Government may make buying annuity compulsory
-
my fuss is that I start to suspect that from the discussion so far that some people here is on surface talking for the welfare of singaporeans but actually they are attacking singapore's government no matter what. I think these people are selfish and highly un-ethical.Originally posted by qlqq9:Just what is your fuss? Oh, so I see you mean people are not to voice out about the way the gahmen handle our CPF. Don't compare CPF with annuity they are different. You have just compared apples to durians. This is typical of alternate voices to compare apples to durians. OMG!
we are talking about using cpf to pay for annuities. so it is apples to apples. -
Even 62 is still good enough. so are you trying to pick on me stating 55, Lin Yu ?Originally posted by Lin Yu:Above is an advertisment from NTUC income - even commerical payout is 62 and you want to collect at 55
grow up -
Originally posted by Daddy!!:Even 62 is still good enough. so are you trying to pick on me stating 55, Lin Yu ? gotcha.
i think they ought to show statistics on the aging population group as well as the death statistic to prove their point -
i know, and you should also know, some old people in singapore who retire with lots of cash. yet they continue to work because they tell me, "I dont feel secure. I am afraid I run out of cash". Now if they know that they are guaranteed monthly payments till their last days, they will have more confidence to retire better. It is about feeling secured, Lin Yu.Originally posted by Lin Yu: gotcha.
i think they ought to show statistics on the aging population group as well as the death statistic to prove their point
If the government does not guarantee the annuities payments, then effectively, they place our retirements in the hands of private insurance companies which can go bust. That is beyond acceptance of any sane person. -
I don't think they are attacking the govt. It is the work of the govt that have led to the discussion. Tell me when Mr Ong was the President did any of the same people complain the same way? So I hope you are objective when you make any statement. People don't complain about the govt for nothing, there is no smoke without fire, understand? Or do you need someone else to explain to you?Originally posted by Daddy!!:my fuss is that I start to suspect that from the discussion so far that some people here is on surface talking for the welfare of singaporeans but actually they are attacking singapore's government no matter what. I think these people are selfish and highly un-ethical.
we are talking about using cpf to pay for annuities. so it is apples to apples. People complain as it is the govt who bring this upon themselves , so don't blame the people. The people of Singapore already have enough from the ruling party. They talk so much about money than any other things. Leading Singapore is not all about $$$$$$! -
there isnt many here, i must say.Originally posted by Daddy!!:iThat is beyond acceptance of any sane person. -
Gazelle, you have not answered our questions!!! Evade again and again!Originally posted by Gazelle:there isnt many here, i must say. -
just ignore that kid lah..he/she is just wannabe trying to get some attention. Just read what he/she post you will know why nobody like replying him.Originally posted by Daddy!!:my fuss is that I start to suspect that from the discussion so far that some people here is on surface talking for the welfare of singaporeans but actually they are attacking singapore's government no matter what. I think these people are selfish and highly un-ethical.
we are talking about using cpf to pay for annuities. so it is apples to apples.
qlqq9, please hor, I am not talking to you, please dont reply. -
Here's a story of one unhappy annuity investor.
I TRANSFERRED $37,000 from my Central Provident Fund (CPF) Retirement Account, which bore interest at 4 per cent per annum, to open an annuity account with NTUC Income in January last year. NTUC Income would pay me a fixed monthly payment of $183.30 starting in 2009, when I reach 62 years of age.
No statement of account had been sent to me since the transfer was effected.
After several requests by phone, NTUC Income replied in a letter dated July 20, 2006, that the bonus for my account was $4.60 in 2004 and $5.20 in 2005.
Surprised to find out that the total bonus was so little, I sent a further letter of enquiry on July 23 and received a phone call from
the company two days later, providing me with the following information:
NTUC Income paid no interest on the amount I had deposited.
The bonus, which is not guaranteed, would be based on the monthly repayment of $183.30 and not on the total amount I had deposited.
After calculating, I realised that, if I had retained the $37,000 with the CPF Board with the interest at 4 per cent per annum:
The yearly interest would be $1,480.
The total interest from 2005 to 2009 (when I reach 62 years of age and monthly payment begins) would be $7,400.
The amount of $37,000 plus interest of $7,400 would be $44,400.
The $44,400 would be enough for NTUC Income to pay a monthly amount of $183.30 to me for up to about 20 years.
As the CPF Board will continue to pay interest on my balance after 2009, I would receive further interest year after year.
As it doesn't make sense for me to leave my money with the company, I instructed NTUC Income on July 28 to transfer my funds back to the CPF Board.
Lim Yan Beng> -
Withdrawal of annuities is pegged to the retirement age in Singapore. This little detail may seem insignificant but if you cannot even differentiate between 55 and 62, then surely you know little about annuities.Originally posted by Daddy!!:firstly, i find it interesting that when i read about cpf, the anti-pap forumers criticized cpf, mainly government delays payment till we are too old to use it. now, we can start withdrawing money in the form of annuities at a fixed age of 55 and this is an improvement over the previous situation, you guys also complain. We asked for transparency about our CPF monies, now we get it and we still complain. I wonder what is going on.
in my humble opinion, annuities is one of the best forms of financial planning for retirement. When we are talking about using cpf money for retirement and when we start talking of using cpf money to invest in annuities, it wont be bad.
