Military junta to revive pension system



BANGKOK: -- The National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) is now tasking its legal and judicial affairs advisory panel to draft a bill that will allow government officials to switch to the previous pension system from the government pension fund.

The bill is now being drafted by the panel chaired by Mr Wisanu Krue-ngam, the former deputy prime minister and former secretary-general to the prime minister.

Manas Jamveha, director-general of the Office of the Comptroller General said that some 300,000 government officials will be allowed to switch back to the pension system from the provident fund when it takes effect end of this year.

It will be among the first bills to be forwarded to the newly formed National Legislative Assembly to pass in December this year, he said.

He said up until 1997, all government officials received monthly pensions for life after they retired.

However as the cost of the benefits under the pension system skyrocketed, the Government Pension Fund (GPF) was introduced in 1997 as an alternative.

The pension system was gradually phased out and the GPF became compulsory for all new officials from that year.

Officials in office at the time had the choice of sticking to the pension system or switching to the GPF which was then promoted to yield good returns.

But due to volatile economy over the years, the GPF failed to deliver the promised return rate, sparking protests among officials who had opted in earlier.

In April 2013 the Yingluck Shinawatra government agreed to let this group of officials — some 300,000 incumbent officials and retirees who became GPF members before March 27, 1997 — to switch back to the pension system under its draft bill.

Likewise, those who did not join the GPF by that date may apply to do so once the bill takes effect.

The bill had been accepted in principle by the House of Representatives but had not been enacted when the House of Representatives was dissolved on Dec 9, 2013.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/military-junta-revive-pension-system/


-- Thai PBS 2014-06-26

So where will the money come from to fund the pensions?

so they are going to introduce a bill and I guess they are very sure it will pass. One man one rule.

Looks like the NCPO is doing everything in this country now except how to let the people Vote for their own democratic government.

One of the wealthiest nations in SEA should have a pension system or national insurance for the elderly. As Singapore has found, these days you cannot always rely on traditional family culture to take care of the aged and so they have just revamped their provisions for the elderly to deal with this.

There will be many challenges, especially implementing a universal taxation system which can support it. At present only 14% of income earners actually pay any tax at all. there will be a lot of opposition

Looks like the NCPO is doing everything in this country now except how to let the people Vote for their own democratic government.

So you want the Thaksin mob back in? I certainly don't and most Thais, even those that are pro-Thaksin, don't want that just yet.

apols misunderstood orig post - post refers to government officials only - not a national system

So where will the money come from to fund the pensions?

Let the govt invest a bunch of money in their provident fund that the govt said would be such a good thing/big money maker....then use the provident fund to pay the pensions. Wait, the govt may not want to do that because they know the provident earnings will not be enough to fund the pension system. What's considered good for the employee by the govt may not be considered good by the govt for the govt.

But back to your question of where will the money come from? Simple: Money printing presses. Money may not grow on trees but printing presses sure can print it out easy enough....oh yea, maybe sell a few bonds which a future generation can take care of.

Why not just pay them the same standard pension any other Thai senior citizen gets ? I can hear the squeals...

pensions for life, ha what a joke, politicians are way above everyone, how about looking after the elderly before you even think about taking care of yourselves

Looks like the NCPO is doing everything in this country now except how to let the people Vote for their own democratic government.

So you want the Thaksin mob back in? I certainly don't and most Thais, even those that are pro-Thaksin, don't want that just yet.

Seem you have given up all hope for the Dem Party.

apols misunderstood orig post - post refers to government officials only - not a national system

That Is the way I am reading it. Skyrocketing costs, aging population, the idea of private retirement investing was earlier attempted in the U.S. Under Republican policies, then the 1987 maket dip shook folks up real bad. Security in retirement income over possible better returns trumped.

So where will the money come from to fund the pensions?

Same place as the money funding government official's salaries.

Which begs the question, why are pensions limited to government officials?

Which begs the question, why are pensions limited to government officials?

in Asian countries, PENSION is a new social concept and is a privilege word only for who work for the government offices.

developed economy like Singapore, Hong Kong, Korea, Japan, and recently China . . . have compulsory nationwide pension schemes ( or private funds ) for everyone.

in the past, RETIREMENT was just about stop working and hope your children supporting the rest of your life ( family responsibility ); unless you have a thick wallet.

cheers

Well. That puts govt employees truly back at the gravy train.

