The newspaper reports should have indicated in their reports that the 2.5% minimum has no difference from what was status quo, reported back in the 90's. The EPF should also highlight on this, as a legal practitioner, I would word my statements in ways that would not constitute misrepresentations and confusing siruations from arising.
It is the fault of the reporters and the EPF AND the minister who took and gave the press briefings.
Not everybody is like Cherroy who has sufficient knowledge on this.
Another way to look at it is that they are reminding us of this 2.5% again,.... because it may happen moving forqard. Perhaps gone re the days of the 6% and above dividend rates.
Look at Sgp's CPF rates. Well,................... off the record,... overheard a personal conversation between a Chinese dep minister in the Ministry of Finance and his aides at a function,...... very well-versed with Sgp affairs,... commented that it's not logical to give out 6+% for a national pension fund. Said if someone wants such high yields, he should go for other riskier investments.
Said a safe pension fund should yield lower than FD. I guessed it's just his personal opinion.
Edited by adding : So, can't depend on anyone, not even the Government for your retirement survivalhood,... better pickup investment knowledge as soon as possible.
Well Singapore is not generous. That's why they don't want to give much back to their citizen.