In the upcoming September referendum, pension fund reform poses a significant challenge for Elisabeth Baume-Schneider and other policymakers. The focus of the referendum is on reforming occupational pension provision through pension funds (BVG reform) rather than the AHV. It is important to remember that pension reforms do not create or destroy wealth directly but rather alter its distribution. Lobbyists and the media often spin misleading narratives around these reforms, as seen in previous debates about retirement provisions.
The unions have launched a referendum against the reform, claiming that people will have to pay more for less pension. However, the reality is that there will be winners and losers, with a net balance of zero for the population as a whole. The Left is in favor of expanding the AHV and opposing the pension fund system due to its view on hidden redistributions.
One of the key aspects of the reform is reducing the statutory minimum conversion rate in the mandatory pension system, aiming to address an imbalance caused by high minimum requirements. The reform also includes changes to the wage base affected by deductions, offering better protection for low earners and part-time workers but also leading to increased costs for employers and employees.
The reform package has received mixed reactions from various sectors, with concerns raised about costs and potential increase in redistribution. Critics from both left and business communities voice their reservations about this significant challenge of ballot voting. Supporters of the reform are eager to demonstrate that BVG can adapt and develop despite recent expansions in AHV’s coverage.
If BVG fails, it could lead to restructuring contributions and debates on alternative reform proposals’ future of BVG remains uncertain with various stakeholders voicing differing opinions and concerns.
