The retirement number won't add up, and passive income is anyone's guess

Just how much liquid wealth one must save before daring to put down work — Hong Kong's middle class argues endlessly over the figure, with some saying HK$10 million and others shouting HK$300 million, a startlingly wide gap. Many residents point out that they pin their retirement security on passive-income estimates like a '4% yield', only to find it hard to come by a credible, down-to-earth calculation framework, often left to add and subtract by feel.

Behind this is a structural gap in local retirement financial planning: the market lacks neutral, non-sales-driven income-stream models, and variables like tax-free yields, dividend tax for non-US persons, and the living-cost differences of cross-border retirement are seldom handled in an integrated way, leaving residents to piece things together on their own. Add doubts over the long-term purchasing power of Hong Kong property and the Hong Kong dollar, and even fallback options like retiring to Southeast Asia or the mainland involve hidden costs such as water quality and healthcare, making decisions even harder to converge.

When security is reduced to a single, repeatedly overturned number, what it reflects is the long-standing void of credible planning tools and independent financial advice in the mass market.