It is very much confusing. One more article is being circulated which attaching for further insight. Pls go through. Prashant
From India, Bhubaneswar
From India, Bhubaneswar
According to the provisions of Employees Provident Funds Scheme, it is very clear
cessation of membership does not arise, once member reached Rs,.6500/, as once
member is member unless he quits the job or settles his account, otherwise
it is mandatory to contribute upto mandatory limit. Regarding basic wages still it is ambiguous, but the as per the privisions of the Act, basic wages is clearly defined
with certain exclusions, which is valid till date.
From India, Hyderabad
cessation of membership does not arise, once member reached Rs,.6500/, as once
member is member unless he quits the job or settles his account, otherwise
it is mandatory to contribute upto mandatory limit. Regarding basic wages still it is ambiguous, but the as per the privisions of the Act, basic wages is clearly defined
with certain exclusions, which is valid till date.
From India, Hyderabad
Hi Monika,
The ceiling limit of PF Eligibility amount Rs.6500/- is not a mandatory rather optional. the PF contribution may be remitted against the employee whose basic is more than Rs. 6500/- and there is no upper wage limitation of basic by mutual agreed by employer & employee both.
And FYI, the present circular as published on 30th Nov, 2012 in the news paper has not been enforced / approved by the concern Govt. authority till the date
regards,
Rajib Mondal,
Dy. Manager-HR,
CIAL, Durgapur
9333563905
From India
1The ceiling limit of PF Eligibility amount Rs.6500/- is not a mandatory rather optional. the PF contribution may be remitted against the employee whose basic is more than Rs. 6500/- and there is no upper wage limitation of basic by mutual agreed by employer & employee both.
And FYI, the present circular as published on 30th Nov, 2012 in the news paper has not been enforced / approved by the concern Govt. authority till the date
regards,
Rajib Mondal,
Dy. Manager-HR,
CIAL, Durgapur
9333563905
From India
Dear Monika,
Still the latest news was not updated by the PF Authority to all concerns.. Although if an employees basic is greater than Rs.6500 and if he need not like to continue , in this case you can show his name as resigned in this month to the PF... and again you can rejoined his name in the register. After rejoin, you can deduct only ESI upto gross Rs.15000 and showing his basic more than Rs.6500, you can show he is exempted from PF...
From India, Chennai
Still the latest news was not updated by the PF Authority to all concerns.. Although if an employees basic is greater than Rs.6500 and if he need not like to continue , in this case you can show his name as resigned in this month to the PF... and again you can rejoined his name in the register. After rejoin, you can deduct only ESI upto gross Rs.15000 and showing his basic more than Rs.6500, you can show he is exempted from PF...
From India, Chennai
you cannot to like that, once member of the fund whenever he joins in new employment he has give form 11 which is mandatory
in which you have furnish previous service details. likewise simply you cannot show them as resigned and new joining and this
also leads legal proceedings aganist employee as well as employer. do not take statutes so easy
edify compliance planners
From India, Hyderabad
in which you have furnish previous service details. likewise simply you cannot show them as resigned and new joining and this
also leads legal proceedings aganist employee as well as employer. do not take statutes so easy
edify compliance planners
From India, Hyderabad
OK
you only considering EPF act and not even looking the other industrial acts so do not even think what you are saying. the reason is if the employee after termination or resign explain your suggestion to EPF deptt., your estt. will be facing the "misrepresentation" case against EPFO and you do not want that.
Stay Cool,
Atom
From India, Phagwara
you only considering EPF act and not even looking the other industrial acts so do not even think what you are saying. the reason is if the employee after termination or resign explain your suggestion to EPF deptt., your estt. will be facing the "misrepresentation" case against EPFO and you do not want that.
Stay Cool,
Atom
From India, Phagwara
To All
Best of knowledge would like to throw light on the above issue . Hope the copy of PF or Circluar released is of any worth.
Any change in the Act or Amendment should be passed from Parliament then only it will be considered till then no need to worry the issue given in the News Paper of Times of India.
Hope you all got my point . Untill Parliament releases the GO untill then it would be continued the same
Regards
B.Anand Kumar
From United Kingdom, London
Best of knowledge would like to throw light on the above issue . Hope the copy of PF or Circluar released is of any worth.
Any change in the Act or Amendment should be passed from Parliament then only it will be considered till then no need to worry the issue given in the News Paper of Times of India.
Hope you all got my point . Untill Parliament releases the GO untill then it would be continued the same
Regards
B.Anand Kumar
From United Kingdom, London
Actually i have informed what the PF Enrollment Officer informed to us when there was an inspection in our organisation. I didnt mention my own ideas...
From India, Chennai
From India, Chennai
Dear All,
This entire week was panic not only to HR commodity but to all working community. I will say that the TOI has created this panic by publishing the article on front page giving broad headline “Save more in PF, take home lower salary every month” and that too without studying all this aspect of EPF&MP Act 1952. The article is misleading with examples which created panic amongst all.
In our CiteHr there are many postings in different threads on this topic. Many viewer viewed the postings. I appreciate the posting by the members but very few discussions I found to be really meaningful.
