170 likes | 339 Views
PENSION REFORM IN BULGARIA – STAGES, GROUNDS AND PHYLOSOPHY Dr. Hassan Ademov Chairman of the Labor and Social Policy Commission of Bulgarian Parliament. PENSION REFORM IN BULGARIA: STAGES. STAGE OF CAUTIOUS PARTIAL REFORMS ( BACKGROUND TO RADICAL REFORMS ) – 1990 – 1999
E N D
PENSION REFORM IN BULGARIA – STAGES, GROUNDS AND PHYLOSOPHY Dr. Hassan AdemovChairman of the Labor and Social Policy Commission of Bulgarian Parliament
PENSION REFORM IN BULGARIA: STAGES • STAGE OF CAUTIOUS PARTIAL REFORMS (BACKGROUND TO RADICAL REFORMS) – 1990 – 1999 • STAGE OF RADICAL REFORMS PER SE – 1999 – 2010 • STAGE OF PROMOTING IDEAS FOR REVISION OR RADICALIZATION OF THE REFORM – 2003 - ?
PENSION REFORM: BACKGROUND • 1990 – 1991 – Generous early retirement schemes; • 1992 – updating pensions and discussing reform possibilities, incl. implementation of the Chilean model; • 1993 – 1994 – “White Book” – reforms in the public pension provision system; • 1994 – Introduction of voluntary pension provision based on the fully funded principle – without regulation; • 1996 – Autonomous pension provision funds and social security institution (NSSI) managed based on the tripartite principle; • 1996 – Pension rate is linked to the social security contribution throughout active life.
RADICAL PENSION REFORM: MOTIVES • Low and almost flat pension size – income replacement rate of 25 – 27 per cent; • Increasing social contributions/ decreasing collection rates; • Low motivation for participation in the public social security system and escape in the shadow economy; • Growing future liabilities and estimated enormous financial deficits.
GROUNDS FOR SUCCESSFUL PENSION REFORM • Political will and commitment backed with widest possible support. • Favorable macro-economic environment. • Favorable social environment. • Institutional capacity, incl. developed IT and communication systems. Actuarial team. • Bridge between the academia and reformers. • Technical and financial support from international institutions. • ActivePR.
PENSION REFORM: PHILOSOPHY Based on the World Bank’s concept for a multipillar social protection system taking into consideration the national traditions and specifics: • Preserving the core role of the solidarity pension system while changing its parameters; • New paradigm – building a well-regulated supplementary privately managed funded pension schemes – both mandatory and voluntary.
Contents of the parametric reforms in solidarity Ist pillar • Universalization: covers all economically active persons and encourages labor mobility; • Supplemented by non-contributory pensions (social, occupational and others) – pillar 0; • Structured in funds – Pensions Fund and Non-Participatory Pensions Fund • Gradually moving early retirement out and into the second pillar; • Stricter pension eligibility rules.
Outcomes of the parametric reforms in the first pillar • Improvement of the dependency ratio – from 104 pensioners to 100 insured in 1999 to 82 pensioners to 100 insured in 2007 • Early retirement is shifted from first to second pillar (transitional period to 2010) • Enlargement of the coverage and the tax basis of the social insurance, including due to the incentives of participation in the second pillar • Improvement of the replacement rate - from 34% in 1999 to 43 in 2007 • Widening of the pension differentiation – from 1 : 3 in 1999 to 1 : 5.5 in 2007
CONTENTS OF THE PENSION REFORM’S SYSTEMATIC PART • Introducing a fully-funded mandatory second pillar with two types of pension funds: • Occupational – for early retirement of people working under arduous labor conditions, funded by the employer; • Universal – for all persons born after 31.12.1959, providing a second life pension, funded through employer and personal contributions; • Regulation of voluntary pension provision (funded IIIrd pillar) with personal or employer contributions. Tax incentives; • Building a regulatory government body – integrated supervision over the non-banking financial sector; • Codifying the social security issues into one single regulatory act – Social Security Code; • Good public-private partnership.
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE SYSTEMATIC PENSION REFORM (THROUGH 31.12.2006) 1 Participation in UPF is mandatory for all persons born after 31.12.1959 (a person may participate simultaneously in all three types of PF) 2 At the end of 2006 pension assets(savings) form 6.4% of the Bulgarian population’s financial wealth.
ADEQUACY OF THE REFORMED PENSION SYSTEM • Access to pension eligibility – almost full coverage of the population. Bottlenecks – high unemployment rate in preretirement age; Income replacement rate from the three pillars (ultimate goal of the reform) – 70 - 80 percent, incl. • From the solidarity Іst pillar – 40 percent; • From the funded IInd pillar – 20 percent; • From the funded IIIrd pillar – 10 – 20 percent. • Current dissatisfaction with the pension levels. Very thrifty pension indexation formula; • Individual accounts, good participation incentives and opportunities for personal choice in the IInd and IIIrd pillar.
Pension reform’s sustainability to the challenges of time Risks relating to the solidarity pillar • Economic risk- negative growth, decline in employment and income rates, real sector bankruptcies, large share of shadow economy; • Demographic risk – worse than projected natural growth rates, new emigration wave and others; • Management risk– simultaneous implementation of reforms – structural, health, military, etc; • Political risk – decisions resulting in new deficits.
Pension reform’s sustainability to the challenges of time Risks regarding the fully-funded pillars • Financial destabilization, bankruptcies and undermining the confidence in the reform; • Bad pension assets management and low rates of return; • Political risk – stopping the reform and regression to the old system; • Institutional risks.
Alternatives to the present pension model Two alternatives are discussed publicly: • Absolutizing the solidarity pillar and restricting the funded schemes only to the voluntary pension savings; • Full privatization of the pension system – Chilean model.
Why the solidarity pension system should not be absolutized • Ageing and emigration put the pensions of the current young generations at a great risk; • No opportunities for personal choice; • Disincentives for participation of young generations; • No assets capitalization.
Why the solidarity system should not be closed down • It is core in almost all developed countries; • The social security contributionof the current generation of workers cannot be annulled; • Issues related to double cost and transition cost; • Bulgaria has signed international agreements for transfer of social security rights. EU Directive 1408; • Social protection of the elderly population cannot become prisoner to the whims of the emerging capital markets.