~by: Leong Sze Hian~

I refer to the report “Percentage of CPF members meeting Minimum Sum on the rise: Tharman” (Channel NewsAsia, Mar 5). It states that “The percentage of active CPF members who meet their Minimum Sum at age 55 has been improving over the years, from 36 per cent in 2007 to 45 per cent in 2011. Speaking in Parliament, Deputy Prime Minister and Manpower Minister, Tharman Shanmugaratnam said this will improve with each successive cohort, as educational profiles improve and lifetime incomes rise”.

However, according to a report in the previous year “Fewer S'pore citizenship, permanent residency granted: report” (Channel NewsAsia, Dec 17, 2010):

“Another issue for the government involves the CPF minimum sum requirement, where S$123,000 must be set aside for retirement. In 2009, only 49 per cent of workers were able to meet the requirement upon reaching 55 years old”.

So, does it mean that those who could meet the Minimum Sum increased from 36 per cent in 2007 to 49 per cent in 2009, and then declined to 45 per cent in 2011.

According to the report 'CPF Trends: Minimum Sum Scheme' – “Among the active members who turned 55 in 2008, about one-third (33.8%) met the required MS (Chart 2). This is a drop from 57.1% in 1996, and could be attributed to the increase in the required MS from $40,000 in July 1995 to $106,000 in July 2008”.

The chart in that report shows that the percentage decline was in almost a straight line, and the 2007 figure was around 36 per cent. This coincides with the '36 per cent in 2007' figure reported in the recent Parliamentary sitting.

15.2% jump in 1 year?

So, does this mean that the percentage declined from 37 in 2007 to 33.8 in 2008, increased dramatically to 49 in 2009 (a jump of 15.2 per cent in one year), and then declined to 45 per cent in 2011, instead of just simply what was reported in Parliament as “has been improving over the years, from 36 per cent in 2007 to 45 per cent in 2011”?

Minimum Sum in cash or with property?

What is perhaps even more intriguing was what the former Minister of Manpower said in Parliament last year that “For the cohort turning 55 in 2010, over 40% of active CPF members, or about 12,600 members, attained their cohort MS set at $123,000 after lump sum withdrawal. Of these members, more than half have set aside the full cohort MS in cash”.

Because if the percentage was 49 in 2009, over 40% in 2010, and 45 per cent in 2011, does it mean that it was like a roller-coaster ride from 57.1 in 1996 to 33.8 in 2008, 49 in 2009, just over 40 in 2010 and now 45 in 2011,  instead of just simply what was reported in Parliament as “has been improving over the years, from 36 per cent in 2007 to 45 per cent in 2011”?

Since the former Minister of Manpower said “Of these members (12,600), more than half have set aside the full cohort MS in cash, does it mean that only over 20% (more than 6,300 members) had their Minimum Sum in cash with the other half of the members being able to have their Minimum Sum after pledging their property?

Could this be the reason why there was a dramatic jump of 15.2% in the year 2009, because the CPF report was referring to the Minimum Sum in cash, whereas the Ministers were referring to meeting the Minimum Sum with cash and property? 

If you are confused by now, so am I!

What about inactive CPF members?

Couple this with the fact that there were also 1,642,900 inactive CPF members, out of the total CPF members of 3,343,300 in 2010, (Department of Statistics Labour and Productivity report), perhaps we could get clarity if someone can tell us how many were in the age 55 cohort in 2011, and how many of these met the Minimum Sum entirely in cash?

How many in age 55 cohort have Minimum Sum in cash?

As I estimate the 55 cohort to be about 60,000 plus since there were 182,700 active CPF members over age 50 to 55 and another estimated 100,000 plus inactive CPF members, could this number be as little as less than 10,000, or less than 1 in 6?  


Support TOC! Buy Uncle Leong’s book here!

picture credit: CashBench

 

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

【选举】不随行动党脚步 人民之声至下周五才恢复家访

人民之声(People’s Voice)党表示,拜访活动将会从6月26日才开始,即使恢复拜访活动,也将可能采取在公共场所,不会到居民家门口,以减少传播风险。 人民之声党领袖林鼎律师昨晚(18日)脸书公告,随着19日开始进入第二阶段的解封措施,各党也开始为下届大选作准备,行动党欲恢复拜访居民活动,而人民之声则表示会再第二阶段解封措施实施一周后再开始进入社区拜访。最早的拜访活动将会在6月26日开始。” 林鼎也表示,即使恢复拜访活动后,也不会选择到居民门口进行拜访,会将拜访活动的居民在公共区域进行,减少感染的风险。 “即使回到社区拜访,我们依然选择在公共场所会见民众,不会让居民陷入感染的风险。” 另一方面,人民之声也谴责在此时举办选举的鲁莽自私决定,认为距离最后期限仍有10个月的时间,选举可待疫情平缓后再举办,但如今却匆匆开始,增加群众在疫情下的风险。 “我们对于政府鲁莽的决定予以谴责,他们大可待疫情趋缓、生活步入正常后,再考虑选举事宜。若现在贸然选举,无疑使民众陷入病毒感染的风险,而且在本地确诊病例数仍维持在三位数、仍有社区感染病例,不应该让民众陷入风险中。只有自私的执政党才会采取鲁莽的一步。”

2020财年赤字增至743亿元 独立以来最高

副总理兼财政部长王瑞杰称,2020年财年整体财政赤字将增加至743亿新元,或占国民生产总值的15.4巴仙,这是我国自独立以来最高的赤字。 在今年三月,王瑞杰发表“坚韧预算案”,当时他也指出赤字高达392亿元,相等于国内生产总值的7.9巴仙。 短短四个月以来,政府公布四套财政预算案,政府从储备金拿出520亿元,应对此次疫情。 总统哈莉玛原则上同意,从储备金拨出310亿元来应对当前局势。 王瑞杰称疫情是这一代人考验,人们需团结一致,作出调整,相信国人能克服危机。  

汤东线第二阶段完成度九成 料今年杪可开放运营

陆交局表示,目前汤申-东海岸线的第二阶段,即六个车站的完成度已达九成,预计今年底可开放运营。 六站包括春叶(Springleaf)、伦多(Lentor)、美华(Mayflower)、光明山(Bright Hill)、汤申上段(Upper Thomson)和加利谷(Caldecott)站。 光明山站与加利谷站将会是跨岛线(Cross Island Line)与地铁环线(Circle Line)的转换站,预计会有10万户家庭受惠,届时他们只需要行走十分钟即可到达其中一个地铁站。 目前第一阶段的地铁站也即将在本月31日启动,其三站包括兀兰北、兀兰和兀兰南站。 汤东线目前是我国第六条地铁线,全长43公里,共有32站,其中八个为转换站,与目前五条地铁线连接。 由SMRT经营的汤东线是我国的第六条地铁线,耗资250亿元,全线长43公里,共有32个站,其中八个为转换站,与现有五条地铁线连接。 它分成五个阶段建成,将在2024年全部通车,一旦全面运作,预计将会达到每日约50万人次至100万人次的乘客量。

CAD managed to recover only a fraction of sum from Premium Liquid Assets (PLA) over its investment scam

The Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) released a statement today (2 January) saying…