ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.พ. 2024
- Singapore Parliament has come out to debate Budget 2024, and one of the hotly contested topics is the Closure of the Special Account at 55, implementing in 2025. Members of Parliament have come out to highlight the impact that it has on Singaporeans.
Here is Mr Loo's take on the debate.
Any questions? Direct them over to the 1M65 Tele Group :D
Endowus Discount Code: endowus.com/r?code=LOOFEB24_C...
1M65 Tele Group: t.me/Loo1M65
1M65 Discord: bit.ly/1M65Discord
Disclaimer: loo.money/disclaimer
Helping Ordinary People lead Extraordinary Lives - บันเทิง
Finally we have some MPs who care to think about us who have been planning our retirement for years just to find out our plans are crushed suddenly. Its an excellent move to retain the SA of all who are already 55 & older. I truly hope our PM to be will act on this to be more inclusive of the older citizens. Good job 👏 ❤
But it was also one MP who brought up the issue of SA shielding which causes CPF to decide closing down SA accounts after age 55.
Fully agree with you that there ought to be a wide public consultation before such a change.
It’s the job of MPs to raise questions in parliament. If they u-turn on anything because of parliamentary questions, there’ll NEVER be any new policy changes. 🙄
Absolutely agree! This is somewhat unfair to those above 55 years
Those that have done shielding have to restore to OA the amount used to shield the SA. Cannot continue to earn higher interest indefinitely - one estimate quoted is $100k extra in interest differential.
Such extra income comes from the CPF/gov and is at the expense of funding for the lower income.
The main concern is letting those in their 70s and 80s to take out their money, this will lead to potential wolves who will con and scam their hard-earn life savings away, leading to boarder social issues!
Are we using CPF shielding as a reason to close the SA after the age of 55?
Agreed for 55 above should let SA run. Can’t imagine what will happen to the exodus of funds that will happen. Loss of monies due to scam or lousy preforming investment instruments. I have planned long for SA shield to happen so that I can pay for 3 of my kids tertiary fees. RA is no guarantee for 4% too. And I do not really trust my monies in RA or CPF anymore 😢 . I don’t think a small amount of citizens affected. Really disappointed how the whole SA issue was carry out …
Or better still reward most of those that have served the army. We are the one that matter most when our beloved country is threaten. The rich and fair weather PRs that might not be around.
You forgot contribution rates going up for above-55 too. That means if you already hit BRS or FRS, and still working, you will take home more in cash after your SA is closed. (More goes into OA, right? And OA can be accessed like ATM after 55, right?)
As you mention, RA or even SA is no guarantee that it is 4% (Policy can be changed to lower the floor rate) Would that be a better option for everyone?
To maintain the high interest rate, the money has to come from somewhere? Or alternatively we can have higher inflation rate far greater than 4%?
And this could mean your 4% interest gain may not be enough to pay for 3 of your kids tertiary fees.
Both will similarly disrupt your retirement plan.
Fully agree with you!
@@LeeMW007 Are you above 55? Do you know that your SA is used to fund your RA first? For majority, too little left in SA to make an impact even if working. But if you are working after 55, you will have more cash to withdraw because you can access your monthly CPF contributions immediately if you meet the BRS or FRS. Isn't this better?
this shielding has always been a "hack" so why bank all retirement plans on it? wouldn't this speak to more of a failure to plan properly?
change is a norm.
Agree, since policy affect all Singaporeans, consultation would be good. Affected parties could be better informed and advise of alternatives. Policy to stop rich from getting richer should not affect those who are mid income and not as savvy with higher risk investments.
The rich are always protected & not affected " the hardest hit are the sandwich group "
On the topic of fairness, those who own HDB and private property must not be allowed to continue to do so. Those who own both are the richer ones. As a result of them hogging the HDB flat, the poorer ones ended up paying more as there are less flats out there available to them. Why no one bring up this issue?
On the topic of fairness, singles should also be allowed to own HDB at a lower age. The age to buy HDB for singles should be lowered from age 35.
