Sri Lanka discussing private sector pension, housing benefits from EPF: Minister

EconomyNext reports that Trade, Commerce, Food Security and Cooperative Development Minister Wasantha Samarasinghe said the government was discussing ways to extend benefits available through Sri Lanka’s Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF). EconomyNext says he outlined a possible contributory pension for private-sector workers, medical insurance and housing projects.

EconomyNext reports that Samarasinghe said the EPF is Sri Lanka’s largest single fund, with assets exceeding 6,000 billion rupees, and described it as operating alongside the Employees’ Trust Fund (ETF), which he said collects a three percent contribution. EconomyNext reports that he said the combined contribution rate is 20 percent. He contrasted the ETF’s five-year withdrawal cycle with EPF access at retirement, which he described as age 50 for women and 55 for men.

EconomyNext reports that Samarasinghe said the government wanted EPF benefits to extend beyond retirement withdrawals. He said discussions were examining a contributory pension model for private employees, while protecting the fund’s assets, and referred to low benefit payouts in some sectors, including cooperative services, which he said employs more than 20,000 workers.

EconomyNext reports that Samarasinghe characterised the fund’s past management as involving state borrowing, mismanagement, stock-market losses and Treasury bond controversies. He said the current administration intended to protect EPF assets and improve returns, and urged workers not to panic about management changes, according to EconomyNext.

WhatNews (සිංහල) reports that Samarasinghe spoke about the government’s plans for EPF and ETF at a trade union national conference held on November 7 at P. D. Sirisena Stadium. EconomyNext dates its report to November 7, 2026. Neither EconomyNext nor the other reports gives a timetable or final decision on the proposed benefits.

Written automatically by AI from the outlets’ own reports, and not reviewed by an editor. It can be wrong — the original report is the authority.