you are definitely not alone. Like what MUM mentioned above, I also made a similar move.
Between late 2023 and mid-2024, I took out half of my EPF savings to invest overseas... mainly into SG, USA and HK/CN. Honestly, this move alone have netted me what would have taken more than 15 years to earn in EPF divs (compounded).

So, I have to thank our madani gov and pmx for giving me that little nudge to diversify away from malaysia. My local equity holdings have been quite stagnant... luckily the divs still help as part of my spending budget.

Going forward, EPF will not play a much of role in my financial or retirement planning anymore. more just as a final safety net, given the gov guarantee.

The real question now isn’t about bringing funds back or topping up EPF (especially with that RM100K pa limit). The focus should probably be on how to position our portfolios for the near future. After such a strong run in global markets, only fair to ask... are we due for a pullback/crash soon?

Unfortunately, there’s been a bit too much interference... by current gov esp.

When the FM suggests that EPF should prioritize local investments, often under the banner of "national interest" as suggested by yourself, it’s worth asking whether that goal be at odds with EPF’s true purpose: ensuring sustainable retirement outcomes for its members.

A simplistic example would be when "national interest" once meant supporting ventures like Proton, MAS, or Renong... initiatives that didn’t always translate into sound financial returns.

At the end of the day, EPF’s core mandate is clear: to manage the compulsory retirement savings of its members. That should always remain the first priority. Any other objectives, however well-intentioned, ought to come second.
I am sure there's a reason in the first place why the professionals and board members of EPF originally allocated XXX% to overseas market...

not just relatively muted.... it does feel like almost no impact at all....

ringgit move from 2.99xx back in najib's time to 4.8xx PMX time to now 4.2xx.... anyone notice any change in prices except slow rising prices?
I never see chicken rice price go down.... and neither have I seen honda official car prices go down... (and honda story somemore yen weaken like mad)...
I would make a brave prediction: even when ringgit appreciate back to 3.8 also no diff in prices except slowly rising...

will only really notice when traveling overseas.

So yeah, keep in ringgit denom assets/EPF if don't want volatility and just spend in ringgit.... invest overseas if can stomach volatility in exchange of some kicker return.

except bonus.... lol...

wanted to include salary, but turns out, salary also very hard to go down if remain in same firm.

what if the upside potentially can be +40% ?

ie EPF is like 2.5% to 7% range
some riskier asset could be -15% to +40%?

or say 80% of ur wealth in EPF, whilst 20% in the risky asset?

thanks to PM4, a common benchmark is 3.8. So I would say 3.8 to the dollar is neutral.

4.2 now is weak. 3.0 would be strong.

due to my portfolio positioning, I rather have 4.8 than 3.0. lol

Haha. But I really don't think she can nominate a plumber... If epf CS is doing their job.

I've asked before when I first nominated someone. Must be related somehow to the member...

somemore the world bank wants to set "the withdrawal age between 65 and 70".


ops.... looks like my early comments in this and in the other epf thread a few weeks ago were just a bit too early.


(for those above 40, the bigger risk isn’t this threshold at all — it’s whether EPF decides to "align" with a future retirement age of 65. If that happens, don’t be shocked if 55/60 withdrawal ages quietly get shifted up too.)

And let’s not ignore the elephant in the room: the very real push to raise the official retirement age to 65. If that happens, what’s stopping EPF from saying, “For consistency, withdrawals only at 65”? Not exactly a wild stretch, right?



So, may as well get it done and over with and just implement it for everyone starting 2026.

Was having similar thoughts as you, but then the tone of the article is sounded slightly impatient (about aging society) and the suggestions of only starting withdrawal from 65...
It is as if Malaysia really need to reign in the withdrawals by those members between 50 to 65... and in the same time asking for official retirement age to be pushed to 65 asap.

