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.
Mr Chan is a relevant employee earning a monthly salary of HK$6,500, which is below the minimum relevant income level. Under the MPF System, what mandatory contribution arrangement applies to him and his employer each month?
A. 僱員及僱主均須各自供款 5%
B. 僱員及僱主均無須供款
C. 僱員無須供款，但僱主仍須按其有關入息的 5% 供款
D. 僱員須供款 5%，但僱主可豁免供款
A. Both the employee and the employer must each contribute 5%
B. Neither the employee nor the employer is required to contribute
C. The employee is not required to contribute, but the employer must still contribute 5% of the employee's relevant income
D. The employee must contribute 5%, but the employer is exempt from contributing
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.