第1部份：MPF 制度簡介

正確答案 / Correct Answer: B

• 根據《強積金考試溫習資料》第 1.4 節，世界銀行於 1994 年提出的三支柱框架中，第二支柱為「強制性、由私人管理、以足額供款方式運作的供款計劃」，香港強積金制度正是按此設計，屬於第二支柱。即使 2005 年世界銀行將框架擴展為五支柱，強積金仍維持為第二支柱。
• 選項 A 描述的是第一支柱（社會安全網，例如公帑資助的綜援），並非由僱主僱員強制供款的強積金制度；選項 D 的「第四支柱」屬於 2005 年五支柱框架，並非 1994 年三支柱框架的內容，所以不適用於此題。

• According to Section 1.4 of the Study Notes, the World Bank's 1994 three-pillar framework defines Pillar Two as 'a mandatory, privately-managed, fully-funded contribution scheme.' The MPF System was designed precisely on this template and is therefore a Pillar Two system. Even after the World Bank expanded the framework to five pillars in 2005, MPF remains the second pillar.
• Option A describes Pillar One (a publicly-financed safety net such as CSSA), which is not a contribution-based scheme like MPF. Option D refers to Pillar Four under the 2005 five-pillar framework, not the 1994 three-pillar framework referenced in the question.

正確答案 / Correct Answer: C

• 根據《強積金考試溫習資料》第 1.5(b) 節，月入低於有關入息下限（HK$7,100）的有關連僱員無須作出強制性供款，但其僱主仍須按該僱員有關入息的 5% 作出供款。陳先生月薪 HK$6,500 低於下限，故屬此情況：他自己無須供款，僱主仍須供 5%。
• 選項 A 錯誤，因為僱員低於入息下限時可豁免供款；選項 B 錯誤，因為僱主供款責任不會因僱員低於下限而免除；選項 D 倒轉了豁免方向 — 制度設計是保障低收入僱員，故豁免僱員而非僱主。

• Per Section 1.5(b) of the Study Notes, a relevant employee earning less than the minimum relevant income level (HK$7,100/month) is not required to make mandatory contributions, but the employer must still contribute 5% of that employee's relevant income. Mr Chan's HK$6,500 salary falls below the threshold, so he is exempt from contributing while his employer must still contribute 5%.
• Option A is wrong because the employee is exempt below the threshold. Option B is wrong because the employer's obligation does not disappear with the employee's exemption. Option D reverses the exemption direction — the policy protects low-income workers, so it is the employee (not the employer) who is exempt.