GE is coming, the vocal SIG groups with votes will tickle gov. Yes the world is unfair, but it is not unreal. PAP knows where the sweet spot is. 🤭
Singles who have no family to take care of should not be allowed to do so too. They have very little financial burdens. Those who have no children should also not be allowed to do so, they contributed no manpower or new births for the country's organic growth. Those who are above 55 should also not be allowed to do because they have already enjoyed it much longer than the youngsters.
Hahaha? This same old topic has already been brought up by soooo many soup grapes in the past but govt choose to ignore cos those who currently own HDB and private properties is only 1.6% nia!!!! Sooo insignificant!!!:Dun be jealous la! You miss it, you miss it!😝😂😂😂
They are already discouraged from doing so with a 20% ABSD
Boomers complain👏👏👏👍
Sounds like a valid argument.
I'm more concerned for those above 55 who can barely meet FRS even if they sold off their property due to unforeseen circumstances....if all their money is stuck in RA & cannot be taken out until 65, then how will they be able to fund their next purchase at that age (55 onwards)?
Precisely NOT TO IMPLEMENT new-policies as they like without GETTING FEEDBACK 1st from the PUBLIC !
5 years before 55 should also be considered to keep it. As for the long term investment it needs 3-5 years to see the return.
I choose to believe that people above 55 who has and continue to put their money in the SA would withdraw only for emergency purposes knowing that the opportunity cost of withdrawing it at 4%. Most of us will continue to leave the money in the SA for this purpose and continue to save it for our retirement. The removal of this SA merely take away this ‘emergency withdrawal’ comfort!
Are you above 55? Do you know withdrawals are taken from SA first? So it is a fact that majority do not use their SA much after 55 because even if they work, very little flows into it regularly.
@@scbchong6964 of course I know. That’s why people who has money in SA will not want to withdraw it unless it’s emergency.
Cap the amount that can be retained in the CPF SA(4%) account after age 55. Come out with a reasonable sum.The rest of the money goes to OA account (2.5%).This will help those who are not savvy in investment. It also prevent the risk of loosing all or part of the money after drawing out and put to poor investments or worst due to scam. This will solve part of the headache when population are aging. This life saving money from SA can be depended upon during emergency.
Agree. This is also what I have been thinking about. Why can’t have a limit of like 100k (or some other amount) for SA. The rest goes to OA.
@@dantofl8811Same tbought..I am thinking why not tag SA limit with the BRS amount (which is currently at $102,900)... BRS always increase gradually every year, the SA limit will therefore auto adjusted gradually.. any excess funds earned from CPF monthly cobtributions and interest will then overflow to OA.
It’s not fair ….. to have differentiated treatment
The same goes to those who are allowed to keep HDB and Private Property while others cant
It's not a differentiated treatment. If we want to lessen the blow, it would mean SA closure at 55 YO will be for those born before 1974 (currently 50YO) or 1969 (currently 55YO). Those who are 50 and above should not have their SA closed because their retirement plans might be seriously affected. Those who are currently 49YO or younger, will have more time to re-strategised.
@@cathhl244049 yo and 50 yo is only differed by 1 year. If 50 yo do not have time to adjust, 49 will not be much better. How abt couples with diff ages? Their plan are together as a family. Let one of them close SA also affects both.
@@victorvictor3483same for those who are rich in hdb and gets all the financial benefits from govt. The list will go on and on. Housing is not a clear indication of wealth.
PM inwaiting announce changes, then own MP question it... u think kid who... ownself wayang ownself...
Later they tweak the rules then becomes the credit of pappy... see we listen to u... and rem to tick for us in the ballot... but all along they alr plan it... just waiting for ppl to voice their anger and see when to tweak only... 羊毛出在羊身上。
CPF is not like bank to change interest at short notice or about long and short term interest. It is for retirement planning and any substantial reduction in interest rates will affect it.
It is not about the rich or poor. The CPF is about building a persons fund to retire and required forward planning. Not all retire at 65.
What about people who wish to retire at 55 with sufficient SA savings to spend between 55 to 65. Because of this change, will they have to put it off.
This is a major change to their plans and cannot be rationalised.