Lee Kwan Yew is suposed to have said about singapore that there was no need for democracy when he did everything that was needed for the country.

Looks like the NCPO is doing everything in this country now except how to let the people Vote for their own democratic government.

So you want the Thaksin mob back in? I certainly don't and most Thais, even those that are pro-Thaksin, don't want that just yet.

Seem you have given up all hope for the Dem Party.

No Eric, only you and the other 4 or 5 "usual suspects." Please read it again with the pink glasses OFF!!!

The money will come from areas that the government no longer has to fund such as the stupid one Tablet one child scheme and other such schemes the government used to buy votes with. Not even the USA and GB who are financial powers buy their students computers.

One of the wealthiest nations in SEA should have a pension system or national insurance for the elderly. As Singapore has found, these days you cannot always rely on traditional family culture to take care of the aged and so they have just revamped their provisions for the elderly to deal with this.

There will be many challenges, especially implementing a universal taxation system which can support it. At present only 14% of income earners actually pay any tax at all. there will be a lot of opposition\

If you want a pension you must pay for it, not the tax payer. They have a provident fund but what we are seeing now is fiscal suicide. When they revert to the old system all future pension payments becomes a contingent liability for the country and the only way to fund it will be through taxes. What I am seeing now is spending in a time the country should be careful of the international headwinds. As a Thailand tax payer I don't agree and will never agree with increased payments for any worker, in whatever form, thats above the increase in that workers productivity. This is like a CEO giving all his employees a B 1 mil but himself B 10 mil.

Which begs the question, why are pensions limited to government officials?

in Asian countries, PENSION is a new social concept and is a privilege word only for who work for the government offices.

developed economy like Singapore, Hong Kong, Korea, Japan, and recently China . . . have compulsory nationwide pension schemes ( or private funds ) for everyone.

in the past, RETIREMENT was just about stop working and hope your children supporting the rest of your life ( family responsibility ); unless you have a thick wallet.

cheers

I understand how it works But not why it is like that?

When taxes are used to fund pensions, as is the case with the government officials' pensions, it makes no sense that only certain people (government officials) receive these pensions, especially not as it is something everyone needs more or less equally?

Private pensions, compulsory or otherwise, are an entirely different matter, they are, as the word says, private.

The money will come from areas that the government no longer has to fund such as the stupid one Tablet one child scheme and other such schemes the government used to buy votes with. Not even the USA and GB who are financial powers buy their students computers.

I think the real question was, where does the money initially come from? And the answer is taxes (public money). Moving the money around a bit does not change that.

Any betting the next election will be a three-party fight? No prizes for guessing who will be the third party.

So where will the money come from to fund the pensions?

How terribly cynical of you to ask. Fiscal realities don't apply to the junta, being all powerful as they are.

We're not allowed to ask them questions like that, and even if we were they can invent an answer.

Which begs the question, why are pensions limited to government officials?

in Asian countries, PENSION is a new social concept and is a privilege word only for who work for the government offices.

developed economy like Singapore, Hong Kong, Korea, Japan, and recently China . . . have compulsory nationwide pension schemes ( or private funds ) for everyone.

in the past, RETIREMENT was just about stop working and hope your children supporting the rest of your life ( family responsibility ); unless you have a thick wallet.

cheers

I understand how it works But not why it is like that?

When taxes are used to fund pensions, as is the case with the government officials' pensions, it makes no sense that only certain people (government officials) receive these pensions, especially not as it is something everyone needs more or less equally?

Private pensions, compulsory or otherwise, are an entirely different matter, they are, as the word says, private.

I guess different from the West, the elderly support is family centric and no demand to external resources. Asian government was not prepare for such niche demand.

Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong learnt from the west and firstly deployed pension schemes within government offices, as a recruitment package. still not yet a nationwide concept.

I see the non-nationwide pension deployment was due to both social demand, government budget and readiness. well, badly it returned out an exclusiveness for government officials.

if this answering the WHY question.

cheers

'... the GPF failed to deliver the promised return rate ...' Think the UK's Equitable Life, which in the early nineties, promised pie-in-the-sky pension guarantees, duly resulting in the taxpayer - surprise, surprise - being lumbered with bailing out investors led by greed. Any return that invokes a promise must, by its very nature, offer a flip-side.

