China Economic Weekly-Economic News (Reporter qi zhou) In July, the annual adjustment of the provident fund came again. After completing the remittance business in June, many units will adjust the payment base of the provident fund according to the average monthly salary of employees in the previous year. It is reported that Nanchang, Kunming, Chongqing, Harbin and other cities have all raised the contribution base of the provident fund. If the salary of the previous year rises and the contribution ratio of the unit provident fund remains unchanged, the employee’s contribution to the provident fund will increase. However, some netizens pointed out that if the salary remains unchanged this year, the contribution of the provident fund will increase, which means that the salary will be less.
Beijing implements "fee reduction" measures for provident fund loans
In addition to raising the deposit base of provident fund in various places, some regions have also optimized policies such as provident fund withdrawal.
For example, Beijing Housing Provident Fund Management Center issued a notice: from July 1, 2020, the second-hand housing appraisal fee for individual housing loans of housing provident fund issued after September 16, 2019 (inclusive) will no longer be borne by the borrower, while the portfolio loan will be borne by the loan trustee bank, while the non-portfolio loan will be borne by Beijing Housing Provident Fund Management Center, and the second-hand housing appraisal fee paid by the borrower will be returned.
At the same time, in order to facilitate the applicant’s loan repayment, since July 1 this year (inclusive), the accepted individual housing loan borrowers of housing provident fund can apply to use the funds in their housing provident fund account to directly repay the loan on the repayment dates agreed in the contract in January and July each year. In other words, the balance of the provident fund account can be directly used to repay the loan, and there is no need to withdraw it from the fixed account for repayment.
Yan Yuejin, research director of the think tank center of Yiju Research Institute, believes that such regulations objectively reflect the guidance of fee reduction and make the loans of provident fund smoother.
"Beijing’s policy further reflects the convenience of provident fund loans. Judging from the evaluation cost of second-hand housing with provident fund loans for single housing, it is about several hundred yuan. From the perspective of buyers under this year’s epidemic, similar cost savings have a positive effect, at least reducing the pressure of transactions. Of course, the follow-up should guard against the risks of some intermediary speculation policies. In particular, such policies are used to exaggerate the tendency of policy relaxation. Because from the perspective of the second-hand housing market in Beijing, there has been a wave of speculation this year, so while digesting good policies, we must further promote the stability of second-hand housing transactions. " Yan Yuejin told the reporter of China Economic Weekly.
Last year, the per capita withdrawal of housing provident fund was about 30 thousand yuan
In fact, the debate about provident fund has not stopped for some time. Celebrities such as Huang Qifan, Dong Mingzhu and Yao Jinbo, as well as researchers in Lou Jiwei and Chen Huai, have all expressed their views. However, regarding whether the provident fund should be abolished or retained, in fact, the central authorities have already set the tone.
On May 18th, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council officially issued "Opinions on Accelerating the Improvement of the Socialist Market Economic System in the New Era", clearly proposing to speed up the establishment of a housing system with multi-subject supply, multi-channel guarantee and simultaneous rent and purchase, and reform the housing provident fund system.
This means that the state will not "across the board" the provident fund, but improve and reform it on the original basis, and the idea of "canceling the provident fund" has been overturned.
In mid-June, the 2019 Annual Report of the National Housing Provident Fund jointly issued by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, the Ministry of Finance and the People’s Bank of China showed that in 2019, the amount of housing provident fund paid in China was 2,370.967 billion yuan; In the whole year, 56,485,600 people withdrew from the housing provident fund, with an amount of 1,628.178 billion yuan, with a per capita income of about 30,000 yuan; 2,860,400 individual housing loans were issued, with an amount of 1,213.906 billion yuan. It is worth mentioning that the proportion of employees paid in the non-public economy is as high as 49.04%, nearly half.
Zou Linhua, head of the housing big data project team of the Institute of Finance and Economics of China Academy of Social Sciences, believes that there are some problems in the current housing provident fund system, such as backward operation mode and low rate of return on funds, and there are also some calls to cancel the housing provident fund. However, housing provident fund, as an institutional arrangement of housing cooperative finance, can effectively reduce the interest burden of house purchase and improve the welfare of employees. The housing accumulation fund system needs to be reformed, but it should not be simply abolished.
"The problems existing in the current provident fund system include many aspects: First, they are fragmented, lacking efficiency and unified norms. The local provident funds are independently operated and managed by local governments, and their practices are different; Second, the investment efficiency is low, and at present, only the current interest income can be obtained, resulting in a waste of funds; Third, the extraction is not convenient enough; Fourth, the quota is limited. In the context of high housing prices, it is often necessary to combine commercial loans to complete the purchase of houses, resulting in an increase in the cost of buying houses. " Zou Linhua said in an interview with China Economic Weekly.
He suggested that the direction of the reform of the provident fund system can consider the following aspects: first, unification and standardization to improve operational efficiency; The second is to broaden investment channels and improve capital gains; Third, extraction is more convenient; The fourth is to increase the quota on the basis of unified operation.