“it’s a camel’s life” - 1asig.ro · “it’s a camel’s life” ... through...

“It’s a Camel’s Life”

David Punter – Principle Consultant - EMEA Oracle Insurance Global Business Unit [IGBU]

OR…..

“The Tale of Three Camels”

3.

2.

1.

•Beast of Burden

•Travel Companion

•Persisting

•A long term relationship

•It carries stuff for us

AND…..

“The Tale of Three Pillars of Pension Provision”(broadly based on the World Bank Definition)

1. Carries our record of State Participation (PAYG)

2. Carries our Accumulation of Obligatory Pension Provision

(Funded)

3. Carries our Accumulation of Privately Managed Provision

(Funded)

1. Source: Projections made by the Romanian Associatio n of the Private Pensions Providers.

2. G. Bojio Garnier Scale. which shows that if the sha re of population of those aged over 60 years and th e total number of inhabitants is higher than the level of 12%, the n there is the phenomenon of "aging population".

Pillar 1 – Generic Issues

• It is PAYG – sustainability relies on an ongoing rat e of replacement

• The replacement rate is not a constant – demographic shift

• Falling employment levels

• Ageing Population - People living longer (1) (2)

• Participation in return for a “Participation Record ”

• Benefits in relation to Participation record can be changed

• Extending Retirement Ages

• Removal of early retirement provisions

• Changes to revaluation factors

• Gradual shift of Burden & Contributions to Pillar 2

• Gradual reduction in Pillar 1 benefit levels

(1)

Pillar 2 – Generic Issues

• It has a history of “Defined Benefit” in many geogra phies•Guarantee of benefits based on service

•Increasingly expensive to operate

• The shift is towards “Defined Contributions”•Unattractive alternative to DB for employees

•Reduces the employers liability

• Coverage•Membership as a condition of employment?

•Doesn’t help the Self Employed

•Generally, people would rather have the money now

Pillar 2 – Developments

• Compulsory Provision/Participation – Defined Contrib ution

• Superannuation – Australia

• Sisterna Previsional – Chile

• Kiwisaver – New Zealand

• Personal Accounts – UK

• OTP (Obligatorisk tjenestepensjon) – Norway

• Obligatory Pension System – Romania

Pillar 2 – Considerations• Lack of Guarantee’s – new arrangements are typically DC

• Effect on “means tested benefits”

• Sufficient levels of contribution to provide a real benefit?

• Minimum regulated contributions v Cost of Administr ation

• Australia – 9%

• Chile – 13%

• New Zealand – 4%

• UK – 2% increasing to 8% by 2017

• Norway – 2%

• Romania – 2% from 2008, increasing in 0.5% increment s to 6%

Pillar 2 – Considerations• Incentives to pay higher levels of contributions (w here permitted)

• Matching of voluntary contributions

• Tax credits

• National Insurance Rebates

• Regulated level of charges

• Transparency

• Investment Guarantees

Pillar 2 – Providers & Standards• Newly established state bodies (e.g. N.E.S.T. in th e UK)

• Authorised/licensed providers (e.g. Insurance Compa nies)

• Maximum charge structures as a condition of authori sation

• Default fund selections and lifestyling

• Access to advise

• Improved regulation of advice/corporate governance/ Investment Management

• Use of technology to control costs and provide requ ired servicelevels

Pillar 3 – Private & Voluntary Provision• Still Perceived as “High Advice” area of provision

• Can involve complex Planning;•Specialist Scheme Administration Services

• High Net Worth Individuals

• Pension products as a Tax Planning vehicle

• Wealth Management

• Estate Planning

• Privately Managed Funds

Pillar 3 – Private & Voluntary ProvisionAn important element in enhancing Pillar 1 & 2 reti rement benefit provision

• For pension savings in excess of those permitted in to Pillar 2

• Basic Principles relatively simple

• Group or “Grouped” products (portability)

• Advice becoming more readily available

• Advice becoming more tightly regulated

• Flexible and competitively priced products increasi ngly being marketed by providers

• Tax efficient means of accumulating and decumulatin g funds

So, what is the future for the respective Camels?

3.

2.

1.

Pillar 1 Camel

1.

•The Pillar 1 Camel will continue as record keeper, carrying our Participation history

•PAYG is becoming increasingly unsustainable so it’s role will continue to be reviewed

•It will continue as the mainstay for elderly workers/pensioners

•It’s burden will be transferred over time to the Pillar 2 Camel and will reduce proportionately

Pillar 2 Camel

2.

•Use of the Pillar 2 Camel will be encouraged and pr omoted, driven by legislation and government publicity campaigns

•Minimum contributions have been increased over time by legislation in some cases– Australian Superannuation a case in point

•There have been postponement of scheduled increases and some reductions however (Romania & Latvia respectively)

•The number of Pillar 2 Camels will increase (e.g. Slovenia & Armenia)

•Options for members to “opt out” may be removed alto gether

•It’s burden is certainly anticipated to increase, b ut it needs resources if the expectation is to be fulfilled..

Pillar 3 Camel

3.

• Use of the Pillar 3 Camel will be encouraged and pr omoted

• Regulation is anticipated to improve advice standar ds

• Simplified access methods will be made available (e .g. through bancassurance, worksite marketing, public a dvice)

• Competition should encourage cheaper more understan dable products

• They are the main tax privileged vehicle for provid ing pension benefits for the self employed

•They will carry funds in excess of those the Pillar 2 Camel is permitted to transport

• Pillar 3 Camels destined to carry the burden of a w ider audience driven by legislation and increased awaren ess

Summary Analysis – Focus is on the Pillar 2 Camel….

Pillar 2

•It’s clear our Pillar 2 Camel is being groomed to s olve the problem of current PAYG systems over time

•It will carry funds arising from compulsory contrib utions that would previously have been absorbed in the provision of Pillar 1 benefit (shif t from state responsibility)

•If it is to do this effectively however it needs:

•Transition planning, Pillar 2 more addresses the ne ed of future generations, the rights of elderly worker and pensioners need to be maintained

•A sustained realistic level of contributions to pro vide a proper supplement to ones retirement income

•To be able to offer some guarantees that how these funds are managed is transparent, is proper, and risks are minimised

•Low cost, high standard service from providers

•Awareness, people need clarity if they are to do mo re than the minimum, or even continue to participate where opting out is permitted.

•Co ordination with Pillar 3, contributions, charges , funds……

•More than “light touch” regulation

Focus is on the Pillar 2 Camel….

Pillar 2

SHIFT OF RESPONSIBILITY

Focus is on the Pillar 2 Camel….SWOT

Pillar 2

Strengths-Simplicity of concept-Low charges-Access-Regulated Administration (CAT)-Market driven competition-They are Defined Contribution-Compulsory Participation-Ability to implement default choices and lifestyling-Encourages sense of ownership

Weaknesses-Defined Benefit mentality in some geographies-Risk carried by employee’s-Insufficient Contributions/Pensions Adequacy-Effect on Means Tested Benefits-Coverage for part time workers-There can be complexity where integrated with Pillar 1

Opportunities-Address the PAYG issue-Increase pensions coverage-Remove reliance on Replacement Rate-Introduce Compulsory Employee Contribution-Introduce Transparency into the system-Capital Market Development-Ultimate Harmonisation

Threats-Capital Markets Performance (Global Crisis)- EU’s Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) rules?-Contribution levels are not maintained-Employers reduce salary to compensate for compulsory contributions-Time running out