Who are better off after MPF mechanism abolition, Hong Kong workers or bosses?
Three years after Hong Kong's legislature passed a long-awaited labour bill to stop bosses from raiding staff pensions to cover severance and long-service payments, the cancellation of the so-called offsetting mechanism finally took effect on Labour Day on Thursday.
Advertisement
The abolition marked a milestone for the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF), which came into operation in 2000, after enduring criticism from the labour sector for half its existence.
The Post examines what the changes mean to Hong Kong workers and bosses.
What prompted authorities to act?
The offsetting mechanism had been part of the MPF scheme since it was introduced in December 2000. The scheme covers 4.75 million members with total assets of HK$1.338 trillion (US$168 billion) as of the end of March.
The sum, which accounts for investment gains and new contributions from members, comes to HK$279,100 per person, or 13 per cent higher than a year ago.
Under the scheme, employers and employees each contribute 5 per cent of the individual's salary up to a combined maximum of HK$3,000 a month.
Advertisement
The mechanism had been criticised for being tantamount to robbing employees of their hard-earned money as it had allowed employers to take cash from workers' pensions to offset their long-service and severance payments.
Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu said on Thursday that the cancellation would benefit the city's three million-strong workforce and provide better labour protection.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
HKFP
3 hours ago
- HKFP
Hong Kong hails ‘overwhelming support' for legalising basketball betting, proposes 50% levy on profits
The Hong Kong government has hailed 'overwhelming support' from scholars, athletes, and youth groups for its plan to legalise basketball betting in the city, following the conclusion of a one-month public consultation last month. Ninety-four per cent of the 1,063 submissions received by the government between April and May 'expressed support or positive views' on the proposal to regulate basketball betting under the Betting Duty Ordinance, according to a paper submitted by the Home and Youth Affairs Bureau to the Legislative Council on Thursday. Those who supported the legal amendment said public demand for basketball betting has 'increased significantly,' and a regulatory regime can protect bettors' rights and interests. The government proposed in April to amend the ordinance to grant the Secretary for Home and Youth Affairs the power to issue a basketball betting license to the Hong Kong Jockey Club (HKJC). The regulatory regime will mirror the existing one for football betting, the government said. In the paper released on Thursday, the government proposed imposing a 50 per cent levy on the net profits from basketball betting. Citing responses from supporters of the legislative proposal, the government said the HKJC may donate its additional revenue to welfare and charitable purposes. The tax revenue generated may also help the government allocate more resources on social welfare, supporters said, according to the government. Financial Secretary Paul Chan first unveiled the government's intention to regulate basketball betting during his 2025 budget speech in February. He said the legalisation could tackle illegal gambling and raise tax revenue amid the city's estimated deficit of HK$87.2 billion. The finance chief projected that regulating basketball betting could generate HK$1.5 billion to HK$2 billion in tax revenue. The government acknowledged on Thursday that 36 submissions – or 3.4 per cent of the responses collected – opposed the proposal. Those who objected raised concerns about the adverse impact of basketball betting on the youth, adding illegal gambling still existed after football betting was legalised. Responding to the concerns, the government said in the paper that the impact of betting activities on young people has been 'steady' in recent years. The proportion of bettors aged between 18 and 21 also 'consistently remained below two per cent,' the government said quoting the HKJC. Some suggested the government to prohibit individuals aged between 18 and 25 from placing bets online, while others proposed imposing restrictions on the amount and number of bets that can be placed by young people. The paper submitted on Thursday is set to be discussed by lawmakers on the Legislative Council's Panel on Home Affairs, Culture and Sports on Monday. 'Disastrous move' In February, the Hong Kong Committee on Children's Rights criticised the government's plan to regulate basketball betting, saying that giving a green light to basketball betting was a 'disastrous move.' The group said popularising sports betting could 'lure' young people to bet with their limited financial resources that should otherwise go to other needs. Gambling loss may also result in psychological pressure and guilt, which may deter individuals from seeking help, it said, warning that gamblers could enter a 'vicious cycle' where they turn to lending agencies or engage in criminal activities.