By this time many experts have given their opinion on this subject. Shri. B.C. Prabhakar, President- Karnataka Employers’ Association who came out with Circular to its members. The said circular is posted in our CiteHr by Shri. Sasidharan Kollery, which is available to us. Shri. Vivek Sang who has posted clipping of Hindu dated 13.12.2012 which says maintain status quo on the circular- said by Union Labour and Employment Minister.
With this, the matter is now clear to all. But still I wish to give some points. This points I wish to give in every thread which I came across on this topic. This may be repeated but helpful in easy understanding.
The Circular in this context is an internal circular giving guidelines to its officers for quasi-judicial proceedings under section 7A. The Sr. 12 in this circular on splitting of wages is an explanation or clarification on the definition of Basic wages which is bit confusing one and probably half way attempt by the officer who signed on his last day of retirement.
There is no mention in this circular as regards to Paragraph 2(f) and or Paragraph 26A. This means both this Paragraph are unchanged.
There is no change in Paragraph 2(f) and or Paragraph 26A. EPFO can not make change in this Paragraph. Any amendment in law can not be done by such kind of internal circular. No one has any right to do it.
The said paragraphs are given below for ready reference:
Paragraph 2(f) of the EPF scheme defines an excluded employee as an employee whose pay at the time he is otherwise entitled to become a member of the Fund, exceeds Rs. 6,500/- per month. The explanation to the paragraph defines the pay to include basic wages with D.A, Retainers allowance if any and cash value of food concession admissible thereon.
Paragraph 26A which contains the provisions with regard to retention of PF membership stipulates that where a monthly pay of a member exceeds Rs.6500/- per month the contribution payable by him and in respect of such employee by the employer, shall be limited to the amounts payable on a monthly pay of Rs.6500/- including D.A, Retention Allowance if any and cash value of food concession.
The question of whether the allowances should be taken into account for the purpose of PF contribution is still pending adjudication before the Supreme Court.
According to me the inclusion of all allowances for the purpose of EPF contribution will not affect much to majority. It will affect to those who are paying basic less than minimum wage rate.
Hope, now there remain no doubts in the mind of any body.
Thank and regards.
Keshav Korgaonkar
From India, Mumbai
This entire week was panic not only to HR commodity but to all working community. I will say that the TOI has created this panic by publishing the article on front page giving broad headline “Save more in PF, take home lower salary every month” and that too without studying all this aspect of EPF&MP Act 1952. The article is misleading with examples which created panic amongst all.
In our CiteHr there are many postings in different threads on this topic. Many viewer viewed the postings. I appreciate the posting by the members but very few discussions I found to be really meaningful.
By this time many experts have given their opinion on this subject. Shri. B.C. Prabhakar, President- Karnataka Employers’ Association who came out with Circular to its members. The said circular is posted in our CiteHr by Shri. Sasidharan Kollery, which is available to us. Shri. Vivek Sang who has posted clipping of Hindu dated 13.12.2012 which says maintain status quo on the circular- said by Union Labour and Employment Minister.
With this, the matter is now clear to all. But still I wish to give some points. This points I wish to give in every thread which I came across on this topic. This may be repeated but helpful in easy understanding.
The Circular in this context is an internal circular giving guidelines to its officers for quasi-judicial proceedings under section 7A. The Sr. 12 in this circular on splitting of wages is an explanation or clarification on the definition of Basic wages which is bit confusing one and probably half way attempt by the officer who signed on his last day of retirement.
There is no mention in this circular as regards to Paragraph 2(f) and or Paragraph 26A. This means both this Paragraph are unchanged.
There is no change in Paragraph 2(f) and or Paragraph 26A. EPFO can not make change in this Paragraph. Any amendment in law can not be done by such kind of internal circular. No one has any right to do it.
The said paragraphs are given below for ready reference:
Paragraph 2(f) of the EPF scheme defines an excluded employee as an employee whose pay at the time he is otherwise entitled to become a member of the Fund, exceeds Rs. 6,500/- per month. The explanation to the paragraph defines the pay to include basic wages with D.A, Retainers allowance if any and cash value of food concession admissible thereon.
Paragraph 26A which contains the provisions with regard to retention of PF membership stipulates that where a monthly pay of a member exceeds Rs.6500/- per month the contribution payable by him and in respect of such employee by the employer, shall be limited to the amounts payable on a monthly pay of Rs.6500/- including D.A, Retention Allowance if any and cash value of food concession.
The question of whether the allowances should be taken into account for the purpose of PF contribution is still pending adjudication before the Supreme Court.
According to me the inclusion of all allowances for the purpose of EPF contribution will not affect much to majority. It will affect to those who are paying basic less than minimum wage rate.
Hope, now there remain no doubts in the mind of any body.
Thank and regards.
Keshav Korgaonkar
From India, Mumbai
Find answers from people who have previously dealt with business and work issues similar to yours - Please Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query.
Epfo-circular-d t-23-sept-2016- declaration-for m-new-form-11.p df