Informácie Sociálnej poisťovne o II. pilieri
sú jednostranné a nemožno ich považovať za objektívne. V otázke
budúcich výnosov sú dokonca zavádzajúce. História výkonnosti akciových trhov
ukazuje, že pravidelné sporenie pri dlhodobom investovaní prinieslo rast
hodnoty úspor, povedal pre The Slovak Spectator dňa 29.6. 2009 Radovan Ďurana
z INESS.
ONLY A FEW days remain for participants in the
privately-managed second pension pillar to freely transfer back to the
pay-as-you-go component of Slovakia’s old-age pension system. Though a lot of
campaigning has gone on, it appears that history will not record any mass
exodus among the 1.5 million people who are saving for their retirement in
Slovakia’s second pillar, which was initiated by the previous centre-right government.
During the voluntary opt-out period, the Labour Ministry, the government-run
social insurer Sociálna Poisťovňa and private pension fund management companies
have all swamped citizens with brochures vigorously arguing the pros and cons
of staying in the second pillar.
The director of Sociálna Poisťovňa, Dušan Muňko, sent a
letter to about half a million people warning them of what he believes are the
risks associated with the second pillar. The Labour Ministry has also been
intensively engaged in what it calls a campaign to balance the one-sided and
biased promotion that the private fund management companies waged before the
second pillar was launched. And, the pension fund management companies
responded by distributing their own leaflets suggesting that it is the
ministry’s campaign which is misleading the public. By June 24,
approximately 26,000 participants had left the second pillar since last
November and about 9,500 people had newly joined, according to information
provided to the media by Muňko.
The government ordered the second pillar to be ‘reopened’
between November 15 last year and June 30, offering current participants the
opportunity to voluntarily opt-out and transfer their pension savings back to
the first pillar.
Normally such transfers would incur a penalty. The second
pillar had also been opened between January and June 2008 and during that time
more than 103,000 people left – and over 21,000 joined – the privately-managed
second pillar.
The second pillar has been seen as a thorn in its side by
the government of Prime Minister Robert Fico, who has repeatedly cited the
global economic downturn and what he has called the endangered savings of
second-pillar participants as the reasons for tampering with the current setup.
In May, Fico indirectly inserted the World Bank into the
campaigning when he said that it had recommended reductions in contributions to
the second pillar in Slovakia. Fico referred to statements that, according to
him and Labour Minister Viera Tomanová, a World Bank representative made to a
conference focusing on the operation of pension systems in times of economic
crisis.
The Slovak Association of the Pension Fund Management
Companies (ADSS) then published a letter signed by Shigeo Katsu, vice president
for the World Bank’s Europe and Central Asia Region, suggesting the contrary.
The World Bank wrote that while it understands that
countries under severe fiscal duress might need to resort to sub-optimal
responses, “we have serious reservations about prolonged second pillar rate
reductions especially when combined with a voluntary opt-out,” according to the
letter that the Sme daily published on its website.
“Our broader messages are twofold: we would advise
governments to avoid the temptation to respond hastily and make decisions now
that are better made once more information is available on the depth and the
duration of the economic downturn and to keep the focus on long-run challenges
of putting in place a fiscally affordable pension system given the demographic
trends in Slovakia and many other countries in Central and Eastern Europe which
would require parametric changes to the pay-as-you-go system,” Katsu’s letter
continued.
Minister Tomanová responded by accusing the ADSS of
manipulating international institutions.
“They are shamelessly dragging international institutions
into this conflict, whether I talk about the International Labour Organization,
the International Social Security Association or other institutions,” said
Tomanová, as quoted by the TASR newswire.
The letter that the World Bank wrote to ADSS will not
influence the ministry’s policies in any way, the spokesman for the Labour
Ministry, Michal Stuška, told The Slovak Spectator.
“The ministry in its decision-making is not influenced by
correspondence which happens between third parties,” Stuška said. “However, the
ministry always minimally takes note of different recommendations by relevant
European institutions and authorities or discusses these at all the relevant
forums.”
However, according to Stuška, the ministry does not plan to
apply recommendations recently presented by different institutions in this
area.
“The clear content of the communication of the Slovak prime
minister and the labour minister was pointing at the openness of the discussion
on the topic of pension systems at the international level, which is in sharp
contrast with the local dimension and the objectiveness of discussion on the
topic since the launch of pension reform in Slovakia,” Stuška said. He
confirmed that the ministry is not proposing to make a change in the ratio of
transfers to the pay-as-you-go system and to the second pillar. It would
contradict the programme of the government, he said.
The state insurer, Sociálna Poisťovňa, drafted its current
budget on the assumption that about 150,000 people would heed its warnings and
return to the first pillar. However, it is now clear that this projection will
not be met.
“It’s necessary to repeatedly warn that the interpretation
offered by media that the Labour Ministry is trying to meet a sort of general
plan of making people quit the second pillar is not correct,” Stuška said. “A
certain pay-off of the debt towards citizens from the times of the one-sided
campaign run at the time of the installation of the reform is necessary so that
at least during the time of opening of the system they are able to make more
responsible decisions.”
Stuška said that the basic interest of the ministry has
been, and remains, that pension-savers who do not have the chance to actively
participate in the second pillar for at least 30 years would leave the system
during its open period.
“The assumption is that this goal will be met,” said Stuška,
adding that “it also considers the decision of remaining in the second pillar
to be a personal decision of each saver.”
The social insurer’s shortfall
“From a short-term
point of view the shortfall in the income of Sociálna Poisťovňa might be around
Sk5 billion {about €166 million],” Radovan Ďurana of the economic think-tank
INESS told The Slovak Spectator. “These finances have been budgeted for the
payment of old-age pensions but the insurer will miss them and thus the state
will have to transfer money to the insurer so that it can meet its
obligations.”
As for the long-term
impact, Ďurana said that fewer people will be contributing to the pay-as-you-go
system and thus the shortfall to Sociálna Poisťovňa from the contributions
linked to the existence of the second pillar will be larger as well.
“It would, in the
long-term, increase the demands for subsidising the insurer, until the moment
when savers retire,” Ďurana said. “Their participation in the second pillar
would then cut the expenses of the insurer.”
However, the social insurer has argued that savers who
remain loyal to the second pillar are sticking to a risk of 70 percent losses
with their pension savings invested in the financial and capital market.
“The information that
Sociálna Poisťovňa provides about the second pillar is one-sided and cannot be
considered objective,” Ďurana said. “The issue of future revenues is even
misleading. The history of the performance of capital markets shows that
regular savings with long-term investments have increased the value of
savings.”
The
Slovak Spectator, 29 Jun 2009, Beata Balogová
