Do you understand the PRS Framework and its Lingo?

Before jumping into the bandwagon of private retirement schemes (PRS), we should understand the PRS framework first. What is the structure behind the scene? Does our invested money in safe hands? Who are the regulators? These were the few typical questions we should find out. No worries, all of these will be answered here... (yeah, give us a "Like")


  • Manufacturer?
    PRS are offered by approved PRS Providers. Each PRS will include a range of retirement funds from which individuals may choose to invest in, based on their own retirement needs, goals and risk appetite.
  • Book-keeper?
    The PPA functions as a record keeping and resource centre for data on all transactions performed by contributors. It will facilitate transactions and promote efficient administration. The PPA will also act as a resource centre for data and research relating to the PRS industry in Malaysia.
  • Safe-keeper?
    The assets of each PRS will be segregated from the PRS provider and held by an independent Scheme Trustee under a trust. Yes. It must be "independent" to safeguard investors money.
  • Regulator...
    All of the above mentioned parties, namely the PRS providers, the PPA, the Scheme Trustees and distributors of PRS were being regulated and supervised by Securities Commission (SC). This was to ensure the proper functioning of the PRS industry and protects members, via prudential and investor     protection requirements.

After all, still blur about the term used above? No worries. Finance Malaysia Blog take the initiative to explain the PRS lingo against that of Unit Trust for ease of understanding:



For more PRS info, you may contact Alex Yeoh (alexyeoh@vka.com.my), a licensed financial planner who can distributes products from multiple PRS providers. Thank you.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"You Can Keep Your Existing Health Insurance"

I wondered about this statement at the time Obama made it.  Clearly, by changing all the rules of health care insurance and mandating conformity, it was unlikely that the vast majority of Americans would not find themselves forced by 'The Affordable Care Act' to have to deal with a completely different health insurance plan and completely different set of health care providers. I now understand what Obama meant.   He was speaking to his immediate family and (politician) friends.  They are exempt from the "Affordable Care Act."  Clearly what he meant to say was: "if you are exempt from Obamacare, like me and my family, you can keep your existing health insurance."  He never meant to mislead.
Read more

Work Ethic of 70s, 80s, 90s

Image
Different generations have their own view on working. You like it or not, working is part of our live. No work = No life. However, this equation has since changed to " Working = No life ". Do you agree? Generally, those born in 70s were perceived to be loving their job. They work hard mainly because of 3 meals/day. For them, a secured life means having a stable job with stable income. They believe that with every efforts you put in, that will reward you back later. As such, over time (OT) is nothing for them. As a responsible 70s, losing their job is a serious matter they tend to avoid. That's why they usually found another job first, before resigning. How about 80s? Other than chasing for stable income, those 80s working adults will also look into the job scope , opportunity for promotion , or working environment . They will take initiative to find for better job. Hence, job hopping is very common for them. Notably, 80s are reluctant to sacrifice their quality of life b
Read more

Things We Now Know

The poor are losing ground in the new Obama world.  The facts are showing up even in the halls of collectivist extremes like the New York Times.  The rich are getting richer and poor are being locked in place.  Big government is throttling the economy and the hopes and dreams of lower and middle class Americans. Today's Wall Street Journal's article by Simon Constable lays out some of the simple and obvious facts of the Obama era: "The richest 20% of households account for 38% of spending, according to government data for 2011, the latest available.  Compare that with 2003 when the top earners spent 26% of the total."  The article goes on to say..."it could get even worse."  It will. Who really benefits when the regulators strangle the banks?  Do banks really need to get much more conservative in their lending practices?  Why does the government know best?  How far can you stretch the FDIC guarantees before American banking is simply a subsidiary of the US g
Read more