GE: Singaporeans ‘lost’ $180 billion from CPF?

[h=2]GE: Singaporeans ‘lost’ $180 billion from CPF?[/h] August 27th, 2015 | Author: Contributions

Leong Sze Hian speaking at a "Return Our CPF" protest rally.

Biggest election issue is CPF?
Now that polling day for the elections has been announced – perhaps the biggest issue that may be debated in the eight days of election campaigning may arguably be our CPF.

Difference between CPF % and CPF returns?
Whilst there may be many different issues relating to our CPF, perhaps the most significant one may be how much Singaporeans have in a sense, lost due to the difference between the returns derived from CPF funds and the interest paid on CPF accounts?

Transparency and accountability on CPF?
Of course, if the Government is transparent – it should disclose the historical yearly returns of say the GIC, yearly weighted average CPF interest rate on all the CPF accounts, yearly total cumulative CPF balance, yearly net surplus of annual CPF contributions less withdrawals, etc.

“Cumulative loss” of Singaporeans’ CPF?
From the above data, we can derive what is, in a sense – the “cumulative loss” of Singaporeans’ CPF since the inception of the scheme.It would be even better if the Government computes the figure.Let’s attempt to estimate this amount.

$5B excess returns in 1 year?
The excess returns of the GIC over the CPF interest in just one year is estimated to be more than $5 billion, on the current CPF balance of about $282 billion .Since we know that the current CPF balance is $282 billion – let’s make some assumptions.
… historical annualised returns of GIC – 6.5 per cent
… historical weighted average CPF interest rate – 3.5 per cent
… start date of 1981 – the year GIC was formed
… historical annual increase in net CPF contributions less withdrawals – 4 per cent

Difference between 3.5 and 6.5% is about $180B?
From the above, computing the CPF balance now assuming 6.5 instead of 3.5 per cent, is estimated to be about $460 billion.
Does this mean that the “cumulative loss” of Singaporeans’ CPF may be about $180 billion ($460 billion at 6.5% – $282 billion balance now)?

Underestimate?
The above may be an underestimate as Temasek started in 1974 (not the 1981 used in the computation), and also the CPF interest rates and returns derived from CPF funds in the early years, may have been higher than the assumed 3 per cent differential between 3.5 and 6.5 per cent.

Any Govt keeps pension fund returns?
Are there any national pension funds in the world that keeps so much of the returns derived from its citizens?

Lowest real rate of return in the world?
Is our real interest rate on the Ordinary Account the lowest in the world since 1999 – when it had remained at just 2.5 per cent till now?
According to Phillip Ang – CPF interest rates were generally below the rate of inflation from 1972 to 1981 – “In 1982, Minister Toh Chin Chye confirmed that our CPF was used for “the construction of new factories, installation of new plant and equipment, expansion of infrastructure such as roads, ports and telecommunications, the building of houses and so on.”
On a cumulative simple interest basis, it was 63.5 per cent (CPF interest) against 65.4 per cent (inflation) during this period.On a cumulative compound interest basis. it was 85.1 per cent (CPF interest) against 98.5 per cent (inflation).

The mother of all our problems?
In the final analysis – is the “cumulative loss” of Singaporeans – arguably, the mother of most of our problems today?

Leong Sze Hian

* Leong Sze Hian is a financial analyst and statistician.

My question to Mr. Leong!

Why is our CPF min sums keep on rising?

xpo2015 said:

My question to Mr. Leong!

Why is our CPF min sums keep on rising?

Click to expand...

That question should be directed at the Ministar. Mr. Leong can answer you if he becomes the Minister after GE.

One way the PAP gang makan your CPF money is through fees.

CPF passes money to GIC to manage. GIC charges CPF fees. GIC passes the money to Temasek to manage. Temasek charges GIC fees. Do these two entities charge hedge funds type of fees? Most probably as they are greedy pigs. The fees are used to compensate the bunch of PAP cronies in these two secretive organizations.

Timely leeminder from Mr Leong who again sexposed the myth of cpf as safe havenue. Nothing is safe under the incompetent hands of pinkie n shiny head.

Najib and his theft from 1MDB peanuts compared to 180billions and more stolen from Singaporeans

makapaaa said:

[h=2]GE: Singaporeans ‘lost’ $180 billion from CPF?[/h]

August 27th, 2015 |

Author: Contributions

Leong Sze Hian speaking at a "Return Our CPF" protest rally.

Biggest election issue is CPF?
Now that polling day for the elections has been announced – perhaps the biggest issue that may be debated in the eight days of election campaigning may arguably be our CPF.

Difference between CPF % and CPF returns?
Whilst there may be many different issues relating to our CPF, perhaps the most significant one may be how much Singaporeans have in a sense, lost due to the difference between the returns derived from CPF funds and the interest paid on CPF accounts?