Nothing new here, pensions for government workers, regular folks can starve. When I moved into our village my wife told me that there was a family in desperate straits not of their own making. The mother is deaf the daughter blind. She wasn't born blind but became so after her father tried to kill her by feeding her insecticide. They each got 500 baht per month pension, but, it was only paid once every three months. Try to imagine that for a moment, having 3,000 baht to live for 3 months. I told my wife that I would help with 2 conditions; that the amount stay constant as I have to budget for it, and that my wife deliver it to the family. The daughter died a couple of years later but we continue to contribute. I only share this story to point out how desperate some Thais are, and how a minute pension that a government worker would sneer at might help them.

One of the wealthiest nations in SEA should have a pension system or national insurance for the elderly. As Singapore has found, these days you cannot always rely on traditional family culture to take care of the aged and so they have just revamped their provisions for the elderly to deal with this.

There will be many challenges, especially implementing a universal taxation system which can support it. At present only 14% of income earners actually pay any tax at all. there will be a lot of opposition\

If you want a pension you must pay for it, not the tax payer. They have a provident fund but what we are seeing now is fiscal suicide. When they revert to the old system all future pension payments becomes a contingent liability for the country and the only way to fund it will be through taxes. What I am seeing now is spending in a time the country should be careful of the international headwinds. As a Thailand tax payer I don't agree and will never agree with increased payments for any worker, in whatever form, thats above the increase in that workers productivity. This is like a CEO giving all his employees a B 1 mil but himself B 10 mil.

I think I see what you are suggesting? Likewise I can't see the logic in your reasoning about paying your workers B1M............?

For example, Australia initially financed its social security payments (pensions etc) by increasing taxation by 1.75% with this money going into a seperate fund that could be managed to pay out in perpetuity!

Comes 1972 and a change of government, the new government sees this fabulous sum "just sitting there", swoops it into general revenue so it can spend it in "pork barrel" projects and insists it can pay Social Security out of general revenue .............wrong!!!! The people of Australia are still trying to pay for that particular piece of idiocy!

If you are suggesting that the user pays then add 5% to VAT and use that to fund all pensions, seems fair enough?

One of the wealthiest nations in SEA should have a pension system or national insurance for the elderly. As Singapore has found, these days you cannot always rely on traditional family culture to take care of the aged and so they have just revamped their provisions for the elderly to deal with this.

There will be many challenges, especially implementing a universal taxation system which can support it. At present only 14% of income earners actually pay any tax at all. there will be a lot of opposition\

If you want a pension you must pay for it, not the tax payer. They have a provident fund but what we are seeing now is fiscal suicide. When they revert to the old system all future pension payments becomes a contingent liability for the country and the only way to fund it will be through taxes. What I am seeing now is spending in a time the country should be careful of the international headwinds. As a Thailand tax payer I don't agree and will never agree with increased payments for any worker, in whatever form, thats above the increase in that workers productivity. This is like a CEO giving all his employees a B 1 mil but himself B 10 mil.

You may be a Thailand taxpayer, as many of us are, but you are not a Thailand voter, presumably. So stop shredding you nightie and save yourself a lot of stress.

One of the wealthiest nations in SEA should have a pension system or national insurance for the elderly. As Singapore has found, these days you cannot always rely on traditional family culture to take care of the aged and so they have just revamped their provisions for the elderly to deal with this.

There will be many challenges, especially implementing a universal taxation system which can support it. At present only 14% of income earners actually pay any tax at all. there will be a lot of opposition\

If you want a pension you must pay for it, not the tax payer. They have a provident fund but what we are seeing now is fiscal suicide. When they revert to the old system all future pension payments becomes a contingent liability for the country and the only way to fund it will be through taxes. What I am seeing now is spending in a time the country should be careful of the international headwinds. As a Thailand tax payer I don't agree and will never agree with increased payments for any worker, in whatever form, thats above the increase in that workers productivity. This is like a CEO giving all his employees a B 1 mil but himself B 10 mil.

You may be a Thailand taxpayer, as many of us are, but you are not a Thailand voter, presumably. So stop shredding you nightie and save yourself a lot of stress.

I don't have nighties and I am not stressed, just annoyed by people that don't contributed to the conversation but need to say something.

Looks like the NCPO is doing everything in this country now except how to let the people Vote for their own democratic government.

So you want the Thaksin mob back in? I certainly don't and most Thais, even those that are pro-Thaksin, don't want that just yet.

What you want is irrilevant. The most important is what the great majority of Thais want and have clearly expressed in every election.