pass onto Singaporeans. They were kept by the
>>>>>>>>> papist leegime so that they can continue to draw multi$million
>>>>>>>>> salary and all sorts of benefits. These funds also allow people
>>>>>>>>> like LKY to crow and thumb his chest on the world stage.
>>>>>>>>> Second, part of the CPF is used to take over the responsibility
>>>>>>>>> of the papist leegime on health care. We used to have free
>>>>>>>>> hospitalisation. After GCT commercialised the health system in the
>>>>>>>>> 80's, we ended up with huge hospitalisation bills.
>>>>>>>>> Third, a major chunks of the CPF are retained forever to ensure
>>>>>>>>> that you don't end up as a liablility of the papist leegime. This
>>>>>>>>> pap government is so afraid of supporting needy Singaporeans. This
>>>>>>>>> has led to some rather ridiculous situation where a person can
>>>>>>>>> have over $hundred thousand in his CPF but is a peniless bankrupt
>>>>>>>>> who have to survive by eating leftovers at hawker centre.

From: "truth"
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:59:03 GMT
Local: Fri, Nov 27 2009 8:59 pm
Subject: Re: CPF has failed Singaporeans

Can u see the ocean and whales in Singapore ?
Can u have outdoor temperature which is like
natural aircon ?
Can u go abalone catching ?
The parks in Singapore are so tiny.
The Singapore air is also polluted.
Singapore is so over crowded.
Singapore is so hot and humid.
Singapore is so noisy.
Singaporeans live in tiny pigeon holes in the sky.
No garden, no fruit trees.
Singapore don't have free media.
Singaporeans don't have real freedom and democracy.
Singaporeans perpetually living in fear of breaking
all sorts of law.
Singaporeans are perpetually bully by their own government.
Singaporeans are made to pay and pay day in day out.
Singaporeans work like hell for so little.
Singaporeans have little time to rest and spend with
their family.
Singaporeans are highly stressed.

"icon" wrote in message

> It is known that financial crisis resulted in lesser toursist worldwide.

> What stardard and quality of life you have that Singapore do not provide?

> "truth" wrote in message
>> But tourists arrival are sharply down from last year.
>> I have having such a wonderful time in Australia.
>> My standard and quality of life, Singaporeans can
>> only dream at.

PAP quietly changed rules of CPF Life scheme

> > CPF Life : Annuity without guarantee....

> > "The annuity provides a kind of retirement-income insurance: you
> > contribute funds to the annuity in exchange for the guaranteed income
> > stream of your choosing later in life."
> > - Investopedia [Link]
> > .
> > The basic idea of life annuity is it serves as a form of insurance where
> > the uncertainty of an individual's lifespan is transferred from the
> > individual to the insurer, which reduces its own uncertainty by pooling
> > many clients[Link]. What good is an annuity if income stream from it is
> > not guaranteed? If you can't depend on it, you will need something else to
> > insure against the uncertainty!
> > .
> > This week the govt passed amendments to the CPF Act that allows the govt
> > to vary the payout on CPF Life at the Government's discretion. [Link]. The
> > reason given was that they may have to cut down the payout to ensure the
> > solvency of the CPF Life scheme (due to incompetent management?). What is
> > happening is this : in a life annuity risk is transferred from individual
> > to the insurance company. However, with CPF Life, the govt passed the risk
> > right back to the individuals. So ordinary Singaporeans are forced buy an
> > annuity that we can't count on for a guaranteed income stream. Even with a
> > guaranteed income stream, we are already forced to bear the risk of
> > inflation ...like I said in earlier post, the basic scheme may not even
> > provide enough for McDonald's Happy Meals[Link] due to inflation. However,
> > with the guarantee on the income stream removed, the basic scheme may not
> > even be enough for maggIe mee! ...all to protect the govt's own scheme
> > from insolvency....(hmm....protecting itself from its own lack of
> > competence?)

> > The CPF scheme and its never-ending tweaks that always end up locking up
> > our money longer and longer but never provide any more in the way of
> > financial security for old age and protection against inflation. The whole
> > CPF should be reformed. We should do what other competent govts do instead
> > of locking up the minimum at a low fixed return. Hire the best managers to
> > manage the money properly so that it will be adequate for retirement later
> > on - that is what almost what every other major pension fund in the world
> > does including Malaysia's EPF, Chilean Pension Fund etc etc. Contrary to
> > what the govt tells us, locking money up at a fix rate is completely
> > unsafe and makes us all vulnerable to inflation. The PAP govt endangers us
> > so that the GIC can borrow the money for investments from the CPF. It is
> > very unkind, unjust and ultimately unfair to the ordinary folks who are
> > now asked to work until they are frail and old.