If they want to rationalise the SA and OA interest, I think it should be for the next generation of workers. Why the hurry?
Agree with you
Are you above 55? Because your SA amount is used first to open your RA, so that is why only 2% actually have anything left in their SA after 55. Point finger and blame gahmen also learn to talk to more citizen above 55 lah.
@@scbchong6964 I think you should read again what @adrian751 wrote. CPF's original (and still the main purpose) is that it is a retirement scheme. The reason why CPF contributions starts once you start working is so that it can accumulate over a period of years, with interest rates providing a compounding effect. This is also why many people start planning to maximum their CPF savings (including via CPF top-ups into SA etc) long before they reach 55. You do not start planning for retirement only at 55. There are people out there who have planned for any excess above FRS in SA (after shielding) to form part of their retirement savings. Also, younger people below 55 are also affected, because even if they build their CPF savings as they age/earn more income, they will now also lose access to this high liquidity, high interest, capital guaranteed place to park their retirement funds.
Actually I did not point finger. I am rationalising lah.
@@adrian751 Instead of talking to yourself and getting misinformed from Haters and Complainers, why not speak to more above-55 citizens?
Many >55 ppl I know have low CPF bal cos in early days salary were low despite contribution rates were high {40%}
You forgot prices also lower in the early days. But if you overspend on housing, no one can save you.
I think they should not start next year too. They should push back for 5 years so that people who are now 50 have time to adjust.
Planned all their life and then suddenly can be affected by this. It’s so paradoxical… haha.😊
We must all act act a bit to make it sound very serious, else how to make the government U-Turn again? The 1.5% is very big deal on your 100000 in your SA you know.
end of the day, why is there so many voters supporting a party that pays themselves high salaries, and squeezed the working class that we need mental health care. And why do we need to pay them and yet seek our consultation? Something is wrong here.
Foo is the one that called DPM Lawrence wong as Lawrence Loh in parliament? The blur one who doesn’t know her boss name?
Script written wrongly by others.
Aiya just let oa become 4 percent after 55
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:26 *🗣️ MP Fiha advocates for allowing individuals aged 55 and above to grandfather the special account policy, suggesting it's fairer for them to continue with existing arrangements while new policy changes apply to younger individuals.*
01:22 *💼 MP Yip Hong Way highlights residents' concerns about disrupted financial planning due to the closure of the Special Account, urging for adjustments to minimize the impact.*
03:08 *📋 Suggestions include conducting public consultations and establishing public-private sector partnerships to fine-tune policies, aiming to mitigate the negative impact of changes like the closure of the Special Account.*
06:47 *⏳ Concerns raised about the short timeframe (10 months) for implementing policy changes affecting retirement planning, suggesting a longer transition period (e.g., one to two years) would be more beneficial for affected individuals.*
Made with HARPA AI
Too much to clise SA contributors monieswith 4% interest but even cpf they wants to swallow later have indigestion .
There will be no change of the CPF policy from the parliament debate, I guess. Because it is DPM announced it. Let's see. :)
Don't be surprised if interest rate for first $80k in OA and Medisave is increased for those above 55.
Would like to also suggest that Singaporeans age above 50 be given a choice to opt out of SA closure if they wish to. This is to lessen the impact as they have less years to plan for retirement than younger people.
Best let people
Decide to allow people to opt in SA to retain after 55 to 65…
Most complainers like to blame gahmen but don't even understand compounding interest in CPF. Why need to give the willfully ignorant so many choices after 55? After 55 you got mid-life crisis and surely cannot think straight or rationally.
The suggestion to grandfather the SA closure obviously looks good for those of us already past 55 years of age but would be deemed unfair to others. From a national policy perspective it is just kicking the issue down the road and will become an election issue. CPF was never intended as an investment get rich scheme as some people like to make it to be . The better way is to provide an alternative scheme to allow retirees a higher interest savings account for longer term offset to inflation.
