but what is :
If vote again the gov for what reason - as though the gov is clawing all the interest that they have gained and going to gain to end of this year. They should be considered fortunate enough and were faster to bask in the sun while it lasted
Spot on! They should show gratitude cos the Govt did not claw back all the extra interest they received after shielding SA. Govt admitted their mistake, not your exploitation of a loophole, punished themselves for losing so much money from GIC Income by changing the rule publicly now to stop the continued bleeding from GIC! A discriminating old policy to benefit the rich, not the population of CPF members!
Not an exploitation. Due to gov itself policy ofmaking it tough for people to maximise their lifelong savings. If gov implemented OA closure after 55 and only SA maintain after 55, people wont need do this shielding. Afterall SA is for retirement but why close after 55 when we not even retired yet..gov shud close OA and all go to SA.
You need to know if say you are govt. You need to invest and give out more for SA 4% vs OA 2.5%. This group of age 55 may choose to retire no more working aka no more contribute to country economy. And yet you need to give them more you are on losing side.
You can read GIC data. Government investment returns is about 4%. Not sure what they invest in
Oppo has asked before how cpf monies are invested and it was replied the monies are lumped together with other revenue streams for investment. By lumping all together it is hard to see say for only cpf component only how it is faring. Very smart answer gotta give it to them. Learn their tactics which I have been all these years.
GIC prefers to report annualized rolling 20 year real (above inflation) returns. In its mid-2023 report GIC said that figure was 4.6% in U.S. dollar terms. That's way above the 4.08% (current nominal interest rate, excluding bonus interest, in Singapore dollar terms) that the CPF Board pays on Special, MediSave, and Retirement Accounts.
No matter what they say, 4% sounds like heroic to them. Even 90+ Buffett with dementia can do better than that. Maybe only beat Cathy Woods. Even Dalio that underperformed market may win GIC
I believe it's reasonable to assume 2% inflation. That means GIC's nominal returns should be around 6.6% (in USD) over the past 20 years.
Extra monies earn goto replenish reserves and also give out chicken wings mah.
Those real smart ones will not join GIC mah tio bor?
GIC and Temasek have some investment goals that are not purely based on maximizing annualized real returns. I suppose we could debate whether they should have such goals, or if they have the best such goals. But the government makes some reasonable arguments I think. In particular, Singapore's sovereign wealth funds are sensitive to supporting Singapore's development. Put simply, they overweight Singapore-oriented investments. There are very reasonable arguments why they should overweight Singapore even if that means lower annualized real returns.
Let's see if I can sanity check that...
Dunno why never think of cut the obscene pay package but tax first. We get what we (not everyone) ask for. Animal Farm is a good novel. Read repeatedly to see how it gel with real life reality you experience. Shiok ar.
You are probably right. If they help some jiak liao bee SG giants then perhaps la. Our sg giants only become worthless and not like 100x like amdk
I think GIC also have to follow a certain mandate…..overall portfolio must be diversified globally….(not just equities…..must be diversified across many different asset classes)
Singapore culture is “thank you! You tried your best, this is a competitive world. Thanks for your great work and do better next time”.
