MPF Fees Face Legislation — Anna Wu: If Cuts Disappoint, We’ll Regulate

This article is a rewrite of a report from October 2012.

MPFA chairwoman Anna Wu revealed in October 2012 the authority was studying a cap on MPF charges or mandating trustees to offer low-fee products — and if fee cuts after semi-portability disappointed, it would advise legislating. MPF charges faced their first legislative ultimatum.

Why legislate?

Cut too little, and the government steps in. Wu said MPF charges still had room to fall; if semi-portability’s streamlining disappointed and fees barely moved, she would advise legislation. Law isn’t the first step — it’s the last one, and a real one.

Does the MPFA have the power?

No — legislation must grant it. She was candid: “Under current law, we have neither the authority, the function, nor the legal power to require fees to fall to any level.” Capping charges needs amended law; percentage or flat figure still undecided, with no timetable estimable.

What’s the low-fee product list?

Due year-end; no threat to free markets. Wu said a low-fee product list would be published by year-end for members’ choice; she rejected claims it would distort free markets — “the MPF scheme is a public social-development policy; being mandatory, it must carry sufficient regulatory power.”

How do trustee services compare?

The official platform is live. The MPFA website launched a trustee-service comparison platform covering 40-plus schemes from a dozen-plus trustees — comparing fund counts and types, transfer times and channels.

What is the lesson from 2012?

An ultimatum is the most effective fee-cut medicine. Wu’s 2012 remarks differed from ordinary appeals: she set a condition — disappoint on cuts, face legislation. Cutting MPF charges takes more than self-discipline or competition; it takes a credible “cut or we’ll legislate” threat.