OK. there are outstanding issues to be ironed out or made clear.
1) when and how much do we pay for the annuities ? Of course, the younger we start, the better it is. The more we contribute, the higher the annuities when we retire at 55 (that also means that many of us dont need to work if our annuities is substantial enough at 55 years old).
2) If the annuities are priced at commercial market rate PLUS the government GUARANTEES payments, it is a steal for all of us because we are buying a commercial product with a sovereign backing.
3) what happens if interest rates fall to zero percent ?
In my opinion, I think our Prime Minister LEE Hsien Loong and his ministers got it right. I like the annuities.
The only attractive thing about annuities is that 'one will not die broke'. However, the overall payment amount is compromised as compared to CPF payouts. This has been shown on a previous post by a fellow forumite.
Singaporeans will be short changed if the annuity system is ever implemented. On the other hand, it will greatly lessen the govt's headache on the greying population not being able to take care of themselves. -
I am talking about this topic of investing cpf monies in annuities very objectively. Are you, like others, being emotionally affected by other issues and merge them with this retirement annuities topic?Originally posted by qlqq9:I don't think they are attacking the govt. It is the work of the govt that have led to the discussion. Tell me when Mr Ong was the President did any of the same people complain the same way? So I hope you are objective when you make any statement. People don't complain about the govt for nothing, there is no smoke without fire, understand? Or do you need someone else to explain to you? People complain as it is the govt who bring this upon themselves , so don't blame the people. The people of Singapore already have enough from the ruling party. They talk so much about money than any other things. Leading Singapore is not all about $$$$$$! -
Originally posted by googoomuck:
do you know that Lim Yan Beng was receiving ($183*12)/$37000 or 5.9% on his NTUC income annuities versus 4% from CPF board?
[b]Here's a story of one unhappy annuity investor.
I TRANSFERRED $37,000 from my Central Provident Fund (CPF) Retirement Account, which bore interest at 4 per cent per annum, to open an annuity account with NTUC Income in January last year. NTUC Income would pay me a fixed monthly payment of $183.30 starting in 2009, when I reach 62 years of age.
No statement of account had been sent to me since the transfer was effected.
After several requests by phone, NTUC Income replied in a letter dated July 20, 2006, that the bonus for my account was $4.60 in 2004 and $5.20 in 2005.
Surprised to find out that the total bonus was so little, I sent a further letter of enquiry on July 23 and received a phone call from
the company two days later, providing me with the following information:
NTUC Income paid no interest on the amount I had deposited.
The bonus, which is not guaranteed, would be based on the monthly repayment of $183.30 and not on the total amount I had deposited.
After calculating, I realised that, if I had retained the $37,000 with the CPF Board with the interest at 4 per cent per annum:
The yearly interest would be $1,480.
The total interest from 2005 to 2009 (when I reach 62 years of age and monthly payment begins) would be $7,400.
The amount of $37,000 plus interest of $7,400 would be $44,400.
The $44,400 would be enough for NTUC Income to pay a monthly amount of $183.30 to me for up to about 20 years.
As the CPF Board will continue to pay interest on my balance after 2009, I would receive further interest year after year.
As it doesn't make sense for me to leave my money with the company, I instructed NTUC Income on July 28 to transfer my funds back to the CPF Board.
Lim Yan Beng>
[/b] -
firstly, annuities are subjected to the "bonuses" and you may not receive your returns as promise (see above example)
secondly, instead of selling the ideas to the people, it is being forced down the throat. did they guaranteed the returns regardless of the "bonuses"
lastly, assuming if he invested $40,000 but manage to receive $10,000 before he passed on, what will happen to the $30,000? -
the example given by googoomuck must have sounded like music to your ears and you are very quick to accept it, then equally quick to use it against me. thats you, Rock^Star.Originally posted by Rock^Star:Withdrawal of annuities is pegged to the retirement age in Singapore. This little detail may seem insignificant but if you cannot even differentiate between 55 and 62, then surely you know little about annuities.
The only attractive thing about annuities is that 'one will not die broke'. However, the overall payment amount is compromised as compared to CPF payouts. This has been shown on a previous post by a fellow forumite.
Singaporeans will be short changed if the annuity system is ever implemented. On the other hand, it will greatly lessen the govt's headache on the greying population not being able to take care of themselves. -
" Should the annuity holder die before age 82, CPF rules require that the balance be returned to his/her beneficiaries (after minor deductions for administrative costs. "Originally posted by Lin Yu:firstly, annuities are subjected to the "bonuses" and you may not receive your returns as promise (see above example)
secondly, instead of selling the ideas to the people, it is being forced down the throat. did they guaranteed the returns regardless of the "bonuses"
lastly, assuming if he invested $40,000 but manage to receive $10,000 before he passed on, what will happen to the $30,000? -
Yes but his bonus was $4.60 in 2004 and $5.20 in 2005. that will not work out a return of $183 as promise. pls check that factOriginally posted by Daddy!!:do you know that Lim Yan Beng was receiving ($183*12)/$37000 or 5.9% on his NTUC income annuities versus 4% from CPF board? -
At first I didn't really support... After finding out more... This is my conclusionOriginally posted by Daddy!!:" Should the annuity holder die before age 82, CPF rules require that the balance be returned to his/her beneficiaries (after minor deductions for administrative costs. "
1. It is something that we are forced to buy
2. It is something of a 'minimum sum' that we are forced to have
3. Government have more than enough reserves to back it
4. The above statement.
The only disadvantage I can see is you cannot use your money at one go... All in all, it's good for people who cannot manage their finances properly... It's not so good for people who can manage well...
