Blog

[SINGAPORE] The proposed S$2.2 billion deal involving the sale of Singapore’s Income Insurance to German insurer Allianz – which the government eventually called off – was a major talking point during the 2025 General Election campaigning.

Here is a recap of what happened:

Jul 17, 2024: Allianz offered to buy a majority stake in Income Insurance for around 1.5 billion euros, or S$2.2 billion.

• Allianz said it would offer S$40.58 per share for 51 per cent of the shares in Income Insurance. The German insurer projected that Income could return some S$1.85 billion in cash to its shareholders within the first three years after the transaction’s completion.

• At the time, 72.8 per cent of Income was owned by National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) Enterprise Co-operative Limited, with the rest held by institutional and retail investors.

• Income had been a public non-listed company limited by shares since a 2022 corporatisation exercise that transformed the insurance business of NTUC Income Insurance Co-operative into Income Insurance.

Jul 23-Aug 5, 2024: The deal raised questions over whether the proposed sale would be at odds with NTUC labour unions’ aim to provide affordable insurance.

• On Jul 30, NTUC Enterprise said that Income’s social enterprise model alone is not sufficient to shoulder growth in Singapore’s competitive insurance environment.

• On Aug 5, NTUC’s secretary-general Ng Chee Meng and president K Thanaletchimi released a joint statement explaining that Income needed adequate capital to remain financially stable. “As a shareholder, NTUC Enterprise will continue to support Income. But it cannot do so alone,” they said.

Aug 6, 2024: The issue was debated in Parliament, with Members of Parliament raising questions about the affordability and accessibility of insurance for the mass market. 

• The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) expected Income to fulfil its obligations to all policyholders under the terms of its existing insurance contracts and would hold Income and Allianz to these commitments, said Second Minister for Finance and MAS board member Chee Hong Tat in Parliament.

• Chee also said that MAS’ regulations and guidance require insurers to maintain sufficient capital reserves and treat customers of participating policies fairly.

After Aug 6, 2024: The Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) continued with due diligence and inquired further into the proposed deal. MAS provided the ministry with more details including Income’s capital optimisation plan, as the regulator felt it could be relevant to the ministry’s views on the deal. MCCY had not seen this information earlier.

Oct 14, 2024: The Allianz-Income deal was called off in Parliament, as the Singapore government assessed that it was “not in the public interest” for the proposed transaction to proceed in its form. 

• “Our concern is only over the terms and structure of this specific transaction, particularly in the context of the preceding corporatisation exercise,” said Culture, Community and Youth Minister Edwin Tong in a statement. The government was still open to any new arrangement which Income may wish to pursue, whether with Allianz or other partners, as long as the concerns were fully addressed, he added.

• In a Facebook post, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong also said that the government’s concerns were over the structure and terms of the offer, but that it remained open “to a new deal that Income may pursue with Allianz or other partners, so long as our concerns are fully addressed”.

Oct 16, 2024: Parliament passed an amendment to the Insurance Act, requiring MAS to consider MCCY’s views when approving transactions involving insurers with cooperative roots. 

Nov 14, 2024: Income and Allianz said in a bourse filing that discussions over the deal for a majority stake acquisition in the Singapore insurer were still ongoing, even after the government veto.

Dec 16, 2024: Allianz officially withdrew its offer for a stake in Income, citing respect for the Singapore government’s decision and emphasising its financial discipline.

Apr 26, 2025: Workers’ Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh resurfaced the failed Income-Allianz deal at the party’s second election rally, saying that no People’s Action Party (PAP) labour MP had filed questions or spoke during the debate in Parliament when the issue was tabled.

• “Elected PAP MPs who champion NTUC… should fight hard in Parliament when NTUC issues are raised, particularly issues that Singaporeans are concerned about,” Singh said.

Apr 27, 2025: Labour chief Ng, who stood as a candidate for Jalan Kayu SMC, addressed at a PAP rally how the Allianz-Income deal was done in “good faith” and complied with legal regulations.

• “In NTUC, we will do our best, and sometimes I’m sorry that it’s not good enough. But we will learn the right lessons and we will do better,” he said.

Apr 27, 2025: Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong said that he did not blame Ng or the labour party for the Income-Allianz deal that fell through. In a PAP rally speech, he flagged how the WP had abstained from voting on a Bill to amend a law that would allow the government to block the deal.

Apr 28, 2025: Speaking to media, Singh said that SM Lee sidestepped the point he had raised about the absence of PAP labour MPs weighing in on the matter. While six PAP MPs and one WP MP had raised questions, the ratio of PAP MPs to WP MPs was about nine to one, he explained. 

Apr 28, 2025: At a WP rally, Harpreet Singh, who was a candidate in the party’s Punggol GRC team, sought accountability from the PAP regarding Deputy Prime Minister Gan Kim Yong’s involvement in the Income-Allianz deal.

Apr 29, 2025: MAS chairman and DPM Gan clarified that the focus of the Income-Allianz deal was on the transfer of ownership and not capital extraction when MAS saw the proposal in July. He spoke on the sidelines of a walkabout in Punggol GRC and addressed the issue alongside the rest of the PAP slate for the constituency. PM Wong was also present.

• DPM Gan stressed that the S$2.2 billion stake sale was the key transaction for which MAS had to ensure that liquidity and capital adequacy requirements were met.

• There were “steps and processes in place” for Income to have enough capital to meet MAS’ requirements, in the event Allianz wished to withdraw capital from the Singapore insurer, he added.