Vextan 1st Gear August 24, 2009 Share August 24, 2009 I have been watching a lot of The Practice, and I am wondering, what is the chance of sueing the gahment for holding on to our CPF money under the Minimum Sum Scheme ? Is the constitution untouchable ? By definition, what is yours, should be yours to keep. So is there any grounds to sue and win, or no way ? ↡ Advertisement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jman888 Moderator August 24, 2009 Share August 24, 2009 first dun think anyone will take up your case, second, even if someone dare, you will not win, third, even if you win, you get the money but you cant still here..... and your lawyer too! actually the minimum amount not a lot to keep it in CPF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vextan 1st Gear August 24, 2009 Author Share August 24, 2009 first dun think anyone will take up your case, second, even if someone dare, you will not win, third, even if you win, you get the money but you cant still here..... and your lawyer too! actually the minimum amount not a lot to keep it in CPF. each cpf account's minimum sum is $120,000, multiply that by about 2 million cpf accounts, that's a hell lot of money. i wonder, can a law not be challenged, say, by the law of natural logic , i.e. what is yours, is yours to keep ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoongf 4th Gear August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 When a person start to work and sign appointment letter, it mentions CPF will be deducted. Therefore, how to argue that CPF was unlawful, when from day 1 it was part of employment terms and conditions? Ppl can work as freelance, offer services, and avoid CPF. Law can be changed, but that needs parliament to amend it. This Parliament very concerned for citizens. So.. if one desire change, get to the root of the issue. Many times, Sg ppl tend to bark up the wrong tree. Anyway.. CPF is indeed a good thing. Just wish they pay a higher interest rate of 5% for all accounts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parkingidiot 1st Gear August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 When a person start to work and sign appointment letter, it mentions CPF will be deducted. Therefore, how to argue that CPF was unlawful, when from day 1 it was part of employment terms and conditions? Ppl can work as freelance, offer services, and avoid CPF. Law can be changed, but that needs parliament to amend it. This Parliament very concerned for citizens. So.. if one desire change, get to the root of the issue. Many times, Sg ppl tend to bark up the wrong tree. Anyway.. CPF is indeed a good thing. Just wish they pay a higher interest rate of 5% for all accounts. be careful what you wish for... for you may surely get it... once upon a time people could get 100% of their CPF money on retirement at 55 then they change to minimum sum cannot take out then they change to minimum sum ever increasing then they changed to retirement age increase then they changed to must can only take out in small monthly install then they changed to if you die, the annuity sapu all your money... my frens... don't you see a pattern evolving? Their excuse is that the peasants dunno how to manage the money so they look after for you.... But in reality... they dunno how to manage the money, they lose all gambling in family ventures like temasick and gick. So now need to keep the cpf money so that there is some money balance... Don't get conned by the pretty words painted about looking after your money for you... What other changes will they think off to NOT let you take your money one day... i wonder, wonder, wonder.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverkris 5th Gear August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 Yah, I also think CPF a great policy that should not be disband. It is a way to force some savings into Singaporeans, especially seeing how the people are spending their future money now. If the government wants the money, they can actually just increase the income tax to 40% of your income as in Europe and we also Lan Lan have to pay, else don't work in Singapore. The minimum sum treat it like an inheritance to your child lah. But on the other side, I think the govt can look into how to let the people make better use of the CPF money besides housing and healthcare. Some of the citizens not only need housing and healthcare, they need to eat and wear too. Perhaps on a case by case basis they can let those in rela needs to convert some CPF into cash to help them get by. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingcopa 1st Gear August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 I have been watching a lot of The Practice, and I am wondering, what is the chance of sueing the gahment for holding on to our CPF money under the Minimum Sum Scheme ? Is the constitution untouchable ? By definition, what is yours, should be yours to keep. So is there any grounds to sue and win, or no way ? U watch too much TV show liao. Think too much liao. This is SG leh u think where. