CPF Account Value Thread 2025

[highsulphur]

Stop see CPFlife as annuity,CPF started off as a retirement funds. Once you see it , you will be enlightened too.

Rice is already cooked. No point wishing for other outcome

 

[kelhot2001]

Rice is already cooked. No point wishing for other outcome

Yup, there is why looking for the best way to minimize damages

 

[kelhot2001]

Are you questioning whether anybody should ever buy insurance?

I don't think longevity insurance is hard to understand, but evidently some people don't understand it. So I'll try. Fundamentally, longevity insurance gives you greater freedom in retirement to spend (i.e. to support a particular real lifestyle) and/or (if you wish) to give. Self-insuring against all longevity risk is very expensive. The "70%" (I'm taking your claim at face value for sake of argument) also benefit because they can safely enjoy a nicer real lifestyle (and/or give away more money) without fear of exhausting their savings.

Simply compare a reasonable Safe Withdrawal Rate (SWR) from one's one assets against the percentage that CPF LIFE pays out of a particular input value. There's just no comparison. The latter percentage is hugely bigger than the former. You need a MUCH bigger amount of wealth to safely generate the same amount of retirement income on your own. Doesn't practically every retiree benefit from that stark difference in lifetime spending/giving power? There are also asset protection benefits inherent in CPF LIFE. Many seniors burn through savings due to addictions or dementia, or they become fraud victims. CPF LIFE income is effectively immune to such calamities.

Why do you buy home insurance when only a tiny minority of policyholders even make a claim?

That's entirely moot. Males and females are in completely separate CPF LIFE risk pools. Males only pool longevity risk with males; females only with females. Maybe CPF LIFE shouldn't be designed that way, but that's how it is. Consequently CPF LIFE payouts for males are slightly higher than they are for females.

Well, nobody is questioning insurance, I do have my own insurance. But CPF isnt insurance in the 1st place, it started as retirement fund. It is pretty hard for you to understand retirement funds, that why I wont even try explaining

Well male or female, does funds come from the same sources?

 

[RedsYWNA]

I will only spend my dividend/passive income during retirement and not touch the principal. So I am not worried at all about longevity and looking forward to it.

The flip side of this method is that you don't get to spend all your money accumulated during your working life. If you dont have descendants, there is a strong argument that the remaining money left after your passing is 'you working for free'.....

 

[BBCWatcher]

Ask Chatgpt:

What did you ask ChatGPT?

Well, nobody is questioning insurance, I do have my own insurance. But CPF isnt insurance in the 1st place, it started as retirement fund.

And now it's longevity insurance. CPF is also long-term care insurance (CareShield Life, payable from MediSave), hospitalization insurance (MediShield Life and Integrated Shield, largely payable from MediSave), term life insurance (Dependants' Protection Scheme, paid from OA), and mortgage reducing term assurance (Home Protection Scheme, payable from OA).

Well male or female, does funds come from the same sources?

I'm not sure what you mean since the answer seems obviously no. A male funds his own CPF Retirement Account, and a female funds her own CPF Retirement Account. With possible government top ups. If you never contribute to CPF then you end up with a zero balance (unless the government adds something). The sources of funds are basically as individualized as CPF members.

The CPF Board invests all members' funds in Special Singapore Government Securities. SSGSes are government guaranteed and pay higher interest rates than ordinary Singapore Government Securities. Members' individual claims on those invested funds are restricted savings account-like and/or life annuity claims.

There is only one CPF Life Pool! Dun listen to fake news!

Longevity risks are not pooled between the sexes in CPF LIFE.

All CPF funds — and individual claims on those funds — are tracked as electronic records in computerized databases, in the same computers. But who cares about that? Do you want to hang your hat on whether CPF keeps Singapore dollar cash notes in separate paper file folders for each member? (It doesn't.) But the CPF Board knows quite well how to track individual claims, and it does that quite well and very accurately. Much like how OCBC Group can track individual bank account, SRS account, and life insurance policy claims.

 

[royalmix]

Males and females are in completely separate CPF LIFE risk pools. Males only pool longevity risk with males; females only with females.

Longevity risks are not pooled between the sexes in CPF LIFE.

All CPF funds — and individual claims on those funds — are tracked as electronic records in computerized databases, in the same computers. But who cares about that? Do you want to hang your hat on whether CPF keeps Singapore dollar cash notes in separate paper file folders for each member? (It doesn't.) But the CPF Board knows quite well how to track individual claims, and it does that quite well and very accurately. Much like how OCBC Group can track individual bank account, SRS account, and life insurance policy claims.

