Temasek’s NIRC less than Budget surplus?

I refer to the 2 full-page colour advertisements by Temasek in the Sunday Times of 29 July.

One of the charts indicate that the Net Investment Return Contribution (NIRC) from MAS, GIC and Temasek was about $15.9$14.1 and $14.4 billion in 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

Since there is no breakdown – let us assume that Temasek’s contribution is about one-third – i.e. $5.3, $4.7 and $4.8 billion for the three years.

The overall Budget surplus  was $9.6, $6.12 and $5.2 billion, for the three years, respectively.

(Note: I had some difficulty finding the estimated and revised overall Budget surpluses in history – so, I have provided the links where I obtained the figures above)

So, does it mean that from a cashflow perspective – arguably, Temasek in a sense, never returned any money to help Singaporeans – if their annual contributions to the NIRC were less than the overall Budget surpluses?

At the Singapore Perspectives conference in January 2018 – the Finance Minister showed charts which stated “Major revenue – FY2016 Revised: $83 Billion” “Social spending now forms largest share – FY2016 Revised $71 Billion”.

So, does it mean that the Budget surplus for FY2016 Revised was $12 billion ($83 – $71 billion)?

Is this the largest Budget surplus (before one-time transfers to trust and endowment funds?) ever in the history of Singapore?


Leong Sze Hian



Sponsored Content

4 Responses to “Temasek’s NIRC less than Budget surplus?”

  • LIONS:

    Temasek HOLE-dungs?

    GD Star Rating
  • consensus by manipulation:

    they dont use their own money.. they take from the rest of society by increasing GST, taxes and redistribute it … dream on….

    GD Star Rating
  • oxygen:

    @LSH, THIS IS PRECISELY WHY the growing size of investment portfolio in our SWFs is NOT A MEASURE of (pretentious) wealth achievement in asset management.

    PAPpy News Publishing would like to paint a glossy misleading read to dumbfarked peasants.


    GD Star Rating
  • HarderTruths:

    I cam also say that GIC Temasek and MAS are in debt and the figures represent not real assets but borrowed money from CPF etc. to fudge the figures.

    I believe my theory is close to the mark.

    GD Star Rating

Leave a Reply

 characters available

Member Services
Members LoginSelf-ClassifiedsSelf-Support
Sponsored Advertisement

Search On TR Emeritus
Sponsored Advertisement

Most Recent Comments
  • LIONS: Well,bro leong,RESERVES here are used *secretLEE* to pay PIG$ N PIGLET$ BIG FAT SALARIES N BONUSES N TO...
  • LIONS: That SAW PAIK CHOO was really something. Will she get a TOP NATIONAL DAY AWARD for creating such a huge mess...
  • LIONS: Lets STOP PRETENDING. Good to witness THE *HEART* TRUTH OF LEE AH LONG’$ FTs. Never mind lah pls welcome...
  • TUCK WAN: A clown is a clown. Guessing and Gasing sound the same only difference is exist point. Top or Bottom .
  • I'm Halimah also jiak liao bee: Like you, I also sold my car and switch to public transport to impress. and guess...
  • more Ammos now,: Seems the Amos spirit blossom across the island. Favourite slang not horrible is dead but shitb...
  • Asd: Y y y… bcos u ask for it la
  • Not patriotic but moneyatric 2: envy, greed n self gratification creamed withvself glorification on hot air. As a...
  • Not patriotic but moneyatric: When SW Goh rationalised why he n the ministers should be paid equal if not more than...
  • PC Ong: CEO Neo set a good example. Only by experiencing what commuters do (ie. walk the ground) he can better...
  • Perspective: The public transportation is definitely overly crowded during peak hours. Passengers pay for their ride...
Visitors Statistic
Latest Statistic