320 likes | 481 Views
ACTUARIAL AND FINANCIAL REVIEW OF THE GENERAL PENSION SCHEME OF LUXEMBOURG. 15 February 2001 The International Financial and Actuarial Service (ILO-FACTS) ILO Social Protection Sector. Structure of the presentation. 0. International comparison 1. Assumptions of the valuation
E N D
ACTUARIAL AND FINANCIAL REVIEW OF THEGENERAL PENSION SCHEME OF LUXEMBOURG 15 February 2001 The International Financial and Actuarial Service (ILO-FACTS) ILO Social Protection Sector
Structure of the presentation 0. International comparison 1. Assumptions of the valuation 2. Status quo results Scenario 1 Scenario 2 3. Alternative reform options 4. Conclusions and recommendations
International comparison- retirement 65 years old with 40 years contribution
Status quo results 1. Scenario 1 (a) Demographic ratio (b) Financial ratio (c) PAYG cost rate (d) Reserves and funding ratio 2. Scenario 2 (a) Demographic ratio (b) Financial ratio (c) PAYG cost rate (d) Reserves and funding ratio
Summary of Financial situation- Status quo 1. Sound financial situation at present, but sensitive to assumptions, especially economic ones (a)Scenario 1 Contribution rate increase necessary after 2050 (b)Scenario 2 Contribution rate increase necessary after 2010 2. Financial situation deteriorates in the second half of the projection period because of demographic reasons - Relatively large cohort of residents at present between the age of 30 – 34 - Higher number of pensioners because of present commuters
Alternative reform options 1.Parametric reform options 1.1 Yearly adjustment of pensions 1.2 Increase in the level of pensions 1.3 Payment of a thirteenth pension 1.4 Unspecified increase of payment 1.5 Higher weight to contribution periods close to retirement 1.6 Change of retirement age 1.7 Reduced invalidity incidence rates
Alternative reform options 2. Systemic reform proposals 2.1 Bonus accounts 2.2 Two-tier pension scheme (introducing DC scheme) 2.3 Value added contribution (VAC)
Introduction of two-tier pension scheme (DC scheme) Assumptions 1. Introduction In the year 2010 2. Contribution rate (a) First pillar (DB scheme) 18% (b) Second pillar (DC scheme) 6% 3. Financial transfers between the two pillars in case of invalidity and survivorship Higher administrative cost in 2nd pillar
Introduction of two-tier pension scheme (DC scheme) (Contd.) 4. Benefits (a) First pillar (DB pillar) - Old-age pensions annual accrual rate of 1.28% (instead of 1.78% at present) - Invalidity and survivors’ pensions same as the present scheme (b) Second pillar (DC pillar) - Old-age pensions only annual amount calculated by dividing accrued individual amount by unisex life expectancy
Value added contribution (VAC) Why: 1.Compensation of fiscal effects of decrease oflabourincome share in GDP 2. Possible increasein employment level Problems: 1. Results of research are inconclusive 2. Employment effects marginal 3. Lobbying for exemptions is highly probable 4. Administrative problems not yet solved or unclear 5. Loosen ownership rights of employers’ contributions 6. Introduction only possible in a concerted international action Conclusions: Presently not recommendable and not necessary
Conclusions andrecommendations 1. Financial situation of the scheme - Sound financial situation - Sensitive to assumptions, especially economic ones - Future demographic pressure on the scheme in eitherscenario
Conclusions andrecommendations (Contd.) 2. Recommendations – ‘‘DO’’s and ‘‘DON’T’’s - DO adjust benefits on annual basis - DO increase early retirement ageof57 and 60 - DO tighten the eligibility criteria for invalidity pensions after age of 50 - DOprolong the scaled premium period to 10 years with a funding ratio of 2 atits end
Conclusions andrecommendations (Contd.) - DON’Tspend current surpluses andpresently high reserves,except for creating ‘bonus accounts’ - DON’T increase the level of thebenefits e.g. - 10% increase in the flat part and accrual rate of 1.9% instead ofthepresent rate of 1.78% - Thirteenth payment - Higher weights to contribution periods closeto retirement
Conclusions andrecommendations (Contd.) - Introduction of two-tier system has no advantage for the individual. - Introduction of VAC is not necessary from a financial point of view. - It may be a good idea to introduce ‘bonus accounts’ through which ‘windfall profits’ could be distributed.
ACTUARIAL AND FINANCIAL REVIEW OF THEGENERAL PENSION SCHEME OF LUXEMBOURG 15 February 2001 The International Financial and Actuarial Service (ILO-FACTS) ILO Social Protection Sector