其實係邊個規定用BNO走嘅，唔可以攞返MPF？
登徒浪人
126 回覆
393 Like
12 Dislike
冇用就唔使咁驚啦
比返啲錢我
Push
龐氏政府
煽動分裂自己揀
嘗試譯下 (TLDR請skip)
Withheld Pensions for Hong Kong Emigres
To penalize Hong Kongers emigrating under a dual passport following imposition of the NSL, Hong Kong’s government is denying access to pensions from the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF), Hong Kong’s pension fund. This fund is managed in part by U.S. financial institutions. In principle, when Hong Kong residents permanently depart Hong Kong to live abroad, they are entitled to early withdrawals from the MPF, money that can be used to cover resettlement costs. To access the MPF fund, Hong Kongers who have departed to the UK have relied on using their British National Overseas (BNO) passports, presenting them as a key document to demonstrate overseas residency and initiate the withdrawal process.
However, in March 2021, MPF authorities announced that BNO passports could no longer be used as documentation to enable
early MPF withdrawal. This change in regulations limits more than 90,000 Hong Kong residents who have emigrated under the
BNO passport from having the necessary documentation to make their withdrawal from the MPF. Based on data from the Hong
Kong government, human rights group Hong Kong Watch finds that these individuals are now being denied over $2.74 billion
(HKD 21.5 billion) in MPF pension funds being held by international banks, including by the UK-headquartered Hong Kong Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) and U.S.-headquartered Prudential. Overseas banks manage much of the MPF, with HSBC managing over 30 percent of funds.
Multinational banks have been clear in their reasoning for rejecting early pension withdrawal. In letters to departed Hong Kong residents, they point to the changed BNO regulation as a reason for withholding funds. In response to this changed guidance, a May 2023 letter signed by 90 UK Members of Parliament criticized the actions of the Hong Kong government, describing the derecognition of the BNO as retaliation and stating that the “punitive denial of Hong Kongers to access their savings is curtailing the ability of many to start new lives and to prosper and thrive here in the UK.”
扣起香港移民退休金
在港區國公法實施後，為懲罰移居海外的香港人，香港政府拒絕該等人士提取強積金。部份強積金由美國金融機構管理。原則上，當香港居民永久離港移居其他地方，他們可提早提取強積金，該等資金可支付移居的費用。為提取強積金，移居英國的香港人得靠他們的英國國民(海外)護照為主要文件，證明他們海外居留權和啟動強積金提取程序。
然而，積金局於2021年3月宣佈英國國民(海外)護照不可作為提早提取強積金的證明文件。這項規例改動限制超過9萬名以英國國民(海外)護照移居的香港人提取他們的強積金。根據香港政府的數據，人權組織香港監察發現超過215億港元強積金因此被拒絕提取，此等基金由跨國金融機構管理，包括總部在英國的匯豐銀行和總部在美國的保誠集團。海外金融機構管理相當份額的強積金，其中匯豐銀行管理超過三成強積金。
跨國金融機構已明言他們拒絕提早提取強積金的理由。在發給香港人的信中，他們指出英國國民(海外)身份相關規例的改變是扣起強積金的原因。就上述規例改動，90名英國國會成員於2023年5月發出聯署信，批評香港政府的行動，形容港府拒絕承認英國國民(海外)身份為報復行為，此等懲罰性地拒絕香港人提取他們儲蓄的措施限制了很多人到英國展開新生的能力。
Withheld Pensions for Hong Kong Emigres
To penalize Hong Kongers emigrating under a dual passport following imposition of the NSL, Hong Kong’s government is denying access to pensions from the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF), Hong Kong’s pension fund. This fund is managed in part by U.S. financial institutions. In principle, when Hong Kong residents permanently depart Hong Kong to live abroad, they are entitled to early withdrawals from the MPF, money that can be used to cover resettlement costs. To access the MPF fund, Hong Kongers who have departed to the UK have relied on using their British National Overseas (BNO) passports, presenting them as a key document to demonstrate overseas residency and initiate the withdrawal process.
