CPF Special Account

[Falc]

With the recent CPF change, what is the most attractive option now?

[Solar]

better don't transfer. don't know when they change policy again.

transferring from OA to SA is a one-way traffic. no turning back. once there, you are stuck.

i pity those who transferred huge chunks over there to take advantage of the 4% previously.. now cry no tears..

[Cheekg98]

it's a one way ticket ... some may not get it at 67 ...

[Ultramega]

if i am planning to invest my CPF money, i won't transfer from OA to SA cos very limited investment choices for SA.

[Sabian]

dun be a dickhead and transfer anything from OA to SA

 

the SA uses are so much more restrictive and it's one way traffic.

 

and the 4% interest rate is not gg to stay there for long.

 

i sm treating my CPF as inheritance money for my kids. anything outside CPF is mine...

 

ALL MINE!!!

[Albeniz]

it's a one way ticket ... some may not get it at 67 ...

 

Looks like the only way to get our money out before 67 is to be a quitter.

Is there any other option?

[Nighthawkcity]

my father did..

100+k in SA

now 53

sigh..

[Nighthawkcity]

transfer used to be ok, since if the person is 50+ alr, getting all the money above minimum sum @ 55 yrs old, u get to earn 150 basis pts above OA.. guess this can pluck the loophole tat some pple see..

[Falc]

To use CPF for multiple properties, one must set aside the minimum sum anyway.

So why not in the SA instead of OA in that case?

[Falc]

150 basis pt is not "alot" if one don't compound it over a long time.

 

Looks like most people just don't see CPF as a good means of building retirement funds, more like source of fund to spend on property, education, other funds etc What a good job our gabermen is doing!

[Solar]

i suppose it caught a lot unawares.. for over 55, 4% is a safe place to park $$$ in, with more than banks' and OA's measly returns. it seemed natural to park excess there.

but who the hell knows gahmen change the returns/payout just like that..

 

dun think they would even allow these $$$ can be allowed returned to OA as an option.

just hope for the best that the returns won't go below 3%..

 

one thing i dun understand, since they 'sincerely' wanted to help ppl retire with enough $$$, why not peg the interest rate to perhaps Temasek's returns?

that's what 'civil service' is supposed to mean..

[Kingcopa]

Either way, we are not gonna see the $$$ so any diff?

[Freestylers09]

nbz now cannot take out invest liao..i saw they say alot people investment in funds lose $...pple around em all gain..even for me yearly 10+20+ percent..some of my friends 1 year get back 1 fold already...dont know wah sianz sia...my jb dream getting closer

Edited September 26, 2007 by Freestylers09

[Sabian]

before the time is due to have that Min sum, most of us would need OA funds for housing and growing if any surplus (maintain a yr's worth of installment buffer), ideally the rest shd be invested to seek out higher returns, assuming your time horizon is long 10 yrs or more.

 

and as it is 2.6% and even the 4% is not deemed to be sufficient to beat inflation. 4% risk free sounds good but pls do not look at just the massaged stats as far as inflation is concerned.

 

consider the rise in medical care costs, the rise in costs of things that u deem "necessary" in your retirement years. etc.

 

already many pple kpkb abt having funds locked up in the OA, there are so many more restrictions on SA usage and all the additional restrictions for that extra 1.4%? And the 4% rate may not stand very long.

 

for those starting out or decades away from the min sum deadline, the opportunity costs of not investing over the decades are high.

 

btw, just in case, it gets misinterpreted, the "dickhead" comment is not meant for you. it is meant to describe a carrothead situation (from the MIW point of view)

Edited September 26, 2007 by Sabian

[Nine_eleven]

With the recent CPF change, what is the most attractive option now?

 

 

keep the money in OA, then invest it in unit trusts. confirm can get better returns till retirement. invest the SA at the same time.

 

this is my personal experience and point of view.

[Pentium]

my father did..

100+k in SA

now 53

sigh..

 

It is not risk free as stated, it is very risky. Policies always change, in the end, can never take out.....Worst Off

[Falc]

Precisely one should put more money in SA early if the higher than 2.5% interest is to make an effect.

 

I'm still confuse if the pegging to the 10y dunno what SG bond is likely to yield higher or lower than 4%?

 

As for using OA for housing, I have assumed CPF is used for multiple properties, and hence, one has to set aside (cannot use) the minimum sum in OA or SA anyway. So the qn is why not SA? One reason is the irreversibility. It will be interesting to explore other reason if any.

[Falc]

Maybe i'm conservative, i will prefer CPF monies to be more risk free. Unit trusts and shares for excess cash.