Eldershield: Is it really necessary?

What is the correct answer to the question?

This was a recent email exchange I had with a reader:

Reader's email:

Hi AK,  
Did you get any private insurance to complement your eldershield?

Thanks.







My reply:

Nope, I didn't. 

I don't need Eldershield but I gave in to a friend's persuasion to do collective risk sharing. :)

Reader's reply:

Thank you.

I'm a short time away from getting on eldershield. And i'm still trying to decide if i should stay in or hop outa the pool. 

My reply:

Well, insurance should be bought on a need basis.

If we are reasonably sure that we will have enough resources to see us through years of reduced physical capacity, we don't need Eldershield. 

This is true for me but I decided to help lower the cost of risk pooling for others who might need Eldershield. ;)





First, we should understand what is Eldershield:

"ElderShield is an affordable severe disability insurance scheme which provides basic financial protection to those who need long-term care, especially during old age. 

"It provides a monthly cash payout to help pay the out-of-pocket expenses for the care of a severely-disabled person."
Source: Ministry of Health

So, it is a disability insurance scheme and I know friends who bought such insurance to give themselves an income in case of disability, permanent or temporary. 





However, not everyone needs disability insurance.

Why? 

We don't need disability insurance because we are Superman (and just have to cross our fingers that we do not come into contact with Kryptonite)?

Source: NTUC Income.

Logically, if we own income generating assets which are able to provide meaningful and regular income streams, we do not need disability insurance. 

Hence, we do not need Eldershield.





This was what I meant by having "enough resources" in my email reply to the reader.

So, is Eldershield necessary? 

It might not be necessary for some of us but we might want to have it.





Related posts:
1. Tea with AK: Eldershield. 
(Read the comments too.)
2. Get free medical insurance in Singapore.
3. What is the best insurance to have in life?

CPF Annual Limit and voluntary contributions.

2016 Update:

CPF Annual Limit is now $37,740, up from $31,450 in 2015.
----------------------
An exchange of comments with readers on my FB wall highlighted something that could be overlooked by some. 






In March this year, I shared a screen shot in my blog:

Why did I voluntarily contribute $4,000 and not much more?

Reason:

The maximum amount of CPF contributions, including mandatory contributions your employer pays on your behalf, is $26,393.
 
The maximum amount of voluntary contributions a person (employee or self-employed) can make in one calendar year is subject to the CPF Annual Limit. 




All CPF contributions, whether mandatory or voluntary, will form part of the CPF Annual Limit.

From 2011, the CPF Annual Limit is $30,600.

No further voluntary contributions can be made if the mandatory and voluntary contributions have already reached the CPF Annual Limit of $30,600. (From 2015, the limit is $31,450.)

Source: CPF



Latest on CPFB's website:

The maximum amount of mandatory and voluntary contributions that a person (employee or self-employed person) can make in a calendar year is subject to the CPF Annual Limit. 

From 2016, the CPF Annual Limit is $37,740.







So, from 2016, maximum amount of VC = $37,740 – Mandatory Contributions

Mandatory contributions are compulsory contributions required under the CPF Act and include our own monthly contributions from earned income.

Use this calculator for VC:
https://www.cpf.gov.sg/eSvc/Web/Miscellaneous/ContributionAllocation/ContributionAllocationCalculator







Related posts:
1. Securing risk free returns early for retirement.
2. National Day Rally 2014: Retirement adequacy.

National Day Rally 2014: Retirement (funding) adequacy.

I enjoyed the National Day Rally by PM Lee this evening. 

He talked about many things but it was the segment on retirement adequacy that I paid extra attention to because of the unhappiness in certain segments of the population with the CPF in recent times.




PM Lee's speech on retirement adequacy was quite clear and free of financial jargon. 

He clearly showed how having savings in the CPF and ownership of a HDB flat will work well to fund our retirement. 

This is not something new but the way the message was delivered in a story telling fashion with PM Lee pretending to be a financial planner advising a fictitious Tan family in Singapore made a difference, I feel.

It is quite clear in the PM's speech that he sees HDB flat ownership as a pension that can be drawn upon in retirement. 

This is something I blogged about before too. See related post #1 at the end of this blog post.




