“I think this is a good project generates a mixed system, it is not being done against anyone,” Minister Marcel said this Sunday in what is already assumed to be a tense parliamentary discussion. From the Labor Commission of the Chamber they already believe that the 6% charged to the employer and the determination of the state agencies that will be in charge of the investment and administration of the funds could be obstacles to moving forward.
This Sunday afternoon, prior to entering the official conclave, Finance Minister Mario Marcel referred to the need to advance in a pension reform, an idea that had already been presented by his government.
This is the third pension reform project in recent times after the failed attempt under Michelle Bachelet II and the other that also did not see the light of day with Sebastián Piñera II.
“After we have had two failed pension reform projects, I believe that the political system, the social actors and the industry itself cannot afford to have another failed exercise”, the guardian of the fiscal portfolio told the press.
“I think we would send a terrible message to the citizens”, he added, after being reminded that the opposition is already criticizing the entire initiative and the government does not have majorities to bend hand.
What's next for the pension reform?
President Gabriel Boric presented the idea this week on national television.
After that, the full government went out to lower communication.
Now the idea has to officially begin its processing in Congress.
Marcel confirmed that a financial report will be presented, which It will detail what the fiscal costs of the pension reform are.
In addition to that, it also ratified that a productivity report will be presented, documents that will analyze the economic effects of the measure.
“The first days we will have to present the project and then a prolonged period of hearings in which the Work Commission will invite different actors to give their opinion”, he recalled.
One of the aspects that has generated the most news has been the administration of the 6% charged to the employer.
Marcel defended this new component for pensions, pointing to factors that already exist today in day.
“What is being financed with 6% of employers in social security, different from an individual capitalization account”, he commented.
As an example of the above, he spoke of the insurance of disability and survival, “ which is financed with a contribution from employers of the order of 1%. That already exists and is not capitalized, it is an insurance that benefits in case of death or that a survivor's pension has to be paid & # 8221 ;, she added.
“Social Security has the same logic. It is financed with contributions from employers and covers contingencies of people that they cannot individually remedy”, she added.
In this regard, she mentioned the greater life expectancy of women who, when planning a pension for them, they end up with a lower monthly amount.
“What the insurance is going to do, it will compensate that loss (…) I think this is a good project, it generates a mixed system, it is not being done against anyone. Social security in particular is not here to replace individual capitalization, it will continue to be an important part of our system and is even being strengthened”, he closed.
Possible obstacles in the discussion of the pension reform< /h2>
All in all, the reform proposes increasing individual contributions by 0.5 percentage points of the taxable salary, adding the 6% contribution paid by the employer, which will create an “Integrated Pension Fund” and the gradual increase of the Universal Guaranteed Pension (PGU) to $250 thousand.
Although the Government has not announced the official date of entry of the pension reform to the National Congress, deputies of the Labor Commission of the Chamber are already anticipating what aspects could generate obstacles in the discussion of the project.
Al With respect to this, the president of the instance, deputy Alberto Undurraga (DC), announced that there could be two knots in the debate.
The first would be regarding the use that will be given to the 6% charged to the employer, where 70% of the distribution of the contribution will go to the register of individual savings in the collective fund and 30% for the equitable distribution of benefits to current pensioners.
Another controversial point, in his opinion, would be in the determination of the state organisms that will be in charge of the investment and administration of the funds.
For his part, deputy Frank Sauerbaum (RN) accused that the real increase in the Universal Guaranteed Pension will not be effective and that it will only be due to inflation readjustment.
In addition, he declared that the PGU should be dealt with in a different project.
Meanwhile, Deputy Juan Santana (PS) The increase in PGU coverage stood out, which means an increase of 28.9%.
In addition, he indicated that the additional contribution of 6% charged to the employer will result in a real increase in pensions, which is close to the social justice that was sought.
Between next week or the following week, the entry of the reform to the pension system.