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingcopa 1st Gear August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 Yah, I also think CPF a great policy that should not be disband. It is a way to force some savings into Singaporeans, especially seeing how the people are spending their future money now. If the government wants the money, they can actually just increase the income tax to 40% of your income as in Europe and we also Lan Lan have to pay, else don't work in Singapore. The minimum sum treat it like an inheritance to your child lah. But on the other side, I think the govt can look into how to let the people make better use of the CPF money besides housing and healthcare. Some of the citizens not only need housing and healthcare, they need to eat and wear too. Perhaps on a case by case basis they can let those in rela needs to convert some CPF into cash to help them get by. No doubt it is a good idea but i think the original idea of saving up for old age is no longer possible for many of us here. Majority of us will be paying off our housing loan till 50-55. Not forgetting our CPF contribution is ever decreasing as we grow older. By the time we pay off our housing loan, how much will we have in our CPF? Majority of us will not even meet the min sum scheme and that mean we will not be able to withdraw our CPF. Sometime i rather hope the government dont be so nice to us. The nicer they are to us, the more scare i am. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pentium 1st Gear August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 be careful what you wish for... for you may surely get it... once upon a time people could get 100% of their CPF money on retirement at 55 then they change to minimum sum cannot take out then they change to minimum sum ever increasing then they changed to retirement age increase then they changed to must can only take out in small monthly install then they changed to if you die, the annuity sapu all your money... my frens... don't you see a pattern evolving? Their excuse is that the peasants dunno how to manage the money so they look after for you.... But in reality... they dunno how to manage the money, they lose all gambling in family ventures like temasick and gick. So now need to keep the cpf money so that there is some money balance... Don't get conned by the pretty words painted about looking after your money for you... What other changes will they think off to NOT let you take your money one day... i wonder, wonder, wonder.... The way you describe it seems like a PONZI scheme or MLM. The new guys who go into the scheme will have the fund those earlier in the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alechi 2nd Gear August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 I read that a $4500 salary is approx. the max CPF contribution your employee will give (i.e. OA $1.3K+; SA $200+; MA $200+). I was also told: 1) when your CPF medisave ceiling of $32K + is reached, any interest payable by CPF on the $32K + will downflow to your SA. Not sure if true. 2) Also not sure if when MA max is hit, whether CPF contribution by employee will become OA $1.3K+; SA $400+; MA $0 Anyone can verify? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gearoil 1st Gear August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 I have been watching a lot of The Practice, and I am wondering, what is the chance of sueing the gahment for holding on to our CPF money under the Minimum Sum Scheme ? Is the constitution untouchable ? By definition, what is yours, should be yours to keep. So is there any grounds to sue and win, or no way ? Why put up such a post? You need money now is it? There is only two ways to deal with the issue. Eithier let them keep all the money with them or quit from here and take all your money out for good! In any case, the Sinkies are doomed. More than 45% buy a pigeon hole and left without the means to meet the min sum in cash when they do retire. Called it.... . money in dump 'HOLED out scheme' in a concrete shell...without liquified cash to deal with daily expenses after retirement. So Mah came out with a reverse mortage scheme...they never run out of scheming anyway! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahjong74 Supercharged August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 (edited) I read that a $4500 salary is approx. the max CPF contribution your employee will give (i.e. OA $1.3K+; SA $200+; MA $200+). I was also told: 1) when your CPF medisave ceiling of $32K + is reached, any interest payable by CPF on the $32K + will downflow to your SA. Not sure if true. 2) Also not sure if when MA max is hit, whether CPF contribution by employee will become OA $1.3K+; SA $400+; MA $0 Anyone can verify? yes, it is based on $4500 salary as a max. Meaning if you earn 4.5k to 10k, your CPF contribution is the same. Max for OA=$1035, SA=$225 and MA=$293 1. yes, it is true. however medisave just been revised to ard $37000. 