But then, to think again, for people who managed their finances well, will have enough money to spend without the CPF money.
Then I think again... What will happen to the people with no beneficiaries? All the money gone? -
Lin Yu, if you want to buy a financial product with high bonus, why do you want to choose annuity? do you know what is the main objective?Originally posted by Lin Yu:Yes but his bonus was $4.60 in 2004 and $5.20 in 2005. that will not work out a return of $183 as promise. pls check that fact -
RESULTS....i want RESULTSOriginally posted by Gazelle:Lin Yu, if you want to buy a financial product with high bonus, why do you want to choose annuity? do you know what is the main objective? -
Lim Yan Beng turns 62 in year 2009, in the future.Originally posted by Daddy!!:do you know that Lim Yan Beng was receiving ($183*12)/$37000 or 5.9% on his NTUC income annuities versus 4% from CPF board?
He was unhappy because after the money was transferred to his annuity account, there was no statement of account issued to him. He had to make the initiative to contact the insurer NTUC for information.
He was unhappy because the insurer NTUC did not pay interest for the $37K deposit in his annuity account in 2004 and 2005 and will continue not do so all the way till 2009. If the amount was kept with CPF, he would have got 4% compounded interest.
The bonus for 2004 and 2005 was culculated on the monthly sum that he would get when he turns 62 in 2009 : $183(not based on the 37K deposited in the annuity account).
And the bonus is not guaranteed ! ItÂ’s based on the investment returns. ThereÂ’s a risk.
The money, if kept in CPF, is risk free. -
Hi first post here. seeing all the heated discussion spurs me on.
I am sure Daddy has valid points, i like that. I also agree that It should never be made compulsory especially for people who has the financial knowledge to obtain higher returns. I believe the govt being as clever as they are should have already considered the fact that we shall not live long.... and about the thought of our money going up in smoke. They should have a plan B to inherit this to our children (subjected to inheritance tax!) How can they give up a good chance to earn?
How stupid can a govt get when what ever you do, you are tax. You drive you kena, you dun drive you kena, you earn you kena you dun earn you still kena (GST) im sure we still need to eat ..
I believe annuity is a good way of preserving cash as many sane people confidently thought that they can manage their so call wealth better with the money in their hands run out of control often and end up poor.
The govt in singapore is already doing very good. Yes i agree that it is very suffocating living in singapore and several of their policies were extremely disappointing, but objectively i think they still care for us as citizens for their own good. Its a situation where we use each other to better ourselves. Who is there to tax if all of us canot tahan and run away? They are already trying very hard to please ppl , though many times in the wrong ways.
Then again any higher returns financial tools often comes with higher risk. If you are looking for high returns. Then you shouldnt be looking for annuity which basically is low risk low returns. where got ai pi you ai qi one.
If the govt is able to solve the current concerns abt what happens to the money if we die early/after we die and leaving it to be an option for us to choose then i believe they could possibly win my vote.
Just a note: to maximise your returns , let the money sit in cpf till abt 62 before buying an annuity / perpetuity . -
Money was always a sensitive issueOriginally posted by Optrader:If the govt is able to solve the current concerns abt what happens to the money if we die early/after we die and leaving it to be an option for us to choose then i believe they could possibly win my vote.
It may be compulsory to buy it earlier...Originally posted by Optrader:Just a note: to maximise your returns , let the money sit in cpf till abt 62 before buying an annuity / perpetuity . -
15 Aug 07Originally posted by Lin Yu:RESULTS....i want RESULTS
Draw No: 2581
1st Prize 0661
2nd Prize 2069
3rd Prize 3051
Starter Prizes
1027 2129
2700 3110
3870 4430
5975 6018
6465 7970
Consolation Prizes
0039 0603
1375 2145
4241 4373
7180 7330
7395 7505
13 Aug 07
Draw No: 2248
Winning Numbers
17 18 20 25 27 43
Additional Number
26 -
You must be jesting....go ask any financial planner, do your sums and you will know what I mean.Originally posted by Daddy!!:the example given by googoomuck must have sounded like music to your ears and you are very quick to accept it, then equally quick to use it against me. thats you, Rock^Star.
I used to be a financial planner and certainly have done my homework.
Annuities ensure that 'one does not die broke' but the payout is very much compromised compared to the CPF's.
If you refuse to accept this fact that I serve on a silver platter to you, so be it. Your loss. -
All i see in this article is just another money sucking scheme and a stronger work you to death law coming up
Jeeez cant the govt. even let people decide what to do with their money? Its money they earn the government has no right to make it compulsory