It must get worse before it gets better. Approximately so it is possible to summarize the pension reform effects on government expenditure in the recent past and near future.
NAV Nav has analyzed the annual expenses of the National Retirement reform in 2011 and for the years 2030. They compared what expense would have been with the old pension rules.
Conclusion: The expenditure in the short term has risen much more than expected. The consolation is that this gets the state budget again in the form of corresponding lower expenses later. And in the long term means pension reform expense savings for the state.
For the one who makes budget from year to year, this shift nevertheless have created a lot of headaches.
Within the approved budget framework has big money years in the years 2011-2015 gone to pensions instead of to roads and other good causes.
Happiness for changing governments in these years is that it was also very high oil prices, solid growth in the Oil Fund and much fresh oil money into the state budget.
Optional age 62
Optional retirement age of 62 gives even more retirees and isolation to increase pension expenditure. Then it seems other changes in the reform stronger.
The path is:
- The pension reform provides increased spending to 2020.
- Then expenditures lower than under the old rules .
- Around 2027 is the sum of the reduced expenditure greater than spending increases to 2020.
The first year
2011 was pension reform first year. Basically, it was then possible for all aged 62-66 years to take out retirement. In the state budget for 2011 was additional expenses as a result of the reform is estimated at around 1.3 billion. The actual additional costs were over 5 billion.
– Many more than expected in the age group 62-66 years used the opportunities to withdraw retirement. Thus step expenditures much more than expected, says section manager Ole Christian Lien Nav.
The number of senior citizens aged 62-66 years is the major uncertainty in a calculation of pension expenditure forward. Nav has made a number of options for the number of early retirees. In the main option being largely the current trends continued.
Three effect on spending
The calculations put numbers on three different effects that go in opposite directions:
- Optional retirement between 62 and 75 years helping to increase spending because many in the group 62-66 years are choosing to take early retirement. Very few postpones until after 67 years.
- Life expectancy adjustment (see fact box) helps reduce costs over time.
- New rules to regulate age pensions (see fact box) contributes to lower expenses.
The optional retirement age should not have a say in the long term because early withdrawals lower lifelong pension. But in the short term it will increase spending because it gets many more retirees.
At the end of 2011 there were 36,000 pensioners under 67 years. Many under 67 was then still on the old scheme with contractual pension (AFP).
Next year Nav that number is 92,000. This is both because increasing numbers are choosing to take retirement pension early and that AFP without simultaneously taking out retirement when no longer an option for private employees under 67 years.
Last year 60 percent of 62-66 year-olds who had the opportunity taken out retirement.
Billions rolls
This year rains Nav with that expenditure to retirees under 67 are approximately 17 billion. Total expenses for National Insurance Scheme is estimated at 190 billion.
Meanwhile, the age adjustment and new regulation rules save 7 billion, so that the total additional expenses this year will be around 10 billion. In 2027 the additional expenses for 2020 and the reduced expenditures in the years after roughly break even.
Published:
No comments:
Post a Comment