2. when the MA is hit, the contribution will become OA $1035, the rest ard $518 will go to SA while MA = 0. The above is based on 35 and below. When one hit 35 and above, The contribution for OA=$945 and SA=$607 and MA=$0 if your MA max is hit. IF MA is not hit, then OA=$945, SA=$270 MA=$337 Edited August 25, 2009 by Mahjong74 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahjong74 Supercharged August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 (edited) Please see attached excel file I have done. It is to calculate the CPF contribution up till 60 yrs old and to see that how much you can afford to buy house. CPF_Contribution_Rate.xls Edited August 25, 2009 by Mahjong74 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booboon 1st Gear August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 give up yr citizenship like Botak jones. Sure can get back 100% CPF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saxo Neutral Newbie August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 Hi Till date, I actually donno what's SA for, you know what is it for? Regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altivo 3rd Gear August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 (edited) Hi Till date, I actually donno what's SA for, you know what is it for? SA = special account. Earns more i/r but can't use for housing loans etc. Regards SA = special account. Earns more i/r but can't use for housing loans etc. Edited August 25, 2009 by Altivo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vextan 1st Gear August 25, 2009 Author Share August 25, 2009 be careful what you wish for... for you may surely get it... once upon a time people could get 100% of their CPF money on retirement at 55 then they change to minimum sum cannot take out then they change to minimum sum ever increasing then they changed to retirement age increase then they changed to must can only take out in small monthly install then they changed to if you die, the annuity sapu all your money... my frens... don't you see a pattern evolving? Their excuse is that the peasants dunno how to manage the money so they look after for you.... But in reality... they dunno how to manage the money, they lose all gambling in family ventures like temasick and gick. So now need to keep the cpf money so that there is some money balance... Don't get conned by the pretty words painted about looking after your money for you... What other changes will they think off to NOT let you take your money one day... i wonder, wonder, wonder.... exactly my sentiments. nowadays many people use most of their cpf to buy housing to stay, leaving little in their cpf accounts for retirement. with the increasing minimum sum, which stands at 120k now, most people when retire cannot withdraw much , or at all, from their cpf account. imagine if this trend increases, then in say twenty years time, the minimum sum could well be $200k, and most of us will retire with no money withdrawable from cpf. and we will have to work for another 20 years as god knows what , for survivial. thats why i find this scheme deplorable. the logic for this scheme is that retirees may not know how to handle the money well, and may squander it, hence the safe keeping of it under the scheme. but this logic is flawed as a person by the age of 55, most will be financially sensible and prudent already. However ff the whole scheme is just to keep more money for the gahment to invest, then i think a law suit is called for. the question is, who dares to be the first to challenge the legitamacy of the law ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumb 4th Gear August 25, 2009 Share August 25, 2009 be careful what you wish for... for you may surely get it... once upon a time people could get 100% of their CPF money on retirement at 55 then they change to minimum sum cannot take out then they change to minimum sum ever increasing then they changed to retirement age increase then they changed to must can only take out in small monthly install then they changed to if you die, the annuity sapu all your money... my frens... don't you see a pattern evolving? Their excuse is that the peasants dunno how to manage the money so they look after for you.... But in reality... they dunno how to manage the money, they lose all gambling in family ventures like temasick and gick. So now need to keep the cpf money so that there is some money balance... Don't get conned by the pretty words painted about looking after your money for you... What other changes will they think off to NOT let you take your money one day... i wonder, wonder, wonder.... What you said is believable by many. The many can do something about it but choose to let it be. So what the fuss? I agree with virtue of the cpf scheme but not the way it's done. ↡ Advertisement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In NowRelated Discussions
Related Discussions
Minimum Post Limit Before New Thread Creation
Minimum Post Limit Before New Thread Creation
Can't meet minimum sum? Divorce and buy a second property.
Can't meet minimum sum? Divorce and buy a second property.
Minimum pay to evade ICT
Minimum pay to evade ICT
Electric car sharing scheme to hit the roads 12-12-2017
Electric car sharing scheme to hit the roads 12-12-2017
New VERS scheme for aging HDB
New VERS scheme for aging HDB
Carro Interesting Car Rental Scheme
Carro Interesting Car Rental Scheme
Proposed mandatory minimum jail sentences (Road Traffic Act)
Proposed mandatory minimum jail sentences (Road Traffic Act)
Private car rental scheme
Private car rental scheme