HWZ Forums

Login Register FAQ Mark Forums Read

To transfer CPF to homemaker wife, or not?

Like Tree137Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-06-2017, 01:41 PM   #46
Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 9,144
And it's even better than that because spouses rarely die at exactly the same time. The surviving spouse still receives his/her monthly payout, for life.
You trying to clarify what I said in my last sentence - life payout for spouse?

But longevity payout is adjusted according gender. So it's not exactly 725X2, meaning husband gets 750 and wife 700 for life.
~Dragonite~ likes this.
henrylbh is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2017, 09:34 PM   #47
Master Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,946
You trying to clarify what I said in my last sentence - life payout for spouse?
It's pretty simple, really. If the husband has a CPF LIFE annuity and the wife does not, then the total annuity payout amount is (a) less, and (b) drops to zero when the husband dies. If the husband predeceases the wife, then the wife is screwed.

By splitting the annuity payout then the actuarial value is higher and the wife is not screwed in the event her husband predeceases her. Both factors are important.

The private annuity market and some other countries offer what are called "joint survivor" annuities, meaning that the annuity pays a monthly benefit for as long as the longest surviving spouse lives. Unfortunately CPF LIFE doesn't offer that option, but the next best alternative is to transfer funds to a spouse's CPF Special Account.
tornedo and ~Dragonite~ like this.

Last edited by BBCWatcher; 12-06-2017 at 09:37 PM..
BBCWatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2017, 06:22 AM   #48
Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 9,144
No need to think further. Just do it, unless you think divorce is quite possible or you think you can sure do better with money in excess of BRS.
If above are your only concerns, I say transfer to spouse.

If you have 166k, your payout is $1330 on average (edit 1380 for male).

If you split it with spouse, for the same 166k, you and wife get 725x2=1450 (edit male $750 and femal $700).

So you decide, if you really need to withdraw amount above BRS or for spouse to get life payout when you not around as wife may not know how to handle bequest.
It's pretty simple, really
Simple no doubt (and superfluous to add pretty and really) and sometimes I wonder why you need to add more words than necessary and sometimes adding irrelevant comments to the subject, like your last para.
~Dragonite~ likes this.
henrylbh is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2017, 01:50 PM   #49
Master Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,946
Henry, one of my few frustrations with the information you post is that you're often ignoring the important insurance-related aspects of lifetime annuities and, for example, bonds. And I don't know why you keep doing that -- perhaps you don't understand them? -- but for most people these important differences are extremely, well, important.
~Dragonite~ likes this.
BBCWatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2017, 03:47 PM   #50
Master Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,990
Henry, one of my few frustrations with the information you post is that you're often ignoring the important insurance-related aspects of lifetime annuities and, for example, bonds. And I don't know why you keep doing that -- perhaps you don't understand them? -- but for most people these important differences are extremely, well, important.
why are you whacking henry? which part of his post says he does not understand with the insurance aspect of cpf life?

both of you are saying the same thing. he is just saying that you are blabbing too much to get a simple message across.

i am the one that do not want the insurance aspect of cpf life. we have fought so much that i do not want to argue anymore.
~Dragonite~ likes this.
dork32 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2017, 03:50 PM   #51
Master Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,990
And it's even better than that because spouses rarely die at exactly the same time. The surviving spouse still receives his/her monthly payout, for life.
depends on how you look at it. if i dont transfer and my spouse die first, then i will be getting 1.4k every month instead of 700.
~Dragonite~ likes this.
dork32 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2017, 04:33 PM   #52
Master Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,946
depends on how you look at it. if i dont transfer and my spouse die first, then i will be getting 1.4k every month instead of 700.
The vast majority of people are risk averse, not risk neutral or risk loving. This is an important understanding! Fail to understand it, and you're not providing good advice -- it's just that simple.

Option 1: $1,330/month for one spouse's life from age 65, $0/month for the other.

Option 2: $750/month for one spouse's life from age 65, $700/month for the other spouse's life from age 65.

All figures are in current Singapore dollars and are CPF LIFE estimated payouts, excluding the 2% annual increase option available from 2018 (which I recommend for most people, actually). And these figures don't really include bonus interest, which would tend to increase Option 2 payouts even further.

Option 2 is clearly superior for anybody who is either risk neutral or risk averse -- which is practically everybody! -- and with some basic, reasonable assumptions (both spouses in reasonably good health or better, the spouses care about each other at least to some degree).

