balance scale CPF

By Timothy Ho

DollarsAndSense.sg weighs in with our views on why the CPF Review Panel has one of the most unenviable tasks in Singapore.

Here is the one thing that the CPF Review Panel would have realized by now. They are part of a review process that will never attain public approval regardless of what they recommend.

Here is why. 

The different expectations of everyone

Most countries’ pension schemes are usually catered for the masses. That includes the poor, the elderly and the underprivileged. For countries with welfare systems, the debate is usually on who should qualify for it, and how much they deserve to be given.

In Singapore, our problems are a lot more different. First and foremost, we do not have any notable welfare system in place. Secondly, the CPF system works in such a way where your pension fund is built up only when you are working, earning and contributing to it. It might be a mandatory scheme, but that does not mean everyone gets to enjoy it. For example, people with disabilities, special needs, homemakers, or those who just can’t get gainfully employment fall through the cracks in this system.

Even among those who are gainfully employed, there are various wages earned. That means everyone is contributing a different amount from one another. In most developed countries, this is sidestepped simply by putting in place a tax rate that could easily shave off up to 20% of your salary, even if you are earning minimum wages. That tax rate is of course used to offset unemployment benefits paid.

So rather than have people with different contributions, and hence different pension account, these other governments simply pool everything they collect from those who are employed, and determine how much should go to the who are unemployed.

The Singapore Case

By now, you would have know that Singapore operates within a very different system. That system is even more complex as different people have different contribution amounts and thus, different expectations for how they should be allowed to use their money.

One of the proposal from the CPF review panel is that more options should be given to CPF members. Two ideas being mooted was that a certain percentage, example 20%, should be allowed for members for withdrawal upon reaching the age of 55 even if they have not reached the minimum sum. Another idea was that those who wanted to top up the minimum sum in return for higher monthly payout should be allowed to do so.

How will more options help Singaporean?

One thing we should note here is that it is extremely easy for the government to simply introduce more options into CPF and please everyone in Singapore. For example, some have asked for full withdrawal of their CPF monies. Others may prefer only partial withdrawal.

Should the government ask for the reason and logic when people demand to withdraw their CPF monies? Should the government be allowed to think for the betterment of its citizens in this aspect? Netizens will say “no”. They believe everyone should have the right to use their money as they will, even if it’s just to blow it all playing jackpots at RWS.

Of course, there are many Singaporeans who will use their money prudently. Examples would include paying down debt and maybe doing some investing, though we hope the definiton of “investing” does not equate into putting money into some type of asset that gives guaranteed monthly dividends of 2%, as that would defeat the purpose of withdrawing from their CPF accounts.

With all due respect to the older folks and the experience they have accumulated, we also hope that no one will decide to take their first plunge into the stock market and invest half his/her life savings upon retirement after reading a few smart books on investing theories and sure-win ways in the library. We don’t want to burst your bubble, but they rarely work and you’d more likely find yourself losing a sizeable portion of your money.

Education Before Options

Basically what we are advocating is for there to be more options that will suit all groups of people, but CPF members must then be able to understand the various schemes and the implications of withdrawing earlier, or even toping up. As it is, it appears that Singaporeans, ourselves included, are already having a difficult time understanding CPF (no thanks to the frequency of changes being made). There is no point having 100 different options for CPF members to consider, only for them to not understand the implications of each, and to end up unwisely choosing a plan where they are worse off than before.

To conclude, we think education and flexibility should go hand in hand to achieve the best results. CPF members must be willing to educate themselves about their money, and the government must be able to find a policy that should work consistently and not have to tweak it every other year. Only then would a range of options will work, and CPF members will be better off.

This article was first published at DollarsAndSense.sg 

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

暴力威胁三女乘客 前私召车司机囚14周

同一天遭三名女乘客投报,指他危险驾驶、要求女乘客坐在前座却没将她们送到目的地,27岁的男私召车司机被判入狱三个月又两个星期,及罚款8000元。 男司机Nigel Lim Guan Yu日前因触犯罪暴力和威胁行为、拥有受管制药物等四项控状,而于8月24日被判刑。第五项控状被纳入法官判刑时的考量中。 被告于2020年2月3日开始担任Grab司机。 事情始末 他于当天早上8时45分在勿洛北接到首名女受害者,22岁的社会工作者,而后者的目的地是巴西立的一栋组屋。当靠近目的地时,受害者要求被告向右转,但是被告却转入巴西立13巷第149A栋组屋的多功能停车场。期间,受害者一直要求被告停车,放她下车,但是都遭被告无视,直到车子开到顶层,撞上一根柱子为止。 受害者当时并未受伤,她趁着被告下车检查车子时立刻逃离现场。被告当时对她大喊,要求她还钱,还说可以和她好好玩一场。 发生首起意外后,被告仍然继续私召车工作,并在巴西立接到第二名受害者,要去巴耶利峇广场(Paya Lebar Square)的22岁美容顾问。…

A revised Team Singapore, a positive new beginning

~ By Howard Lee ~It is barely days to the Olympic and…

最新消息:纳吉确认被捕

大马反贪污委员会于今天下午,前往前首相纳吉住家,展开逮捕行动。 据报导,反贪会已完成调查报告,包括纳吉涉嫌洗黑钱和非法挪用资产的详情,认为罪证确凿,建议逮捕纳吉。 根据一马公司调查团队文告,反贪会成员在下午2时35份逮捕纳吉,协助调查与SRC国际公司案,纳吉将在明早8.30面临提控。 SRC国际公司乃是一马公司子公司,2012年在财政部旗下。 不过,反贪会表示,呼吁各界静候该局进一步的文告。 早前,首相敦马哈迪曾表示,控告纳吉的罪状“近乎完美”,需要长达月余的调查,就是希望能确保诉讼万无一失。

LTA announces completion of investigation on the tunnel flooding incident at Bishan

The Land Transport Authority (LTA) has announced that it has completed its…