More than 1.85 million CPF members have less than $20,000 in CPF Ordinary Account?

In 2015, there were 3.69 million CPF members.

According to MOF, more than 1.85 million CPF members do not even have $20,000 in their CPF Ordinary Account.

MOF: “More than half of all CPF members earn 3.5% per year on all their Ordinary Account (OA) balances” (see image below).

Source: MOF

In order to earn the stated interest rate on ‘all’ balances in the OA, a member’s OA cannot exceed $20,000.

Almost 2 million CPF members having less than $20,000 in their OA is a shockingly large figure. Even if retirees, foreigners and new workforce entrants are excluded, that still leaves hundreds of thousands of Singaporeans.

Since the CPF scheme has failed its retirement objective, it looks like PAP will need to come up with more help schemes to ‘help’ Singaporeans downgrade our homes.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in CPF. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to More than 1.85 million CPF members have less than $20,000 in CPF Ordinary Account?

  1. Williams says:

    You have highlighted a very serious problem that deserves Singaporeans’ attention. Aren’t we are screwed by PAP’s assert enhancement scam? What is happening to our 154th media? No sound no issue? Shouldn’t Khaw and Tharman commit hara kiri?

    • Phillip Ang says:

      They will complicate the public housing scheme with different types of leases and MSM will report how Singaporean retirees are being assisted by PAP. CPF scheme failed years ago but of course no one is admitting to this.

  2. sinkie says:

    That’s becoz most people are using up their entire monthly OA amount to pay mortgage. Even for BTO flats which are supposed to be the cheapest, many buyers still need to pay >$1000 per month. If you’re talking about resale 5-rm / Exec in mature estates, or EC (which many young graduate couples will go for as their 1st flat), then you can be looking at $2000++ per month mortgage. And these are 25-year mortgages, so for most of their working life they are using their OA to pay for housing.

    PAP walked down this path of zou huo lu muo many years ago in the late-1980s when they allowed CPF to be used to buy homes. PAP helped out their banker buddies at that time of weak property prices and bad property loans, but doomed entire generations of ordinary Sinkies to have no retirement.

    • Phillip Ang says:

      PAP will advise flat buyers to buy within their means. Making flats affordable works against their interests but Singaporeans still believe PAP will sacrifice their interests.
      Reduction in property prices will affect banks, bankers, property firms, developers and of course land sales revenue and related taxes. Only external events can cause property prices to fall to an affordable level.

      • sinkie says:

        The problem is that PAP themselves are encouraging ordinary Sinkies to max out their CPF for property by having lots of HDB advertisements & examples showing how average salary CPF can cover their 25-year mortgage. I remember back in 2013 even their examples had to show buyers having to top-up their monthly mortgage with cash, but still say is affordable.

        To PAP & HDB, as long as your CPF can pay your mortgage, you’re being prudent. Never mind that 60% of your retirement fund is being officially encouraged to be spent on housing. Leaving only 25% to build up for retirement (the other 15% is locked up in Medisave).

        So even though on paper, Sinkies are saving the most in the whole world for retirement (37% of salary being pumped into CPF each month), but effectively only 1/4 of it is actually set aside for retirement. No wonder Sinkies cannot retire, and PAP has to keep on increasing the re-employment age year after year (as if so many companies are willing to continue hiring you at your last pay when you’re hobbling around at 67 or 70).

  3. Confused says:

    Agreed with your interpretation that more than 1.85 million CPF members do not even have $20,000 in their CPF Ordinary Account.

    It kind of sync with Roy’s claim that most do not have minimum sum when they reached 55. Why then set the minimum sum so high? The pap government made it like as though they would would top it up to the ms if you don’t already have for you to retire?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s