However, in March 2021, MPF authorities announced that BNO passports could no longer be used as documentation to enable
early MPF withdrawal. This change in regulations limits more than 90,000 Hong Kong residents who have emigrated under the
BNO passport from having the necessary documentation to make their withdrawal from the MPF. Based on data from the Hong
Kong government, human rights group Hong Kong Watch finds that these individuals are now being denied over $2.74 billion
(HKD 21.5 billion) in MPF pension funds being held by international banks, including by the UK-headquartered Hong Kong Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) and U.S.-headquartered Prudential. Overseas banks manage much of the MPF, with HSBC managing over 30 percent of funds.
Multinational banks have been clear in their reasoning for rejecting early pension withdrawal. In letters to departed Hong Kong residents, they point to the changed BNO regulation as a reason for withholding funds. In response to this changed guidance, a May 2023 letter signed by 90 UK Members of Parliament criticized the actions of the Hong Kong government, describing the derecognition of the BNO as retaliation and stating that the “punitive denial of Hong Kongers to access their savings is curtailing the ability of many to start new lives and to prosper and thrive here in the UK.”
扣起香港移民退休金
在港區國公法實施後，為懲罰移居海外的香港人，香港政府拒絕該等人士提取強積金。部份強積金由美國金融機構管理。原則上，當香港居民永久離港移居其他地方，他們可提早提取強積金，該等資金可支付移居的費用。為提取強積金，移居英國的香港人得靠他們的英國國民(海外)護照為主要文件，證明他們海外居留權和啟動強積金提取程序。
然而，積金局於2021年3月宣佈英國國民(海外)護照不可作為提早提取強積金的證明文件。這項規例改動限制超過9萬名以英國國民(海外)護照移居的香港人提取他們的強積金。根據香港政府的數據，人權組織香港監察發現超過215億港元強積金因此被拒絕提取，此等基金由跨國金融機構管理，包括總部在英國的匯豐銀行和總部在美國的保誠集團。海外金融機構管理相當份額的強積金，其中匯豐銀行管理超過三成強積金。
跨國金融機構已明言他們拒絕提早提取強積金的理由。在發給香港人的信中，他們指出英國國民(海外)身份相關規例的改變是扣起強積金的原因。就上述規例改動，90名英國國會成員於2023年5月發出聯署信，批評香港政府的行動，形容港府拒絕承認英國國民(海外)身份為報復行為，此等懲罰性地拒絕香港人提取他們儲蓄的措施限制了很多人到英國展開新生的能力。
我認為幫民建聯派過傳單都要制裁先夠阻嚇力
全部人唔俾拎咪解決問題
如果好似美帝咁有集體訴訟, 腥港政苦應該一早食哂屎啦....
不斷更多呢事件再一次覺得自己好彩冇走早到。
一毫子都冇益到呢個港共軍政廳
一毫子都冇益到呢個港共軍政廳
推
反而
佢講道理你就唔洗走啦
唔洗浪費時間
唔洗浪費時間
講一句就得架啦。大佬，中國黎架
越諗越嬲，我仲要兩公婆咁多年都係供緊佢嘅上限，夾埋差不多兩球！
係咪應該學其他巴打，開盤話如果攞得返，呢個po留言嘅巴打每人派一舊水？
係咪應該學其他巴打，開盤話如果攞得返，呢個po留言嘅巴打每人派一舊水？
告完佢用國安法告返你轉頭都得 你告唔告
遲啲將「尋釁滋事罪」好似黨安法咁引入香港，睇下邊個仲去申請司法覆核？
行動post?
係保險公司班擦鞋on9呀。。。畀曬保險公司個board，班高層啲名佢地慢慢玩
要制裁就梗係制裁啲商家佬好啦，佢地啲家人一齊瀨，咁就super啦。
個plan 係留嚟預你退休，
如果你只係出去一轉會返去，咁唔俾拎就正常，
只係個重點變咗好政治，
以前係宣誓話返大陸就拎到，
而家係有齊外國visa 都拎唔到，
因為visa 唔代表係入籍，過咗期可能趕人，
聽聞最慘係有啲拎咗綠卡又話唔俾，
如果你只係出去一轉會返去，咁唔俾拎就正常，
只係個重點變咗好政治，
以前係宣誓話返大陸就拎到，
而家係有齊外國visa 都拎唔到，
因為visa 唔代表係入籍，過咗期可能趕人，
聽聞最慘係有啲拎咗綠卡又話唔俾，