Posts: 2,295
Threads: 27
Joined: Jul 2012
Reputation:
41
05-02-2015, 09:48 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2015, 10:11 PM by CY09.)
Hi Specuvestor,
Is CPF really a government liability? This is a debatable point. IMO, it is not a liability for now based on current circumstances. In addition, yes I am in the camp for higher returns
As many will know, the CPF proceeds are invested together with the nation reserves in exchange for SGSS bonds. For an ordinary middle income CPF member, he/she is likely to obtain returns of 3.5% to 4% annually. But how much is the investment accurred from the reserves? Over the past 20 years, the returns has been 6.5% p.a. Given this line of thoughts, CPF may not be a liability. Small trivia: As of now GIC's portfolio is approximately 45% equities, 10% property and rest in bonds and cash.
As I have said in another CPF related post on VB, the insurance industry offers similar products with returns ranging from 3.1% to 4.75%. In the process of doing so, insurers make billions out of this while paying CEOs/agents a fat pay check and millions in advertising. These 3.1% to 4.75% returns tend to be smoothed out returns because insurers are aware of the 1) volatility of the market and 2) the general population unwillingness to stomach negative returns. This is why insurers smooth out their portfolio returns, resulting in a low but consistent yield of 3.1 to 4.75% despite the ups and downs of the market
Hence as a custodian of Singaporeans' retirement funds backed by a non-profit policy managing these monies, my personal view is that the returns can be bumped up to reflect fairness to CPF members
Posts: 2,744
Threads: 23
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
25
^^ Guaranteed returns vs non-guaranteed returns. If CPF Special Account no limit, insurance co and banks die liao.
"... but quitting while you're ahead is not the same as quitting." - Quote from the movie American Gangster
Posts: 104
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation:
5
Alot of financial engineering in cpf....for e.g most cpf holder use cpf to pay for housing loan but how come they are charged an interest for using their money? Effectively cpf holders are funding the governement portions of interest payment.
Posts: 2,744
Threads: 23
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
25
(05-02-2015, 10:10 PM)CCUV Wrote: Alot of financial engineering in cpf....for e.g most cpf holder use cpf to pay for housing loan but how come they are charged an interest for using their money? Effectively cpf holders are funding the governement portions of interest payment.
the interest 'charged' goes back to your own CPF OA, not Govt. not funding anyone except yourself.
"... but quitting while you're ahead is not the same as quitting." - Quote from the movie American Gangster
Posts: 104
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation:
5
05-02-2015, 10:35 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2015, 10:45 PM by CCUV.)
Another engineering that puzzle me "mystery" regarding calculation of interest payable in sma account. 10 years bond yield plus 1 percent.......hmmm........why is government using cpf holders money to buy government bond? The increasing min sum cause a huge demand for government bond especially 10 years which suppress yield of 10 years.
10 years sg bond is a basis for a lot of calculation like cpf sma account,corp bond,business loan,calculation of reit listing,calculation of property loan........and coincidentally GLC is the largest borrower of loan and bond issuer......hmmmm
Posts: 138
Threads: 1
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation:
8
05-02-2015, 10:37 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2015, 10:39 PM by investor101.)
CPF retirement fund will always be grossly inadequate because of high housing prices. Most people will see their CPFs wiped out in order to pay for their HDB apartment. Whether the CPF returns is 4% p.a. or not, most CPF members will not able to enjoy the part of the compounding effect where the numbers begin to take off.
It is designed that way, so that most members will receive a dismay return, despite the theoretical huge compounding effect. If our government would allow most CPF members to enjoy the huge compounding effect where the returns start to look really impressive, the CPF issue wouldn't have blown up so big. And no, I don't agree with the concept of our government being thoughtful by delaying the withdrawal rate from 55 years old to now 65 years old. I actually do worry about the financial health of any institution when they keep delaying payouts. As the late Toh Chin Chye said, there would be a run on the bank if the bank tried to do something similar.