Business
8.25% vs 16% Per Annum: Can Your EPF Returns Beat Equity? CA Explains
Last Updated:
Apart from retirement planning and pension, the EPF scheme also offers tax benefits, which are not available under mutual fund equity investments.
For FY 2024-25, the EPF interest rate has been set at 8.25 per cent. (Photo Credit: Instagram)
The Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF) scheme offers an opportunity to salaried workers in the private sector to build a retirement corpus. The government-backed scheme has been designed to offer financial protection to the private sector employees in their retirement years. Under the scheme, an employee contributes 12% of the basic salary and dearness allowance every month. An equal amount is also contributed by the employer.
It offers a secure and fixed interest rate, which has been set at 8.25 per cent per annum for FY 2024-25.
On the other hand, there are equity assets, such as stocks and mutual funds, that come with the potential of delivering much higher long-term returns than most fixed-rate investment options.
However, the question here is, can 8.25% EPF returns beat a potential 16 per cent annual return from equity schemes over a horizon of 5 years?
CA Compares EPF and Equity Returns
In a recent LinkedIn post, Chartered Accountant Nitesh Buddhadev explained how the EPF investments can beat the equity schemes despite lower returns.
He took the example of two employees having a gross income of Rs 26 lakh and a basic pay of Rs 1 lakh each. Both of these individuals began their employment after September 1, 2014, with a base wage and dearness allowance (DA) of more than Rs 15,000 per month. Both have opted for the new tax regime for filing their income tax returns (ITRs).
Adding to this, he shared that if the first employee chooses a 12 per cent EPF limit, the monthly EPF contribution will be Rs 12,000. As the employer matches the amount and pays Rs 12,000, the total monthly contribution to EPF will be Rs 24,000.
For the employees who joined after September 1, 2014, and get a basic salary of more than Rs 15,000, the entire 24 per cent goes to EPF, as they are not eligible for the Employees’ Pension Scheme (EPS).
Contrary to this, the CA uses the example of another employee who decided to opt out of EPF and instead invests Rs 24,000 in equity. New employees who join after September 1, 2014, and have a base salary of more than Rs 15,000 have the option to opt out of the EPF.
Now, according to the CA, since this employee is liable to pay tax on the increased portion of salary of Rs 12,000 (which would have been the employer’s EPF contribution), the effective equity investment will be Rs 20,256 rather than Rs 24,000.
The CA estimated a total of Rs 3,744 per month as tax liability, which included a 30 per cent flat tax rate and a 4 per cent health and education cess.
How Does Taxation Impact Overall Returns
The CA estimated the first employee’s EPF corpus at an interest rate of 8.25 per cent over a five-year period to grow into Rs 17.75 Lakh.
However, at an estimated 11 per cent return on equity investments during the same 5-year period, the corpus for the second employee (after capital gain tax) would grow into Rs 15.75 lakh.
Result? Even though the equity investments provided higher returns of 11 per cent, PF outperformed them with only 8.25 per cent returns due to the tax advantage.
Going by the calculation, the CA suggested that in order to reach a corpus of Rs 17.75 lakh, the equity investor must receive a 16 per cent (post-tax) annualised return over 5 years.
Though it may sound surprising, EPF can help you get higher returns compared to equity investments due to tax benefits.
A team of writers and reporters decodes vast terms of personal finance and making money matters simpler for you. From latest initial public offerings (IPOs) in the market to best investment options, we cover al…Read More
A team of writers and reporters decodes vast terms of personal finance and making money matters simpler for you. From latest initial public offerings (IPOs) in the market to best investment options, we cover al… Read More
Read More
Business
Trump Might Welcome Chinese Investment, but America Is Wary
A hallmark of President Trump’s second term has been his penchant for negotiating economic deals with countries that pledge to invest trillions of dollars in the United States
“It’s now pouring in from all parts of the world,” Mr. Trump said during a speech last fall in which he boasted of nearly $20 trillion of foreign investment.
The meetings this week between Mr. Trump and China’s leader, Xi Jinping, in Beijing are expected to include talks over purchases of American farm products and planes and the possibility of expanding access for American companies into China’s vast consumer market.
There has also been speculation that Mr. Trump and his advisers are seeking a major investment from China. But such a pledge could be complicated by deep distrust in the United States toward Chinese firms, which many workers blame for the hollowing out of American manufacturing.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent acknowledged the challenge in an interview on CNBC on Thursday, explaining that the United States and China were working to develop an investment board that would determine what sectors were acceptable for Chinese investment. That would essentially provide China with guidance on how to invest in the United States without its transactions being blocked by the Committee on Foreign Investment, an interagency group that reviews foreign investment and is led by Mr. Bessent.
“Look, there are plenty of things that the Chinese could invest in in the U.S.,” said Mr. Bessent, who is in Beijing with Mr. Trump.
Chinese investment in the United States has declined sharply in recent years amid tougher investment screening standards nationally and at the state level.
That sentiment could ultimately clash with Mr. Trump’s transactional instincts and his desire to return home with a big-ticket win.
