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

去年400自杀个案 20至29岁年轻人占17巴仙

2019年共有400起自杀个案,比起2018年的397起提升了三起,其中20至29岁青年,是所有年龄层中最高的。 新加坡援人协会(Samaritans of Singapore,SOS)的统计显示,我国2019年共有400起自杀案件,而且大多数年龄层的自杀死亡人数也略微增加,而因自杀死亡的人数从2018年,每10万新加坡人中的8.36巴仙下降至8巴仙。 400起自杀年龄中,则以10至29岁青少年居多,值得关注的是,20至29岁的年龄层中,自杀死亡人数占总数17巴仙,共71人。 另一方面,20岁至29岁的年龄层的求救意识也稍微提升,据数据显示,自2019年的3月份至目前,其热线求救的个案量从3千396增至4千124。 而根据新加坡援人协会所观察,大多数欲自杀者都面临不满足的伴侣关系、难以应对的个人心理健康那个问题、以及极具挑战性的情况,才会衍生出自杀的想法。 而且根据近日援人协会的调查,共有2千497名受访者参与调查,其中有580名20至29岁的人参与调查。有三分之一的20至29岁年龄层的人在情绪不稳定时,都不会选择寻求协助,这源于社会环境对自杀的污名化,导致他们欲寻求协助时,因恐惧、羞愧。 担心被批评,甚至笃定认为不会出现任何改变,而拒绝向外求助。 援人协会执行董事Gasper Tan表示,“尽管求助热线的数量提高,证明青少年逐渐注重他们的心理健康,亦明白他们需要提早介入,但某一族群的高自杀率数也令人担忧。” 他也表示,该现象也意味着需要促进更多社区工作,使青少年在寻求协助时无需受到异样的眼光投射。…

本地有1109无国籍人士 政府依学历、经济贡献等审核公民申请

在本次的国会会议,国会副议长暨荷兰-武吉知马集选区议员迪舒沙,询问内政部长本地目前有多少无国籍人士,以及在协助申请公民或永久居民方面,政府是否能进一步协助这批群体。 对此,内政暨律政部长尚穆根透过书面答复坦言,截至去年11月30日,本地共有1109位无国籍人士。其中,有76%具有永久居民身份,在住房、教育和医疗方面,享有与其他永久居民同等福利。 若无国籍人士申请永久居民或公民权,移民与关卡局都会依据一系列事项,审核每份申请。 这些事项就包括:无国籍人士在本地居留的时间、家庭背景、经济贡献、学历、年龄,与本地人的家庭关系等等。 同时,当局也会考量他们成为无国籍人士的原因。例如,他们选择放弃原国籍身份。或是非出于自愿失去公民权。 有者因犯罪而被原生国家剥夺国籍。 有者尽管新加坡出生,但碍于父母都不是新加坡公民,父母也未能为孩子申请祖国的公民权,而为此成为无国籍人士身份。  

The Orange Production launches with exciting new collaborations with young artists

Local theatre company The Necessary Stage (TNS) will be working with young…

Newsbites – F1 supremo accused of bribery, and other news

F1 supremo accused of bribery deal in Singapore Formula One boss Bernie…