So you confirmed you yourself post fake news!

 

[kelhot2001]

What did you ask ChatGPT?

And now it's longevity insurance. CPF is also long-term care insurance (CareShield Life, payable from MediSave), hospitalization insurance (MediShield Life and Integrated Shield, largely payable from MediSave), term life insurance (Dependants' Protection Scheme, paid from OA), and mortgage reducing term assurance (Home Protection Scheme, payable from OA).

I'm not sure what you mean since the answer seems obviously no. A male funds his own CPF Retirement Account, and a female funds her own CPF Retirement Account. With possible government top ups. If you never contribute to CPF then you end up with a zero balance (unless the government adds something). The sources of funds are basically as individualized as CPF members.

The CPF Board invests all members' funds in Special Singapore Government Securities. SSGSes are government guaranteed and pay higher interest rates than ordinary Singapore Government Securities. Members' individual claims on those invested funds are restricted savings account-like and/or life annuity claims.

Longevity risks are not pooled between the sexes in CPF LIFE.

All CPF funds — and individual claims on those funds — are tracked as electronic records in computerized databases, in the same computers. But who cares about that? Do you want to hang your hat on whether CPF keeps Singapore dollar cash notes in separate paper file folders for each member? (It doesn't.) But the CPF Board knows quite well how to track individual claims, and it does that quite well and very accurately. Much like how OCBC Group can track individual bank account, SRS account, and life insurance policy claims.

Many of what u mentioned like CPF life inception date 2009, Medisheld inception date 2015, Careshield inception date 2020 are recent years changes not what before it was started

In my beginning on OA, SA And MA as saving for retirement, and medical payment. Maybe yours is different


"The CPF Board invests all members' funds in Special Singapore Government Securities. SSGSes are government guaranteed and pay higher interest rates than ordinary Singapore Government Securities. Members' individual claims on those invested funds are restricted savings account-like and/or life annuity claims."

I think since day 1 CPF start, it had been this way regardless if it is cpf life or RSS or MSS. Not sure what your point here

 

[BBCWatcher]

Many of what u mentioned like CPF life inception date 2009, Medisheld inception date 2015, Careshield inception date 2020 are recent years changes not what before it was started

Singapore didn't have an MRT until 1987 or a casino until 2010. Nothing can ever change?

 

[DevilPlate]

Singapore didn't have an MRT until 1987 or a casino until 2010. Nothing can ever change?

Exactly…..but i can understand some older folks simply refuse to change, accept, or adapt to the new world.

Always last time last time…..

 

[kelhot2001]

Singapore didn't have an MRT until 1987 or a casino until 2010. Nothing can ever change?

hahahha, you are talking about infrastructure change to compare with a policy change. Anyway, change are inevitable, we just minimize damage.

So I presume u are ok with banks decided unilaterally change your retirement account into annuity account without your consent and you are happy about it. You are such a nice guy

 

[kelhot2001]

Exactly…..but i can understand some older folks simply refuse to change, accept, or adapt to the new world.

Always last time last time…..

Ignorance is always a bliss for you. Cheers

 

[DevilPlate]

Reminded me how toxic my previous company was…..a few insecure older staff trying hard to thumb down a new guy who propose some great ideas to overhaul the workflow and eventually kena kick out

*im not the yng guy

 

[BBCWatcher]

hahahha, you are talking about infrastructure change to compare with a policy change.

The MRT and casino gambling were big policy changes, too. But there are myriad other examples. How about ABSD which was introduced in 2011 then hiked a few times?

So I presume u are ok with banks decided unilaterally change your retirement account into annuity account without your consent and you are happy about it. You are such a nice guy

The CPF Board isn't a bank.

However, a bank holds Singapore dollars and perhaps other currencies. The government has a lot of control over the real value of Singapore dollars and how they're taxed. Bank deposits are also subject to policy changes.

 

[henrylbh]

hahahha, you are talking about infrastructure change to compare with a policy change. Anyway, change are inevitable, we just minimize damage.

So I presume u are ok with banks decided unilaterally change your retirement account into annuity account without your consent and you are happy about it. You are such a nice guy

Change RSS to CPFL to me is a fundamental breach of faith since it is our money 100%. To me the action is high handed with no regards to members' right, regardless of how good the intention is. The least it could do is to allow members to choose between RSS and CPFL, if there is still a minority of at least 10% in favour of the previous scheme.

 

[kelhot2001]

The MRT and casino gambling were big policy changes, too. But there are myriad other examples. How about ABSD which was introduced in 2011 then hiked a few times?

The CPF Board isn't a bank.