“If Trump were to be committed to a major investment deal with China, there’s still a challenge of implementation,” said Kyle Jaros, an expert on U.S.-China ties at the University of Notre Dame. “It would take real follow-through to overcome a lot of the political and regulatory barriers that are in place right now.”
According to a report published last month by the research firm Rhodium Group, less than $3 billion of Chinese investment in the United States was announced in 2025. That was the lowest on record, with investment peaking at around $45 billion in 2016.
The United States has imposed tight restrictions on Chinese investment out of national security concerns, making it difficult for Chinese firms to build factories near military facilities. Some states also have enacted restrictions on Chinese purchases of real estate and farmland.
China’s clean energy technology, such as electric vehicles and batteries, has also faced challenges in the United States because of political backlash. There was a surge of Chinese investment in those sectors after clean energy and tax legislation was passed under the Biden administration in 2022, but according to Rhodium, more than half of those investments have been canceled, paused or delayed.
A $2.4 billion electric vehicle battery factory that the Chinese company Gotion was building in Michigan was canceled last year after the community there protested and mounted legal challenges to stop the project.
Other types of Chinese investment have also stirred controversy. That includes the recent purchase by Nongfu Spring, a Chinese bottled water company, of a warehouse in New Hampshire that it wants to turn into a bottling facility. The purchase was reviewed last year by the state’s attorney general.
After the inquiry found that there was no wrongdoing associated with the transaction, Gov. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire issued executive orders to block China, Russia and Iran from getting access to data or purchasing land or property in the state. “Foreign adversaries like China should not be doing business in New Hampshire,” said Ms. Ayotte, a Republican.
There continues to be deep skepticism within the U.S. automobile industry about competition from China. Last month, a group of American steel associations sent a letter to top Trump administration officials urging them to keep Chinese car manufacturers out of the United States.
“As representatives of our nation’s manufacturing sector, we urge you to ensure American competitiveness by not surrendering access to the U.S. auto market to the Chinese Communist Party,” they wrote. “Additionally, allowing Chinese companies and Chinese autos into the U.S. would create consequential, unacceptable national security risks.”
Agriculture also remains a contentious issue. The chairman of the House select committee on China, Representative John Moolenaar, a Republican from Michigan, introduced new legislation this month that would ban China from acquiring U.S. farmland.
“Food security is national security, and we cannot allow foreign adversaries like China to buy up American farmland near our most sensitive military and critical infrastructure sites,” Mr. Moolenaar said.
The bipartisan bill would create a requirement for the federal government to review Chinese deals involving ports and telecommunications infrastructure. It would also apply to purchases made by investors from Russia, Iran and North Korea
Michael Pillsbury, a China scholar who has served as an outside adviser to the Trump administration, said that the president’s advisers were concerned about Chinese investments in sensitive sectors such as semiconductors, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, aerospace and critical minerals. It has been a challenge, he said, to come up with a “white list” of sectors that could be considered safe.
“The red lines have moved back and forth as the nature of technology has changed,” Mr. Pillsbury said.
He added that while Mr. Trump is eager to announce a $1 trillion Chinese investment pledge, he is mindful not to incite political backlash.
“I think there’s been an effort by the administration to avoid getting into a fight with the China hawks,” Mr. Pillsbury added.
Ahead of Mr. Trump’s trip to China, a White House official downplayed the idea that the administration was seeking to create a new $1 trillion Chinese investment program. The White House continues to be focused on pushing China to increase its purchases of American farm goods, which it boycotted for much of last year when trade tensions flared.
Despite the anticipation of a Chinese investment pledge, the details and follow-through will be important.
While Mr. Trump has said that foreign investments have topped $20 trillion, according to the White House’s own investment tracker, U.S. and foreign investment pledges made during Mr. Trump’s second term total $10.6 trillion. Foreign leaders appear to have learned that they can win favor with Mr. Trump by promising whopping investment pledges that they might not fulfill.
“The devil is in the details,” said Philip Ludvigson, a partner in King & Spalding who specializes in national security risks and foreign investment, “about not only where the investment goes but also whether it happens at all.”
Business
‘Cheaper’ funeral option left Somerset man unable to say goodbye
Ed Cullen says his mum had an unattended cremation which saved money but was “devastating” for him.
Source link
Business
Trump brought top CEOs to Beijing but few big deals emerge
There were plenty of choreographed ceremonies but no sweeping trade breakthrough as Trump met Xi in Beijing.
Source link
-
Tech7 days agoA new frontier: Identity stack evolves for agentic systems | Computer Weekly
-
Tech7 days ago‘Orbs,’ ‘Saucers,’ and ‘Flashes’ on the Moon: Pentagon Drops New UFO Files
-
Fashion7 days agoNew orders in German manufacturing up 5% MoM in Mar 2026: Destatis
-
Tech7 days agoNick Bostrom Has a Plan for Humanity’s ‘Big Retirement’
-
Tech1 week agoWhat Microsoft Executives Really Thought About OpenAI in 2018
-
Sports7 days agoShaheen Afridi achieves landmark feat during opening Test against Bangladesh
-
Fashion7 days agoUS’ Carter’s taps retail veteran Sharon Price John as new CEO
-
Entertainment7 days agoRihanna embraces new tattoo given by children
