Saththaram points out that we are facing a massive opportunity cost because social security remains under the civil service system. He worries that insured individuals will lose out and jabs that none of the social security executives rely on social security pensions.
On 29 Jan 2026 GMT+7, Associate Professor Dr. Saththaram Thambutsadee, a faculty member at the College of Interdisciplinary Studies, Thammasat University, spoke after participating in the seminar "Looking at the Future of Social Security Investment" at The Society, Gaysorn Tower. He said he believes everyone has questions about social security, which is the country's largest investment portfolio, now approaching nearly 3 trillion baht, with Thai stock trades in the hundreds of billions.
However, today's event was not intended to expose or reveal scandals, as the public already has an overall picture. What he wants to emphasize is that there is a solution, and currently, we face a huge opportunity cost because social security is under the civil service system. Today, he compares it with large, efficient pension funds worldwide—from Norway, South Korea, and Malaysia—that have faced similar crises but could solve them by being honest and reviewing their systems. He outlined a vision for removing social security from the civil service system in the future to improve investment crisis resolution, efficiency, and returns more aligned with insured members.
The new structure would still include entities under government agencies, similar to the Bank of Thailand, the Government Pension Fund, or Thai PBS television station, resembling a hybrid model. On the other hand, it would democratize governance—not privatization—but return power of oversight and management to the public board. Efforts are underway to promote this new structure, where social security is a participatory organization with direct board elections but remains under the civil service framework. For example, Thai PBS receives government funding but lacks public participation. The new structure aims for genuine public involvement.
Asked about changes to investment formats, Dr. Saththaram said the social security investment plan had previously approved a 40% allocation to high-risk assets. The board has approved this, but due to bureaucratic procedures, it will take about 15 months, meaning the new portfolio proportions will take effect in 2028, shifting to 50% high-risk and 50% low-risk assets. This delay represents a significant opportunity cost from being under the civil service system, as it prevents adjustment of the portfolio to international standards.
"Social security investment is intergenerational, meaning investing today to generate pension funds 20-30 years later. Therefore, the portfolio should not require high discretion but must be transparent, clear, and based on sound choices today to yield correct returns decades ahead. Being under the civil service system causes insured individuals to lose this opportunity. But remember, none of the social security executives will use social security pensions; only the insured lose out by not receiving adequate efficiency," he said.
Dr. Saththaram added that over the past two years, a new Strategic Asset Allocation (SAA) system has been implemented, producing positive effects. However, this coincided with a rising bond market, which improved portfolio appearance. For a 20-30 year horizon, one cannot rely solely on luck or market miracles; long-term investment planning must be done properly, independently, and aligned with insured members' interests.
He personally believes there is no better moment than now, with the upcoming election on 8 Feb, to address this. He has seen consensus among many political parties that social security reform is urgent. For example, the Prachachon Party has pledged to remove social security from the civil service system within 90+10 days. The Pheu Thai Party’s Dr. Prommin Lertsuridej has also stated that the Medical Council allows board elections.
Regarding social security elections, where one person votes for seven representatives, he questioned why this can't be done. Two political parties have officially discussed this. He hopes Mr. Yotsanan Wongsawat, Pheu Thai’s prime ministerial candidate, will confirm this. He also urges the Bhumjaithai Party, as a major political force, to reach an official consensus, which would help the 20 million insured—who are voters—to consider this. The key now is to have a government and at least 250 MPs to push this forward.
When asked how the funds can be invested to grow, Dr. Saththaram said social security manages its own funds, with the government only managing civil servant payroll funds, which is a small fraction. The largest portion comes from wages of general employees, contributing over 5 billion baht annually. He believes fairness must be given to social security staff not involved in procurement. Clearly, the 5 billion baht payroll budget can be cut. Besides staff wages, there is also over 1 billion baht per year for IT, about half of which is maintenance costs.
Improving IT efficiency, such as adopting a cloud-first system supported by the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society, could reduce redundant purchases and maintenance costs, saving budget. If social security is removed from the civil service system, administrative expenses could be cut from a 10% ceiling to 3%, which he believes is still manageable for social security to operate.
Regarding the Social Security Office deputy spokesperson's statement on television that the average employee wage is about 80 baht per person, he noted that economies of scale—basic economic principles—mean such per capita averages cannot fully explain costs. Some systems are designed for unlimited users. For example, questions arise about IT procurement and budget requests, but exact per-user cost data is often unavailable. He believes the focus should be on whether each budget item is used efficiently, citing examples like calendars and suits.
(File photo)