The point to maintain closure is highly controversial, just sharing my opinion but everyone is entitled to their own. I dont think anyone should have the SA since as mentioned most do not have above FRS. for those who do, I dont think 1.5% will affect them, notwithstanding there are tbills at 3.5% currently, for those who thinks 1.5% difference will affect them greatly, they probably already have alot of money in SA and these can then be withdrawn for other alternative investments to get above 2.5% from OA. Middle class still has more options than the lower class. Regarding including private sector this is good but I still wonder, if I ask you give 4% every year without fail good or bad will you sell such policy on top of uncertain withdrawals anytime? It's easy to see from the point of the recipient of the SA but someone needs to pay the bill, then don't complain when GST or income taxes go up. Good to hear more ideas and suggestions
The reason why ppl do shielding is becoz cpf deduct from SA then OA to create RA, gov or cpf can just make the change of deducting from OA THEN SA to create the RA, so ppl dun do shielding
Btw it’s not CPF board that sets CPF policy, its Ministry of Manpower. Cpfb has no power to implement or change any policies, it’s MOM.
If SA is meant to help SG residents to build their retirement adequacy, why not close it only at the statutory retirement age instead of 55 years old, which is fairer and still aligns to the CPF policy intent.
You are right that consultation with SG residents are important and not dish out abrupt policy changes without assessing the impact.
Hope the PAP close the SA as soon as possible 🙏🙏🙏
Time to vote oppo to teach pap a lesson
I don’t agree. It’s just a waste of public money. Middle income??? With hundreds of thousands in CPF ???
Aiya, this affects only those who have lots of monies in the SA account.
you are not thinking clearly. This affects EVERYONE working after 55 yo!
eg at 55yo, all your CPFSA balances go into RA becos you have less than FRS in CPFSA at 55 yo. The impact for this group comes AFTER the RA is created.
your first CPF contribution (from work) after 55yo will now go to OA and RA (RA is no withdrawable account) instead of previously going to OA and SA (both are withdrawable accounts)
Haha then good to include citizen who r 45 now, give all 45 & above hv time to adjust. Pls made sure shielding will not b stopped else almost same as removal of SA when reaching 55.
Besides letting those above 55 to keep their SA, i think those turning 50 next year should also keep thier SA, because as mentioned, they have already planned for it and likely do not have the luxury of time to change
Unlikely, they will U turn. At least, my impression for Mdm Foo has a positive change.
no lah need to be those 50 and above
Cap SA by 2xBRS after 55yrs old. Don’t need to extend RA ERS to 4xBRS. stay put as 3xBRS. Something to think about.
Just wayang in the parliamentary debate. Nothing will change since the decree is from the crown prince about to go through coronation. Just accept it and go on with life.
Not royalty lah. DPM Wong parents not royalty either. You also got chance to study, score well and join civil service and join PAP, right? Your problem is lack of talent and ability and bad attitude, right?
Only 2% are exploiting their SA over age 55 lah. Didn't all the Opposition supporters demand to remove such privileges from the elites and richies? btw did you also notice all those who kpkb are NOT above 55 yet? I am above 55 and have been using the interest in my SA to pay for road tax, internet access, conservancy and maintenance etc. Closure of SA after age 55 is no big deal because you can still use your OA.
Only 2% have invested not exploitated. It is our money! Future young adults who needs the SA interest to continue paying for their housing loans will be adversely affected too. Its whole group of middle income earners.
@@Clc760 Are you above 55? btw your housing payments come from your OA, not SA. I know because I am over 55 and paying my housing loan from OA. And my SA has small amount which I am drawing down to pay for road tax, conservancy, property tax, etc. btw if you are "middle-income", you will already meet your FRS at 55. Do you also know that your SA is withdrawn first to create your RA at 55? That's why majority have very small amount left in SA after 55.
Cpf Sa closure will only hit the rich reaping more from the CPF but not the majority CPF members
My take is it is a good move
Govt just increase the OA interest to 4% will settle most concern😅
nah going to happen SA4.08% CPF did the math they realized they cant afford to payout
My friend is 54 year old and has been planning to use SA fund for retirement for over 10 years. So, grandfathered for those at 55 would disadvantage my friend who is only months away from 55. So how...? Very unfair to my 54-year old friend leh. What say you...?