If they do know something that we don't (maybe the world bank have some super powderful statistical tool or forecasting method), it would make sense to force the issue and just make the changes on everyone by 2026.

i think gov of the worlds and the world bank do not think like us...
why? cos dead people can't complain... the living later will say it is a great idea...

they (govs and world bank) seems to care more about your retirement funds outliving you...

No lah... your relatives or friends probably didn’t explain properly what they meant by the “Ponzi scheme” nature (some also call it the “pyramid scheme” feature).
What they should really be saying is that most fund managers prefer having a net positive cash inflow from investors: cos money is fungible. And consistent inflow makes fund management much easier.

Naturally, a country like Malaysia, where our demographics are still decent (more of a beehive/mosque dome shape rather than a diamond shape), will provide that kind of steady inflow. Somehow, people associate this with pyramid scheme also???

Retirees know this monthly exercise all too well... haha.

For example. If I know every month I'll receive 100 million in contributions and only need to pay out 80 million, I just have to figure out what to do with the 20 million net inflow.
But if it’s the other way around, if need to pay out 120 million, then I’ll have to start thinking about what to liquidate, or whether the bond interest or Maybank dividends are coming in this month etc. Those cashflows can be lumpy at times.

hahaha... good one! haha

Seems to be only for employers...

Hopefully...

more of such news... who knows... may backfire until epf/gov finally decide... i can imagine some elderly persons between 55 to 70, under influence of their family or friends, will just go and take everything out....

If someone is working and can afford to make self-contributions of 100K a year, then the 1.3m limit is of no concern.

But there are three points worth noting:

a) The 1.3m limit only applies starting 2028, with EPF has already said they'll review the limit again then. So it’s essentially a moving target, and could very well change by 2029 or 2030. (should we just plan and assume it is 100K increase every year for simplicity sake???)

b) There’s the threat of a “pension-like” cashflow system, although gov said is only for new members… for now.

c) And now there’s talk about raising the withdrawal age to 65 or even 70 before members can access their funds.

It’s getting murkier and murkier as time goes on.

lol... so now salahan siapa?

-- world bank?

-- misunderstanding by newspapers for not reading properly the report???

-- growing mismatch of concepts between what a retirement fund truly is and what a social pension support from the government means.
Thanks to certain groups constantly blurring the lines, even media outlets now equate EPF as if it’s a government pension scheme, when it’s not.

hahaha

food for thoughts....

Technically speaking, for most members who didn't do any self-contribution or top-ups, all EPF contributions ultimately come from employers. After all, even your salary is paid by employers, right? haha

If I were to personally transfer RM100K into your EPF account because I am super generous, the source is obviously me. But guess what? It’s still 100% yours, regardless of where it came from.

Now here’s the real question:
That 12% “employer contribution”. Is it really some generous gift from your boss, or is it basically part of your overall pay package legally dressed up nicely as a "contribution"?


I am simple minded... EPF funds is mine... the only contention is accessibility... not ownership.

Technically, you don’t even need to wait for the funds to be credited.
Any earned but unpaid employer contribution already legally belongs to the member.

EPF can take action against those rogue employers who fail to pay up. (my understanding is, in bankruptcy cases, EPF can step in to recover what’s owed.)

Why bother asking the general public, right? Most are too broke to give "financially sound" feedback anyway.

EPF or the gov should just go straight to the top 80K or 130K "epf millionaire"members: the ones who clearly cracked the EPF accumulation game. Get their opinions as that's where the quality insights are mah.

Or better still, just drop by this forum… we’ll save them the consultation fee.
I for one will answer for free. Retiree mah, contribute back to society in terms of advice....

This post has been edited by Wedchar2912: Nov 3 2025, 03:06 PM

T20 if you have more than 100K rm
T10 if you have more than 200K rm
T05 if you have more than 400K rm
T04 if you have more than 500K rm
T01 if you have more than 1 million rm

(thereabout from epf stats in the annual report based on active members)

B40 if lesser than 15K rm.


So, which group should we listen to in order to get advice on how to ensure adequate retirement funds? the b40 or T05???