Asia Times
12 hours ago
- Asia Times
Hopes for a Xi-Trump summit are naively misplaced
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping's surprise phone call—marking the first direct communication between the leaders in months—may signal a temporary thaw in an otherwise frosty and structurally adversarial relationship. While America's restoration of Chinese student visas and China's resumption of blocked critical mineral trade suggest detente, this contact, like others in the history of US-China summits, could quickly prove to be more performative than substantive. The danger lies not in dialogue but in the illusion that the leader-to-leader call, which Beijing insisted Trump requested, will meaningfully alter the deep geopolitical, ideological and economic divergences that define Sino-American relations today. News reports said Xi told Trump to roll back tariffs and other trade measures that are roiling the global economy while warning him about intensifying the dispute over Taiwan. Trump claimed on social media that the call delivered a 'positive conclusion', including on China's restrictions on critical mineral exports, and that lower-level discussions on trade would follow. He said, 'We're in very good shape with China and the trade deal.' Both leaders invited each other to visit their countries. However, reports noted that there was nothing in either side's official statements to indicate the critical mineral issue had been resolved. And China has reasonable cause to remain on guard despite Trump's post-call positivity. Let us count the many impediments to real and lasting reconciliation: The most acute danger stems from Trump's lack of strategic coherence. Unlike the Kissinger-Nixon doctrine of detente, which was structured, calculated and guided by a realpolitik vision of global balance, Trump's approach is reactive and transactional and thus prone to Chinese manipulation. Concessions, including the reopening of student exchanges on the US side and lifting critcal mineral restrictions on China's—appear to be issued in exchange for vague 'reciprocity' rather than any long-term strategic realignment. For Beijing, such inconsistency is easily exploitable. Xi understands that Trump is prone to tactical surprises and policy reversals, allowing China to notch one-by-one concessions while offering minimal structural reforms or broad policy changes in return. This understanding of Trump's tactics and views may also embolden China to keep testing US resolve and commitment in the Taiwan Strait, East Sea and South China Seas, knowing that by doing so it strengthens its negotiating leverage in wresting future US concessions. Much has been made of US-endorsed 'de-risking' from China without actually 'decoupling.' The resumption of trade in critical minerals—crucial to US defense and clean energy sectors—signals a potential pause in America's techno-economic containment of China, which if lasting, would contradict the bipartisan consensus in Washington that China poses a 'systemic challenge.' This could also send mixed messages to allies such as Japan, South Korea and key ASEAN economies, many of which are now being pressured to restrict technology transfers to China, particularly in regard to AI and quantum computing. If Trump reverses this posture, potentially at a Trump-Xi in-person summit, it would necessarily undercut the anti-China coalition the US has been trying to build since 2017 and signal a climbdown of epic proportions. An in-person summit with Xi would give both leaders global optics, something they arguably both need as their hardline stances cause political tremors at home and restlessness abroad. Yet symbolism without substance carries its own risks. The 2019 Mar-a-Lago summit and the 2018 G20 truce in Argentina were celebrated photo ops that ultimately yielded few strategic gains. Indeed, they were followed by tariff escalations, cyber accusations and deepened distrust. Xi, ever conscious of China's 'national rejuvenation' drive, may use a summit with Trump to signal that China is not isolated—even amid Western efforts to contain it – and that he brought the US to heel through his tough negotiating posture. Should he succeed in presenting Trump as a president willing to do business without political preconditions, it will bolster China's power on the world stage. This symbolism would serve Xi well amid research that shows China is straining under the weight of assisting various countries when its own economy remains fragile. There will be a temptation to portray a Trump-Xi summit as a return to the two sides' previous 'managed rivalry' model. Yet this notion is predicated on mutual trust, which no longer exists. A brief thaw may offer breathing space for both, but there is no sign yet of lasting strategic stability. During the previous Cold War, the US and Soviet Union were able to negotiate arms control and crisis management protocols. No such guardrails exist between the US and China today. The resumption of critical mineral trade and educational exchanges, while welcome, won't be enough to reverse mutual mistrust, especially when military encounters in the Taiwan Strait or the South China Sea could easily still spiral out of control. Increasingly politicized charges against Chinese nationals in the US are fueling that mistrust. Those include new accusations that China is involved in 'agro-terrorism' that aims to wipe out US barley, wheat and corn yields by up to 50%. A PhD researcher of Chinese origin at the University of Michigan has been arrested in this connection. A potential Trump-Xi summit – despite stage-managed positive vibes and smiles for the cameras, could be yet another empty ritual—a theatrical handshake over unresolved and deep contradictions. To be sure, both leaders have reasons to engage. Trump seeks headlines as his popularity slips ahead of 2026 midterm elections; Xi seeks legitimacy for his tough negotiating posture that risks millions of Chinese factory jobs. But neither is offering a strategic roadmap that can reassure domestic or global audiences. Without a shared understanding of what strategic competition entails, and without mechanisms for escalation control, the optics of detente will only mask a rivalry that still threatens to spiral deeper and deeper into conflict.
RTHK
14 hours ago
- RTHK
URA to get two government sites for residential use
URA to get two government sites for residential use The government says the two sites are to be rezoned for residential use. File photo: RTHK The Chief Executive in Council has approved the granting of two sites to the Urban Renewal Authority (URA), with the plots to be rezoned for residential use. In a statement on Friday, the government said the sites on Bailey Street in Hung Hom and Tseung Kwan O Area 137 will be handed over to the URA by private treaty for a term of 50 years, at nominal premium of HK$1,000. It said, according to its understanding, the two sites will be rezoned for residential use through town planning procedures. Secretary for Development Bernadette Linn said granting the sites to the URA helps the body fulfil its urban renewal mission amid a sluggish property market. "The granting of the two sites to the URA could also benefit the community. Specifically, the Bailey Street site can create synergy with the URA's cluster of redevelopment projects in the Kowloon City area," Linn said. "As for the Tseung Kwan O Site, the original housing development of which has been deferred due to re-prioritisation of the Hong Kong Housing Authority's projects, granting the site to the URA would optimise the use of the land resources in a timely manner." The government said the site on Bailey Street, with a net area of 7,610 square metres, would have an estimated a total gross floor area of about 68,000 square metres. The site in Tseung Kwan O, it said, has a net area of about 9.15 hectares, and would have a total gross floor area of about 713,700 square metres. The URA said it welcomes the decision and will make good use of the extra revenue generated from the two sites.