Transparency and accountability on CPF?
Of course, if the Government is transparent – it should disclose the historical yearly returns of say the GIC, yearly weighted average CPF interest rate on all the CPF accounts, yearly total cumulative CPF balance, yearly net surplus of annual CPF contributions less withdrawals, etc.

“Cumulative loss” of Singaporeans’ CPF?
From the above data, we can derive what is, in a sense – the “cumulative loss” of Singaporeans’ CPF since the inception of the scheme.It would be even better if the Government computes the figure.Let’s attempt to estimate this amount.

$5B excess returns in 1 year?
The excess returns of the GIC over the CPF interest in just one year is estimated to be more than $5 billion, on the current CPF balance of about $282 billion .Since we know that the current CPF balance is $282 billion – let’s make some assumptions.
… historical annualised returns of GIC – 6.5 per cent
… historical weighted average CPF interest rate – 3.5 per cent
… start date of 1981 – the year GIC was formed
… historical annual increase in net CPF contributions less withdrawals – 4 per cent

Difference between 3.5 and 6.5% is about $180B?
From the above, computing the CPF balance now assuming 6.5 instead of 3.5 per cent, is estimated to be about $460 billion.
Does this mean that the “cumulative loss” of Singaporeans’ CPF may be about $180 billion ($460 billion at 6.5% – $282 billion balance now)?

Underestimate?
The above may be an underestimate as Temasek started in 1974 (not the 1981 used in the computation), and also the CPF interest rates and returns derived from CPF funds in the early years, may have been higher than the assumed 3 per cent differential between 3.5 and 6.5 per cent.

Any Govt keeps pension fund returns?
Are there any national pension funds in the world that keeps so much of the returns derived from its citizens?

Lowest real rate of return in the world?
Is our real interest rate on the Ordinary Account the lowest in the world since 1999 – when it had remained at just 2.5 per cent till now?
According to Phillip Ang – CPF interest rates were generally below the rate of inflation from 1972 to 1981 – “In 1982, Minister Toh Chin Chye confirmed that our CPF was used for “the construction of new factories, installation of new plant and equipment, expansion of infrastructure such as roads, ports and telecommunications, the building of houses and so on.”
On a cumulative simple interest basis, it was 63.5 per cent (CPF interest) against 65.4 per cent (inflation) during this period.On a cumulative compound interest basis. it was 85.1 per cent (CPF interest) against 98.5 per cent (inflation).

The mother of all our problems?
In the final analysis – is the “cumulative loss” of Singaporeans – arguably, the mother of most of our problems today?

Leong Sze Hian

* Leong Sze Hian is a financial analyst and statistician.

Click to expand...

This fight is not just your voting for opposition, any opposition against the PAP
Singaporeans must do much more than just relying on their single vote.

Support Opposition, any Opposition, all Opposition
Regardless if they have primary school, or O levels or A levels or PhD
Regardless if they wear singlets, or tuxedos
Support Opposition, any Opposition, all Opposition
Regardless if they wear slippers, or wear sneakers or shoes
Support Opposition, any Opposition, all Opposition
Even if a rat crawl out of a sewer and stand as Opposition
Even if a cockroach with 6 legs and 2 long feelers at the head become Opposition
They will be much better for Singaporeans than the fucking corrupt perverted PAPs who only think of laughing all the way to their banks and back from the banks

UNDER THE FUCKING PAP, SINKIES ARE 4TH CLASS CITIZENS IN THEIR OWN LAND STOLEN FROM THEM BY PAP
PAPs ARE THE 2ND CLASS CITIZENS WITH THE LEE FAMILY AS THE FIRST CLASS ARISTOCRAZIES

FTs ARE TAKEN IN AS THE 3RD CLASS CITIZENS KICKING SINKIES INTO 4TH CLASS AND SINKIES GOOD ONLY TO GO
HEAD DOWN DOWN AND ARSEHOLES UP HIGH HIGH TO BE FUCKED AND TIEWED BY PAPs LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THEIR BANKS.

YOU MUST CANVAS FOR THE OPPOSITION, ANY OPPOSITION , BY TALKING TO YOUR FRIENDS AND THOSE IN YOUR NEIGHBOURHOOD
UNITE ALL OF THEM TO VOTE OUT THE PAP AGAINST THEIR FUCKING FTs THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO PACK IN TO STEAL YOUR FUTURE AND YOUR CHILDREN FUTURE

TALK TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS , AND TO PEOPLE THAT YOU DO NOT KNOW
TELL THEM ALL TO TALK TO THEIR FRIENDS AND EVEN TO PEOPLE THAT THEY DO NOT KNOW

LET US REGAIN BACK OUR SINGAPORE FROM THE STINKAPORE THE PAPs ARE CREATING AT THE EXPENSE OF ALL OF US

STOP THE FUCKING PAPs FROM LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THEIR FUCKING BANKS AND BACK FROM THEIR FUCKING BANKS

without the pap, sinkies would not even dream of saving $180m in cpf. they would still be making $1.80 a day collecting trash and emptying 50-bucket trucks.