must yolo like McAfee mah... hahaha

Math. But no application to life.

support... i got so much story... just tahan dun tell... hahaha... nvm...

epf div only once a year... rest of the time tcss lor... just most ppl very passionate n excitable

isn't cpf have something similar about periodic withdrawal? are we saying SG policy is bad here?

"As of December 31 2022, a total 6.7 million contributors or 51 per cent of those aged under 55 have savings of less than RM10,000 following the withdrawals.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nst.com.my...ough-rise-above

“At the same time, there are a total of 3.2 million members under the age of 55 who are at a very critical savings level of less than RM1,000, of which 2.58 million members, or 81%, are Bumiputera members,” the minister stated.
https://themalaysianreserve.com/2022/08/08/...0-in-savings-2/

Can apply cpf to epf policies?
What is good in Spore may not be good in Malaysia, especially the current political climates

singapore always adopt an authoritarian approach, we are not.

cant copy and paste just like that

Imagine this. You've led a frugal and financially-responsible life with no exorbitant purchases, living within your means and squirreling away your savings in the Employees Provident Fund (EPF).

With that magical 60th birthday now approaching, retirement looms large and, more importantly, the eligibility to withdraw your retirement savings is becoming a reality. Your mind is now set on taking that round-the-world cruise you and the wife have been talking about for the last 30 years, on top of buying that plot of land in Tanjung Malim and building your retirement home.

However, just before you're able to do so, the rules change. You're now only allowed to withdraw a small portion of your savings periodically. Why? Because too many of your peers had in the past squandered away their savings, only to become insolvent in their retirement years.

How much interference is deemed too much when it comes to managing the people's retirement savings? Prime Minster Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's announcement that the government is open to a suggestion by EPF to make it mandatory for new members in future to withdraw their savings periodically, instead of a lump sum on reaching 55, has triggered debate.

MORE NEWS
Full split to ensure competitive returns for EPF members
Rafizi: Govt standing firm, not considering another round of EPF withdrawal
PM hopes EPF's local investments to reach 70 per cent this year
EPF says investment climate will remain challenging
While Anwar said he was open to the idea, he nevertheless noted that some constraints had to be taken into consideration, including the fact that the savings of some EPF members were simply too meagre. EPF chief executive officer Datuk Seri Amir Hamzah Azizan stated that making periodic withdrawals on a monthly basis could offer members a better way to manage their retirement funds. This, he said, would also allow them to continue enjoying annual dividends for their remaining savings.


There is merit to the suggestion. Data from EPF showed that up to November 2021, some 3.6 million members had less than RM1,000 in their accounts. It also said that members retiring in the next few years would need roughly RM600,000 to have a decent life in retirement. While there is undoubtedly a need to ensure that retirees have enough to enjoy their twilight years, there is also a fine line between managing and micro-managing.


Take the case of Singapore, where the criteria for withdrawing funds upon reaching the retirement age of 65 is ever changing. The criteria for a full draw down of one's savings is difficult to fulfil, especially for middle and low-income earners.

The reality for many Singaporeans is that despite working diligently all their lives, there is little chance for many to enjoy the fruits of their labour, and they have to contend with a dripping faucet of finances to get by in retirement, sufficient to survive, but not quite enough to enjoy the rest of the ride. We have to tread carefully. While there is a noble premise to the idea of limiting access to one's retirement savings, at the end of the day, it is ultimately the people's money.

Analysts have said the government has yet to address the elephant in the room, which is to increase the average salary, which now sees 50 per cent of Malaysians earning less than RM2,500 a month despite the rising cost of living. Anything else would be putting the cart before the horse.

Sos
https://www.nst.com.my/opinion/leaders/2023...draw-all-or-not

The proper way to this, imo, is for each person to have a session with an Epf appointed financial advisor, review their situation and come up with a recommended withdrawal plan. In short, different for everyone based on circumstances. This though may not be practical for many reasons.

Epf already have professional advisors ready for retirees. Apparently the ceo feels this is not enough therefore the monthly withdrawal is suggested.

https://www.kwsp.gov.my/ms/member/retiremen...dvisory-service

if good policy, why not. and cpf is not locking all your saving, just the minimum right. balance is key for every policy

This post has been edited by commonsense: Jul 8 2023, 11:41 AM

Yes that how it works , if the government intends to protect the people .

Yeah but make it simple. Lock up 240k maximum. That amount is not hard to reach at 55

you can tick yes for that.

not for me. i will have my own financial planning when i reach 55 ...

who wants to die without being able to enjoy their life saving?

pass all to char siew?

those who wanna leave it there, just leave. why force?

whats next? we use sgd as currency and abolish myr since sgd is so good?

why suddenly does epf feel like they have responsibility to manage people's retirement fund? social police?

later banks also look after our finances when we are old?



This post has been edited by gashout: Jul 8 2023, 01:16 PM

law says so... manage until 50 (ori i think)... then 55... now 60...

future extend to 85... lock down 240k for slow drawdown... excess can lump sum... i support...

I do not deny, they are times where i just want to say, idiots who didnt manage their money well after they retire, they deserve what they get.

But at the end of the day, we have to remember, if things dont go well then government have to step in to help with old age poverty. When government step in means, tax money eventually. Or government resources get diverted away from other matters.

If you think about, yes, epf really not for profit. Their mission i believe should be somewhere the line of well being of epf members.

On a unrelated note, epf purpose should include maximising return and not like the idiot someone who says EPF should bring money back from overseas to malaysia to invest. Epf should invest where it is best for epf members. Be it overseas or local (Edited for clarity)

Having said that, the doubts brought up by most ppl are legit. In part, due to lack of trust to our government. And obviously this has not improved yet.

This post has been edited by adele123: Jul 8 2023, 03:05 PM

was it? 50?

what i can remember when I was in secondary school was a teacher of mine took the time to talk about working/career and retirement. Remember he mentioned that government servants can opt for early retirement at age 50 (male) or 45 (female) and still get the normal pension. He said something similar in private sector.

maybe that's where the 50 comes from? did casual google search, but nothing old info came up.

Imagine that... back in 1990s, 45 is achievable for early retirement if one is a female...

Imagine if epf no exist... till die also work... emergency fund also rely on epf... covid come, die die want take out epf

die loh, 85.... will never see my money again

then control elderly bank account too, can?

since only how many percent contributes to epf, most people have banks. banks are the best target to deal with the problem.

whats wrong with people bring money back from overseas to malaysia? whats wrong? you frown upon inflow of money and encourage outflow of money? don't care if they wanna put back in malaysia, their problem, that you too have problem?

some countries, contribution is very little too. people survive.

That's not what I mean. Maybe I was not clear.

What I mean is, if investing overseas is good enough, then EPF should continue to invest overseas and not invest locally. Talking about EPF investment not normal ppl investment.

Was not directed to anything you said specifically. Just commenting on a separate comment weeks back on PMX asking EPF to invest more locally.

i think so... i remember when started working... some of the old timers collective agreement was 50... i dun check retirement then so cant say 100%...

dun forget last time ppl die younger... also smoking and booze very popular... everybody i know smokes.... some colleagues for dinner is 3-4 big bottles anchor... lol...