My friend who was born in 1974 lamented about missing the majullah package…
Ask your friend talk to me lah. I am above 55 and no problems. His SA will be used to fund his RA first anyway. He does not lose it. Don't exaggerate and blame gahmen for nothing.
@@scbchong6964don't downplay and excuse the govt.
This decision not only affects what happens at 55 yo. it affects every single CPF contribution received after 55yo. eg from your 1st contribution (post 55) onwards, there will be no more CPF SA to allocate to. all the amounts that would have gone into CPFSA will now go to RA. if a person works till 68 yo, we are talking about another 13 years of contribution!!
@@ocswoodlands Citizen, you forgot your SA is open from when you start work until age 55. After 30+ years of working, if you still cannot save, the problem is not CPF or gahmen. The problem is YOU.
btw not forcing you to put into RA after 55. You still have access to all the stocks, ETF etc. And excess SA is moved into OA, right? I am above 55 and have been using my SA interest to pay for road tax and conservancy etc. No big deal this closure after 55 because you would have larger sum in your OA anyway. Plse speak to more above-55 citizens before kpkb and blame gahmen all the time.
@@scbchong6964 you are post 55 yo and currently have a OA, SA, MA and RA, right?
Q1.
What is the interest rate paid to your SA balance of today?
Q2. With SA removed in 2025 and your SA balances moved to OA, what is the interest rate this balance attracts?
And prior to budget 2024, my CPFSA was to have remained open till the day I die and not only up to 55yo.
While you answer the 2 simple questions above, i rest my case.
The concept of saying those in their 55 has no time to re-plan their retirement plans while is relevant, open up the topic, how much time an individual requires to redo their plan. How do we define the cut of age to grandfathered the old rules? No matter what cut off age is used, it will never be fair. I can argue that the older generation got a chance to take advantages of the old system. Their wealth may be distributed to their children. Their children will still benefit.
Example. My parents were factories worker and does not earn much and they have not benefited from SA shielding. I am not yet 50, but with my income, retirement till the age of 80+ is a concern. I am not even looking at having a chance to travel annually for my retirement, or dine out at restaurant often (and by that I mean probably once every few months). With my situation, closing out the SA just does not helps.
I do agree that SA is out of the norm (high returns and liquidity). If the idea is to avoid that, cant we let the individual decide, how much of the excess should go into OA or RA, instead of just having BRS, FRS and ERS?
Those who have done planning knows that any plans have to cater to ever changing world.. CPF policies included. So dun use that as a reasoning pls, only going to sound lame
Shutting it entirely and abruptly doesn’t require a brain
Complainer, you have your SA from when you start work until 55, hor. If after 30+ years, you still got nothing saved, the problem is not CPF or pap, the problem is YOU.
At least the MPs have the courage to speak up! For those who are sitting under the fence, many of you will be affected if you plan to continue paying your housing loan beyond 55 years old as the SA interest actually can help you with the mortgage payment and for those with children, their education fees too.
How to rescue? Pap MPs talk only lah. Can they vote against it? Bark only. Cannot bite. Only opposition MP can and do vote against when they disagree.
Spot on, Mr Loo. let’s talk. My suggestion would be to raise the age to 60 and also raise the FR ceiling.
Foo Mee Har is a clown. Those who are 55 and above have reaped more benefits than those who are young and just starting out. Letting them continue while depriving the young of it, is definitely far from being fair. They should simply have stopped CPF SA shielding and the problem will be solved. Anyone takes out the money, not allowed to put it back again. Period. As for the liquidity issue, they should only allow withdrawals once per year from SA/RA. If need liquidity, transfer it to OA and cannot transfer back to RA/SA. Period. EVERYTHING SOLVED!
My suspicion is the banks are draining funds and needing cash. And this is an attempt to bolster the banking reserves, by indirectly causing a pushing out effect. I could be wrong...and I hope I am. But if I am right, this is a very bad sign.