You're not married to somebody you care about, are you?
~Dragonite~ likes this.
BBCWatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2017, 10:39 PM   #53
Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 9,144
Henry, one of my few frustrations with the information you post is that you're often ignoring the important insurance-related aspects of lifetime annuities and, for example, bonds. And I don't know why you keep doing that -- perhaps you don't understand them? -- but for most people these important differences are extremely, well, important.
Easier to understand annuities than your frustrations. Just because I am not parroting you?
~Dragonite~ likes this.
henrylbh is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14-06-2017, 06:00 AM   #54
Master Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,990
The vast majority of people are risk averse, not risk neutral or risk loving. This is an important understanding! Fail to understand it, and you're not providing good advice -- it's just that simple.

Option 1: $1,330/month for one spouse's life from age 65, $0/month for the other.

Option 2: $750/month for one spouse's life from age 65, $700/month for the other spouse's life from age 65.

All figures are in current Singapore dollars and are CPF LIFE estimated payouts, excluding the 2% annual increase option available from 2018 (which I recommend for most people, actually). And these figures don't really include bonus interest, which would tend to increase Option 2 payouts even further.

Option 2 is clearly superior for anybody who is either risk neutral or risk averse -- which is practically everybody! -- and with some basic, reasonable assumptions (both spouses in reasonably good health or better, the spouses care about each other at least to some degree).

You're not married to somebody you care about, are you?
too lazy to argue. yeah i dont care about my spouse. you just see things from your side
~Dragonite~ likes this.
dork32 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14-06-2017, 08:38 AM   #55
Master Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,946
yeah i dont care about my spouse. you just see things from your side
No, I'm merely pointing out that most people care about their spouses at least to some extent, and vice versa. If you and your spouse are exceptions, then you would consider exceptional CPF optimization approaches. That's not a "side." That's reality! In the real world, most married people care about their spouses, at least to some extent.

As I've said many times, I practice what I preach. I care about my spouse (hugely), and so I'm making sure my spouse's CPF balances are ratcheting up along with mine. That approach also maximizes bonus CPF interest. (Bonus interest is calculated based on the first $60K per individual. If only one individual is earning bonus interest, that's less interest for the household.) I also have a "joint survivor" annuity in the pipeline, already, something I wish CPF LIFE offered. Since CPF LIFE does not, it's all the more important (for spouses that care about each other) to make sure that both spouses have their own lifetime annuities.
~Dragonite~ likes this.
BBCWatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-06-2017, 03:34 PM   #56
Master Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,990
No, I'm merely pointing out that most people care about their spouses at least to some extent, and vice versa. If you and your spouse are exceptions, then you would consider exceptional CPF optimization approaches. That's not a "side." That's reality! In the real world, most married people care about their spouses, at least to some extent.

As I've said many times, I practice what I preach. I care about my spouse (hugely), and so I'm making sure my spouse's CPF balances are ratcheting up along with mine. That approach also maximizes bonus CPF interest. (Bonus interest is calculated based on the first $60K per individual. If only one individual is earning bonus interest, that's less interest for the household.) I also have a "joint survivor" annuity in the pipeline, already, something I wish CPF LIFE offered. Since CPF LIFE does not, it's all the more important (for spouses that care about each other) to make sure that both spouses have their own lifetime annuities.
i am not transferring one cent to my wive's account. i am going for brs at 83k or whatever the sum is.

if i die now, i will leave my wife my condo, my hdb, my car, my cash/insurance of 700k. if she sells my condo, she will have 1.8 mil. She stays in the hdb and draws 3000 a month, the 1.8 mil can last for 50 years if interest is 0%. if interest is 2%, it can last forever. my wife is the low maintenance type.

you tell me that my wife needs cpf life payout?

if you transfer cpf to my wife, the amount stuck is more than 83k. if either of us die at 75, we are going to lose big time. we are dumping more money into something that i dont want. what is the use of high interest if they are going to take all back if you die at 75.

the fact that i can accumulate money despite my lousy salary means that i can accumulate more if i dont die so young.

if i dont transfer, i will not risk the loss of the money if i die at 75. i also know how to put my money to good use. i am very cautious with my investment and i will not lose money.
~Dragonite~ likes this.
dork32 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14-06-2017, 04:32 PM   #57
Master Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,946
you tell me that my wife needs cpf life payout?
If I were in your shoes, yes, I would.