> > posted by LuckySingaporean

> Temasek can't survive without using CPF money and the country's reserves

CPF minimum is unfair and ridiculous

From: "truth"
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 09:32:48 GMT
Local: Mon, Jun 1 2009 5:32 pm
Subject: CPF minimum is unfair and ridiculous

truth comment : no other country in the world forceably keep
a chunk of their citizen's saving except singapore. how on earth
singaporeans can tolerate such massive abuse by the pap leegime
is beyond me. if the pap leegime is afraid to take on the
responsibility of looking after its' old citizen, then it should give
up power and allow others who are more willing to look after
singaporeans take over.

INCREASE in CPF minimum sum: when will Singaporeans ever see their
hard-earned savings?
June 1, 2009 by admin

The CPF minimum sum has been INCREASED yet again to "adjust for inflation".
However, for some strange reasons, the Straits Times chose to omit the key
word - "increased" in its report:

"From next month onwards, Central Provident Fund (CPF) members will see
changes made to their Minimum Sum (MS), Medisave Minimum Sum (MMS), and
Medisave Contribution Ceiling (MCC).

Starting July 1 this year, the CPF MS will be revised from $106,000 to
$117,000. This will apply to members who turn 55 from July 1, 2009 to June
30, 2010." (read article here)

The minimum sum is the amount of money needed to to be set aside in the
Retirement account of Singaporeans after they reach 55 years of age before
they can withdraw their CPF in one lump sum.

For example, if one has $118,000 in his/her CPF ordinary account, he/she can
withdraw $1,000 in cash while leaving the minimum sum of $117,000 in the
Retirement account.

In other words, if you do not have this amount in your CPF by the time you
are 55, you will be at the complete mercy of the CPF Board to "dispense"
your own savings to you monthly till the day you die.

To make it worse, if you are unable to set aside your full Minimum Sum in
cash, your property, bought with your CPF savings, will be automatically
pledged for up to half of your Minimum Sum. (details here)

How many Singaporeans can pledge this minimum sum to their retirement
account by 55 years of age? It will be a interesting figure for us to find
out.

The figures are computed based on the cost of living in Singapore. What if
one decides to retire in China, Thailand or Malaysia? Can the sum be
adjusted so as to free out more cash for retirees to enjoy their twilight
years elsewhere?

The government has no business or right to withhold the savings of
Singaporeans from them. These monies are not sitting idly in the CPF. Are
they used by our Sovereign Wealth Funds in overseas investments, e.g. to
bail out distressed foreign banks?

It seems like most Singaporeans will never be able to withdraw their CPF in
one full sum unless they are filthy rich or they pack up their bags and live
Singapore for good.

What do Singaporeans want to do after they retire from active working life,
that is IF they ever retire? Do they want to depend on a few hundred dollars
from their CPF savings to survive or do they want to make use of it to enjoy
life like travelling around the world?

We vote for a government to care for us when we grow old and infirm, not to
"help" us plan for our retirement with our own savings. Why can't the
government do more to help those elderly with no CPF savings to depend on
when they can afford to blow away $4.6 billion dollars in less than a year?

Do we really need to invest our reserves in such risky investments in order
to generate returns year after year? Not all developed countries in the
world have SWFs like Singapore and they are doing as well, if not better
than us.

Are Singaporeans getting short changed by the government? Do we really want
to work forever to contribute to Singapore's GDP growth (so as to justify
the exorbitant pay of our ministers) till the day we collapse and die? Is
this the definition and meaning of life in Singapore?

While the CPF minimum sum keeps increasing, the salary of the ordinary
Singapore worker has stagnated. How is it possible for us to accure that sum
of money in our CPF when our salaries forever lags behind the high cost of
living which has been increasing relentlessly?

Does the government really understand the concerns and aspirations of
Singaporeans? Perhaps we should peg their salaries to the median salary of
the Singapore worker instead of the GDP growth before they can understand
the plight of the common man in the streets.