There are many ways in which seniors could monetise their flats:

1. Rent out a room.

2. Rent out the entire flat and stay with their children.

3. Downsize or rightsize to a smaller flat which will pay them a Silver Housing bonus as well.

4. Do a lease buyback with HDB.

https://www.mnd.gov.sg/yourhousingjourney/seniors.html

With point number 4, PM Lee said that it was only available to 3 room flat owners but because many seniors who stay in 4 room flats would like to have this too, preferring not to move from surroundings familiar to them, the lease buyback scheme will be extended to 4 room flats by the HDB too in future. 

This change will bring cheer to some seniors. 




With this change, the lease buyback scheme will become available to more than half of all HDB flat owners.

This is all said with the understanding that the minimum sum (MS) of $155,000 is really insufficient to provide adequate monthly lifelong income from age 65.




Estimates show that a MS of $155,000 at age 55 would provide some $1,200 a month in lifelong income from age 65 when members of the audience mostly thought $2,000 a month is a more realistic figure. 

When PM Lee asked for a show of hands, no one thought $1,000 a month is sufficient.

So, there are ways to make up the shortfall and to ensure retirement funding adequacy for owners of HDB flats.

PM Lee then went on to say that the MS will be tweaked one more time next year to $161,000. 

There is no need for anyone to make anymore wild guesses. However, it will still be only enough for basic retirement funding, in my opinion.




Although PM Lee says that he does not think there will be need for big adjustments beyond that, the MS might need to be adjusted from time to time and they will have to study how this should be done.

Apart from what has been said so far, PM Lee has announced a major concession in the CPF scheme and that is to allow seniors to take out a bigger lump sum in their retirement (i.e. from age 65, not 55) if they wish to but it has to be within reason. 

There must be a limit of, perhaps, 10% or 20% of what is available in their CPF-RA. There should be valid and good reasons for seniors to do so.

If you get to choose, choose wisely.

However, the seniors who choose to do so will have to fully understand the trade off. 

They would have less in their CPF-RA after a bigger lump sum withdrawal and, so, the monthly payout from CPF-Life would be reduced.

PM Lee also announced a Silver Support Scheme which is to help the elderly poor, acknowledging the fact that there are seniors who do not have much in CPF savings and who might not own a HDB flat. 




They might not have family support to fall back on either. So, the government will do more to support them and they will be given yearly bonuses from age 65. Details to be announced in next year's budget.

The PM reminded us that the CPF is there primarily to help members achieve retirement adequacy and, together with home ownership, the vast majority of Singaporeans will be OK financially in retirement. 

However, he said that there will be exceptions and there is room for flexibility. The measures he has announced, I believe, will help address these issues.

The PM did not give details but I look forward to announcements by the Ministry of Manpower at a later date on how the CPF could give people more options in retirement in future.




What is my take?

In general, I think the CPF is a good system and provides basic retirement funding for its members. 

I like its reasonably good risk free returns and how it helps people who help themselves.

Since most in the audience felt that $2,000 a month is more realistic to fund retirement more comfortably in today's money in Singapore, the current MS is not excessive. 

In fact, next year's MS is also not excessive. In fact, it is too low.




Although PM Lee has suggested that citizens have "savings" locked up in their HDB flats and he suggested an average of $300,000 for 3 room flats and $400,000 for 4 room flats, I would like to caution that depending on HDB flats as pensions (i.e. for partial retirement funding) has its own set of risks.

With the MRT link to Johor and the high speed rail connection to K.L., there is no guarantee that property prices here in Singapore will continue to increase meaningfully. 

So, asset rich and cash poor Singaporeans who form the majority of the population here could find themselves in a bind 10 or 20 years later.




Therefore, not to be complacent and too dependent on our homes as pensions, efforts to improve financial literacy and to encourage financial prudence in our citizens must be strengthened. 

A national financial education program in schools should be introduced as soon as possible.

PM Lee suggested that people who are still healthy and who are able to continue working in retirement continue to do so. 




Although I like the suggestion and applaud the spirit of seniors who would like to continue working, I would like it more if they work because they want to and not because they have to.

Not to run the risk of sounding like a broken recorder, for anyone who might be interested in more of my thoughts, see related posts #3 and #4 below.

Related posts:
1. Retiring comfortably with a HDB flat.
2. Housing and the CPF.
3. Achieving level 1 financial security for Singaporeans.
4. Retiring before 60 is not a dream.
5. Purchasing a HDB flat, new or old.