You're assuming your asset base is invincible. No, it really isn't, sorry to say. You f**k up (or events f**k you up, or both), with a creditor or court judgment for example, and your spouse is utterly f**ked. For the pittance that is CPF LIFE (relative to what you describe), and for the excellent deal that it is, I'd grab it, some of it. And I am grabbing/have grabbed it, for both of us -- I practice what I preach.

"Zero (longevity insurance) is the wrong answer," unless you're in poor health. We can perhaps quibble about the correct number, but zero is not the correct number....

....And most developed countries, and even some developing countries, don't allow zero as the answer, even for Bill Gates and his spouse. They put a bedrock lifetime retirement annuity income stream underneath practically every one of their citizens, rich (currently) and poor alike. Bill Gates will receive roughly US$3,000/month starting at age 70 (I assume he'll defer since he seems to be in good health, although he has the option to start collecting a lower monthly figure as early as age 62, which is only months away as I write this) for the rest of his life from U.S. Social Security, and his wife Melinda Gates will receive the same. Those figures will be adjusted for U.S. inflation annually. To pick another example, the formerly wealthy Bernie Madoff, currently age 79 and in prison, is now receiving that approximate level of monthly income from U.S. Social Security. He screwed up (and how), but he's not destitute. Nor is his spouse, even if she were to divorce him.

I like that bedrock income stream, and I like that for my spouse, too. I sleep well. A couple countries are now even experimenting with lifetime guaranteed basic income, from cradle to grave.
~Dragonite~ likes this.

Last edited by BBCWatcher; 14-06-2017 at 04:49 PM..
BBCWatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-06-2017, 02:54 AM   #58
Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 9,144
Can have the beginning and ending as close together as possible. Less pain reading
~Dragonite~ likes this.
henrylbh is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2017, 07:17 AM   #59
Master Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,990
If I were in your shoes, yes, I would.

You're assuming your asset base is invincible. No, it really isn't, sorry to say. You f**k up (or events f**k you up, or both), with a creditor or court judgment for example, and your spouse is utterly f**ked. For the pittance that is CPF LIFE (relative to what you describe), and for the excellent deal that it is, I'd grab it, some of it. And I am grabbing/have grabbed it, for both of us -- I practice what I preach.

"Zero (longevity insurance) is the wrong answer," unless you're in poor health. We can perhaps quibble about the correct number, but zero is not the correct number....

....And most developed countries, and even some developing countries, don't allow zero as the answer, even for Bill Gates and his spouse. They put a bedrock lifetime retirement annuity income stream underneath practically every one of their citizens, rich (currently) and poor alike. Bill Gates will receive roughly US$3,000/month starting at age 70 (I assume he'll defer since he seems to be in good health, although he has the option to start collecting a lower monthly figure as early as age 62, which is only months away as I write this) for the rest of his life from U.S. Social Security, and his wife Melinda Gates will receive the same. Those figures will be adjusted for U.S. inflation annually. To pick another example, the formerly wealthy Bernie Madoff, currently age 79 and in prison, is now receiving that approximate level of monthly income from U.S. Social Security. He screwed up (and how), but he's not destitute. Nor is his spouse, even if she were to divorce him.

I like that bedrock income stream, and I like that for my spouse, too. I sleep well. A couple countries are now even experimenting with lifetime guaranteed basic income, from cradle to grave.
i mentioned bill gates is receiving because he is forced to, not because he needs it. you just dont learn. the gates eg is also total rubbish.

you predicted that i am going to be a destitute. i am not. this is groundless. this is not going to happen. my net assets has been increasing since i started work. it is going to increase further. i still got many years to work. i work in civil service. iron rice bowl.

just like i am going to say your pension fund is going to collapse to you are going to get nothing from it.

you say longevity insurance to me, i will say rubbish.

but if you say medical insurance, i am more acceptable. if i die, the family will have more than enough. if i dont die, and require a lot of medical bills, then my family is in deep sheet. that is why i am not complaining too much about medical insurance.

you still refuse to accept that not all people needs longevity insurance. you are one stubborn idiot.
~Dragonite~ likes this.
dork32 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2017, 07:19 AM   #60
Master Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,990
Can have the beginning and ending as close together as possible. Less pain reading
this guy does not bother to read anything else. he just believes in himself.

i do not agree with your advice to transfer to wife account.

you do not have to agree with mine. both have their merit. diff people have diff needs.
~Dragonite~ likes this.

Last edited by dork32; 16-06-2017 at 07:30 AM..
dork32 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.

Please refer to our Terms of Service for more information.


Thread Tools

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On