Mr Loo, you forgot to address the issue that above 55, the contribution rates are going up too. That means all those who meet BRS and FRS will have more cash in their pockets actually. Because they can immediately withdraw their CPF contribution every month from their OA after turning 55. Why Haters and Opposition like to kpkb and blame gahmen when they only see narrow, biased viewpoint?
The question id like to ask about is that permanent 4+% yield in SA. How is that being funded?
I think it is an unfair rug pull of sorts, but if that 4+% requires tax dollars and reserves to backstop it in the ecent of a market downturn, then its unfair on future generations who have to fund it right?
I think the govt is not transparent in explaning WHY its being discontinued and so far all i hear is "Streamlining" which makes no sense. Logically they should be only stopping it because theres a growing trend or large CPF SA shielded funds that the govt has to pay a permanent 4+% yield on. And considering the aging SG society, such a thing can quickly become a financial burden on future generations.
My 2 cents as a 36 year old.
Adding to my comment above, if you think about SA post retirement, allowing it to exist WHILE ALSO allowing you to withdraw anytime means it's a product that guarantees 4+%, protects the principal and gives MAXIMUM liquidity. It's also a mark to market product which means the govt has to take on volatility risk.
Such a product is not sustainable. SA pre-retirement works because you're now allowed to withdraw from it. That capital lockup gives the govt breathing room to navigate market volatility while also giving 4+%
@@yuva I am over 55 and have been using the interest from SA to pay for road tax, property tax etc. You forgot SA is deducted first at 55 and flows into one's new RA. Most above 55 have very little in SA anyway even if they continue working. btw also remember that contribution rates are increasing for those above 55. So if one makes FRS or BRS, and one continues working, there is actually more cash in the pocket because one can withdraw the CPF contributions from OA immediately.
Of course the tax payers are funding it. Its a subsidy that gov is paying above market rates. It is now capped and the boomers are whinning
And the tax payers are not subsiding the poor mind you, its the extremely rich people who park hundreds of thousands if not million into SA 4%. Its not fair that we allow this exploitation at tax payers expense
@@scbchong6964 You really shouldn't be able to take out anything from SA anytime while still being able to earn a guaranteed 4%. This is an unsustainable financial instrument that the govt should not have allowed. I think it's right for the G to remove it before too many people start CPF shielding and the govt ends up having to pay 4% on a fund that is basically 100% liquid and has a long duration yield.
Also, the people who would have the $$ to do CPF shielding arguably are upper middle class and don't need the govt's help for retirement.
If government reverts or adjust they look weak. Singaporeans are too spoilt with a big safety blanket. Also, like mr loo said, a lot of it is perception of being affected. However, perception is reality these days sadly. No doubt this is not great for retirement savings but it’s just course correcting what we should’ve done long ago.
Public consultation isnt relevant here as it is meant to cover a loophole, private partnership is a lousy suggestion. Allowing private products will allow private profit driven financial companies to suck up more money from poor or lowly educated people. I previously lost money investing my cpf in those lousy unit trusts
Why did you leave out what the opposition MPs propose? One of them MP Louis Chua proposed again to review the CPF interest rates. I think this is sound and long overdue due to longer term structural inflation, and goes towards addressing the root cause of why people look for high yielding, safe places to park cash while in retirement or nearing retirement age. I disagree with MP Foo Mee Har's suggestion. Why does she assume that planning only starts at 55? Planning for retirement is a long term process. As a former senior banker for many years, she of all people should know. I note she is also current CEO of 'Wealth Management Institute". This suggestion is a defeatist one, cos it is already conceding defeat.
Have you ever ask if Opposition MPs give handouts and more welfare to their supporters in Hougang and Aljunied? Ever ask them if it is sustainable? So many Opposition supporters are actually entitled and complacent.
@@scbchong6964 I think you should bring your rant somewhere else.
@@scbchong6964opposition is not ruling party, they cannot make decisions on giving out handouts. 😅
@@alanbingham7045 Freedom of speech means I can make an opinion about your complaints and opinions, right? Instead of biatchin', blaming and blaming gahmen, why don't you speak to more above-55 citizens?
@@scbchong6964 Yes of course. I respect your freedom of speech and right to make an embarassment of yourself.
