Hi Rohit,
EPF and NPS are two different schemes, and you cannot transfer funds between them. EPF is maintained by the employer, and NPS is a self-financed fund.
Regarding salaries above 6500, please note that the cap for 6500 is for the contribution amount from the employer, i.e., the employer is not liable to pay to your PF fund more than 12% of 6500. However, an employee can, on a "Voluntary Basis," contribute more than 12%. Insist with your HR that you have a PF account and would like to continue the same.
Another point to note is that the transfer of PF from one company to another was a cumbersome process, but I believe EPFO has now made it available online. Please check on their website.
It appears your company, like many in India, places the basic at a higher side to avoid paying PF. Your HR may not be aware of the legal obligations, but your MD/CEO likely is aware that it is their obligation to continue your PF upon request. They may prefer to avoid the PF submission and related bureaucracy.
Companies that do not wish to have PF typically obtain written confirmation from all employees stating their preference not to subscribe to PF. My advice is to rally a few more employees to request inclusion in PF. Here are some excellent resources from people I follow. Read them and share with your friends and colleagues:
- [Anand's Blog: All Your Questions about Employee Provident Fund - Answered!!!](http://anandvijayakumar.blogspot.com/2013/04/all-your-questions-about-employee.html)
- [Anand's Blog: Employee Provident Fund - Demystified](http://anandvijayakumar.blogspot.com/2013/03/employee-provident-fund-demystified.html)
I have heard from my sources that the government might soon change the employer contribution and the definition of the basic salary, making PF compulsory for all employers. This is good news for employees, and I am eagerly awaiting this development. Here is a link for more information on what I mentioned:
- [New PF contribution rule may reduce your take-home salary | Wealth18.com](http://wealth18.com/new-pf-contribution-rule-may-reduce-your-take-home-salary/)
In short, I urge all young workers between the ages of 18 to 32 not to forgo the PF options while negotiating their salary. Your take-home pay may be less, but in your retirement years, you will reap the benefits.
Wishing you good luck.
Ukmitra
From Saudi Arabia, Riyadh
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
306EPF and NPS are two different schemes, and you cannot transfer funds between them. EPF is maintained by the employer, and NPS is a self-financed fund.
Regarding salaries above 6500, please note that the cap for 6500 is for the contribution amount from the employer, i.e., the employer is not liable to pay to your PF fund more than 12% of 6500. However, an employee can, on a "Voluntary Basis," contribute more than 12%. Insist with your HR that you have a PF account and would like to continue the same.
Another point to note is that the transfer of PF from one company to another was a cumbersome process, but I believe EPFO has now made it available online. Please check on their website.
It appears your company, like many in India, places the basic at a higher side to avoid paying PF. Your HR may not be aware of the legal obligations, but your MD/CEO likely is aware that it is their obligation to continue your PF upon request. They may prefer to avoid the PF submission and related bureaucracy.
Companies that do not wish to have PF typically obtain written confirmation from all employees stating their preference not to subscribe to PF. My advice is to rally a few more employees to request inclusion in PF. Here are some excellent resources from people I follow. Read them and share with your friends and colleagues:
- [Anand's Blog: All Your Questions about Employee Provident Fund - Answered!!!](http://anandvijayakumar.blogspot.com/2013/04/all-your-questions-about-employee.html)
- [Anand's Blog: Employee Provident Fund - Demystified](http://anandvijayakumar.blogspot.com/2013/03/employee-provident-fund-demystified.html)
I have heard from my sources that the government might soon change the employer contribution and the definition of the basic salary, making PF compulsory for all employers. This is good news for employees, and I am eagerly awaiting this development. Here is a link for more information on what I mentioned:
- [New PF contribution rule may reduce your take-home salary | Wealth18.com](http://wealth18.com/new-pf-contribution-rule-may-reduce-your-take-home-salary/)
In short, I urge all young workers between the ages of 18 to 32 not to forgo the PF options while negotiating their salary. Your take-home pay may be less, but in your retirement years, you will reap the benefits.
Wishing you good luck.
Ukmitra
From Saudi Arabia, Riyadh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
As I understand, your employer is not willing to contribute to the employer's PF portion. I would suggest you can invest your savings into the Public Provident Fund (PPF). You will be entitled to Sec 80C if applicable. In PPF, only your contribution is applicable, and you can take advances as well in the future. Moreover, I would recommend that if you want, you can withdraw money from the old PF account and deposit it in the PPF account. After all, the objective of saving for our future needs is important, where PPF is a typical retirement product.
Regards,
RAVI.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Regards,
RAVI.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Seems to be a logical answer, especially one should know that in EPF, even the Govt. pays 1.16% for the pension fund, which is not available in any other scheme. The rate of interest also till now has been good. So as suggested by Sh Mitra don't let your EPF go.
From India, Moradabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Moradabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
HC All - Trainees not covered for PF -2010.pdf
PF Ledger.xls