However, a bank holds Singapore dollars and perhaps other currencies. The government has a lot of control over the real value of Singapore dollars and how they're taxed. Bank deposits are also subject to policy changes.

Cant see the correlation to it. Is my cpf funds affected?

So in principle, if bank do it is wrong but cpf is ok because of whatever. Cheers

 

[DevilPlate]

Change RSS to CPFL to me is a fundamental breach of faith since it is our money 100%. To me the action is high handed with no regards to members' right, regardless of how good the intention is. The least it could do is to allow members to choose between RSS and CPFL, if there is still a minority of at least 10% in favour of the previous scheme.

Neverending….

FYI prior to 1987 before Min Sum Scheme, CPF members are able to withdraw ALL upon 55yo.
And then Min Sum Scheme evolved to BRS/FRS/ERS RSS and then CPFLife

 

[BBCWatcher]

There’ve been 4 general elections since CPF LIFE’s introduction 16 years ago (and its announcement about 17.5 years ago). The general public seems broadly happy or at least content with CPF LIFE. I checked the WP’s (main opposition party’s) 2011 manifesto, and it described CPF LIFE as “justifiable.” In fact, the WP liked (and presumably still likes) lifetime retirement income security so much that it proposed free (paid out of general revenues) life annuities for Singaporeans then age 85+ who were (and did) face CPF savings exhaustion. The WP also advocated stronger government backstopping of CPF LIFE in their 2011 manifesto. (I happen to agree the government should guarantee payout levels for entire lives once payouts start. Starting payout figures might wobble a bit depending on longevity experiences, but once a member starts payouts they shouldn’t wobble.)

One of the reasons the public at large seems to like CPF LIFE is that it relieves pressure from the “sandwich generation”: working adults trying to support their destitute or poor elders who exhaust their savings. In fact, the law often requires them to support their parents. Life annuity income removes the spike in support that would otherwise occur when a parent or grandparent exhausts savings. In short, CPF LIFE helps children and grandchildren too. (It also means they’ll inherit more homes, on average.)

The classic Retirement Sum Scheme has also changed a lot over many years: payouts must start no later than 70, the payout minimum was raised to $350 per month (or the remaining balance, whichever is lower), once RA is exhausted payouts continue from OA, SA was closed, nominees can no longer keep inherited funds on account earning 4.0+% interest, ex-Singaporeans are kicked out as soon as they become ex, the payout skew has been adjusted for faster exhaustion, and the Enhanced Retirement Sum was increased by 1/3rd (in addition to annual increases).

Note again please that CPF LIFE is not actually compulsory. Only a little longevity insurance is compulsory (only effectively if you can afford it, and only if you maintain Singaporean citizenship or Permanent Residence). Got another pension or life annuity? (Or found better longevity insurance?) Opt out of CPF LIFE (and CPF RA) if you wish.

 

[royalmix]

The assumption that the public is broadly content with CPF LIFE simply because there are no major complaints or political attacks overlooks the complex realities beneath the surface. In truth, opposition parties avoid rocking the boat on CPF LIFE and related policies because these are deeply entrenched, technically complex, and politically sensitive issues tied to seniors' security and family obligations. The lack of loud criticism is as much about political pragmatism and risk aversion as it is about genuine satisfaction. So, it’s more than meets the eye—apparent ‘contentment’ is often a reflection of political strategy and cultural norms, not necessarily unanimous approval.

(another good example is Closure of SA, if you understand the underlying reason - not expresssly mentioned!)

 

[royalmix]

Quote:

CPF LIFE – Forced In, Lost 4% Interest – Anyone Else Affected?

“Just found out that when I was moved from Retirement Sum Scheme (RSS) to CPF LIFE at 55, my Retirement Account money was transferred into a pooled fund — and stopped earning the 4% interest I was getting.

I was never clearly told that I'd lose this interest permanently, or that CPF LIFE payouts could end up lower than the interest I was already earning if I die earlier than expected.

This feels like a forced move with no transparency. No real choice, no proper explanation.

CPF LIFE may make sense for some, but it’s not one-size-fits-all. And for older cohorts (like those born before 1960), many of us were just quietly shifted without understanding the long-term loss.”

 

[BBCWatcher]

Quote:

Quote from where? Who said or wrote this, and when?

 

[henrylbh]

Quote from where? Who said or wrote this, and when?

Does it matter? What're you looking for?

The person who moved over from RSS to CPFL just got self con due to lack of knowledge and now blames others. But can't blame the person as many educated people at that time and now still do not have good knowledge of CPFL, or CPF in general.