Why give hope? You said in your last video to forget and move on yet you continue to harbour hopes on a U-turn.
Bias against opposition
Have you ever ask if Opposition MPs give handouts and more welfare to their supporters in Hougang and Aljunied? Ever ask them if it is sustainable? So many Opposition supporters are actually entitled and complacent.
@@scbchong6964 hey they don't have trillions of dollars sitting in the reserve to give to le. Our government is stingy
@@siaboonleong Not stingy at all. You forgot the CDC vouchers, utilities rebates, property tax subsidies, income tax rebates, and really poor get free food, free rent, free laptops, subsidised school fees, subsidised public transport etc. I think you are not paying any income tax yet and still living rent-free under your parents' roof, right? Citizen, speak more to those above 55 before kpkb and blame gahmen daily.
@@scbchong6964 you kbkp for what ? I live rent free so what. I can't afford hdb le. 300 k le siao. Imagine minimum wage is 1500 is almost impossible to buy one le. Before you judge others please go thru your brain why people say nothing much is given. Your response only tells me you are living too comfortably and don't realize the general public all living hand to mouth existence. Cdc voucher so what ? I won't be able to use them all in the first place. For groceries is only 300. Ntuc 3 trips settle liao. You don't know how things are super expensive now
@@scbchong6964 your channel is censored like the pap. looks like someone is afraid.
How many people exploited the loopholes and are affected? Why waste so much time and tax payer resources on this. Just close it. Period.
All these questions ate more of pap throwing to their MPs to ask lol.. when pap seeks opinions from Singaporeans on decision making??
TOTALLY DISAGREE. While it sounds sexy and logical and even compassionate for the current post-55ers, what it means is that the pre-55ers are going to have to "subsidise" the post-55ers as the government has to give them their 4% SA interest from a fixed pool of returns that they make. All else being equal, assuming government returns is fixed, there will be less to go around for post-55ers for their retirement / payout.
The post-55ers have already reaped the "spoils" of the fruit in terms of high SA interest. Time to move on. Inasmuch as I empathise with the uproar, they need to look for new ways of funding their retirement given the change. As they say, who moved the cheese.
There is no subsidy lah goondu. Don't ALL working adults singaporeans have the SA until turning 55? If after 30+ years of working life your savings is still bad, the problem is not CPF or gahmen. The problem is YOU.
A lot of the people using sa shielding are using cpf sa to bridge the gap from 55 to 65.
Perhaps authorities can allow an option for cpf life payout to start from 55 years old or 60 years old instead. New figures to be calculated and voluntary deferred payout option to the age of 70 should still be retained
You forgot most still working with high salaries after 55, hor. No need to spoonfeed and babysit anymore.
We should prevent CPF shielding by setting the rules instead of closing SA. Nevertheless, we cannot address the 2% who successfully did CPF shielding.
Why is this group who have been abusing the system needing special attention?
Free loading losers
For 55 years and below, i would suggest they should increase the frs by 3 times of bhs.
Mr Loo, don't kao beh so much lah. As reported by CNA, your potential lost of interest gain is 100K only. Peanut to you lah.
Let this money be spread to other cpf members who can benefit from this SA account anomaly.
Tolong tolong..... kum sia le.
Greed knows no bound
Your suggestions not practical. grandfather rights not fair to those just below 55. Why below 55 cannot keep the SA but above 55 can keep?, those above 55 would have already gained those additional interest over the years. Totally unfair suggestion.
Mr loo, take care of your health...
你的臉色不好看...
❤
Ya... 2 dark patches on the cheek...not a good sign....
Im not PAP follower
Im not a PAP follower
Have you ever ask if Opposition MPs give handouts and more welfare to their supporters in Hougang and Aljunied? Ever ask them if it is sustainable? So many Opposition supporters are actually entitled and complacent.
Firstly im not a PAP supporter its my own business not your kayponess. second, how do you know the opposition not giving out handouts. Pls dun based on your bias judgement. Pls find out facts b4 talking cock
Why do you look sunburnt on your cheeks?