What did the “original sin” label mean?
A March 2011 commentary described MPF as born with an “original sin”: forcing employees to contribute in a city that hates being forced. After the Budget’s HK$6,000 MPF injection sparked uproar and was abruptly scrapped, the MPFA faced re-matching some 7 million accounts for 2.5 million employees and self-employed persons — word was staff were relieved not to do it.
How did the MPFA plan to add flexibility?
Beyond the coming ECA, the MPFA wrote to all employers in late 2010 encouraging them to offer two or more MPF providers so staff had real choice.
How can members use their choices?
Post-ECA, switch trustees yearly; review fund mixes regularly regardless. Compare scheme fees and performance at MPF fund comparison.
Related articles
View allScrapping offsetting would absolve the MPF’s “original sin”, says MPFA chief — as no-instruction accounts fall from 1.05m to 630,000 in a year
In November 2017, the MPFA’s executive director welcomed the proposal...
What Happened in the MPF Market in May 2011?
What were the key MPF developments in May 2011? May 2011 brought four big...
Offsetting Has Siphoned Off HK$26.6 Billion — Don’t Let “Unemployment Insurance” Be a False Promise
In 2012, CY Leung pledged in his election manifesto to scrap the MPF...