Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content

JOBS AND DEVELOPMENT BLOG

Read. Comment. Debate.

Jobs and Development Blog - The Jobs Knowledge Platform > Posts > Universal Pension, Yes, Regressive Funding, No
Universal Pension, Yes, Regressive Funding, No
December 13, 2013 | Contribution by DAVID A. ROBALINO

David A. Robalino is a Lead Economist and Labor and Youth Team Leader at the World Bank

Mariano Bosch, Carmen Pages, and Angel Melguizo at the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) are proposing a new approach to expanding the coverage of pension systems in Latin America while helping create more and better jobs. Their ideas are spelled out in a new book "Better Pensions, Better Jobs: Towards Universal Coverage in Latin America and the Caribbean." The book is about Latin America but the problems discussed and proposed solutions are relevant for any middle-income country. I think the IDB's proposal is a great contribution to the debate on pension reform. Below I discuss some of the points they make that I agree with and those where I think other options could be considered.

 
Silver miner in Potosi, Bolivia. Photo credit: ©urosr

Much to like about the IDB pension proposal...

Mariano recently posted a blog here on jobsknowledge.org that summarizes the book's main messages. In a nutshell, the proposed model for reforming pensions systems has two components: (i) an anti-poverty non-contributory pension that is financed out of general revenues; and (ii) a contributory system that can include contribution subsidies for middle- and "low-income" workers.

There are three main things that I like about the book and the model. The first is the connection the authors make between pension reform and the labor market. Indeed, an important objective of the recommended policy changes is to reduce taxes on labor (the tax-wedge) that we all agree can reduce formal employment. The second is the model makes a clear distinction between the redistributive function of the pension system (anti-poverty) and the insurance function (smoothing consumption/preserving standards of living). Thus, the authors recommend that workers' contributions should always be linked to benefits. And, finally, the third is that the issue of "funding" does not come out as an important element of the reform. All the recommendations can be implemented in the context of a pay-as-you-go system (see my posting on non-defined contributions) or funded defined contribution systems.

...but only if the model is NOT regressive

What I don't like is that the proposed model can be regressive — that it can redistribute income from low — to higher-income workers. Indeed, potentially large fiscal outlays would be used to subsidize the contributions of workers who enroll in the contributory system. They are, by definition, formal sector workers who are likely to have, on average, higher incomes. Clearly, the subsidies can provide incentives to workers (and employers) in the informal sector to enroll in the contributory system but the increase in the coverage rate is likely to be small (a few percentage points).

What is the rationale for those subsidies? If the function of the contributory system is consumption smoothing (on top of the social pension), it is unclear that subsidies should be used. If there are concerns that workers can’t afford the contributions needed to finance a given replacement rate (the ratio between the pension and pre-retirement earnings), then probably the social pension is too low or the targeted replacement rate is too high.

If, on the other hand, the objective of the subsidies is to reduce labor taxes it becomes important to identify what those taxes are. Implicit taxes used to finance minimum pension guarantees or to subsidize workers with short career histories should indeed be eliminated (given that the social pension is financed out of general revenues). However, workers' contributions that are linked to benefits shouldn't be considered a tax — unless the target level of benefits is well above what workers want, and in that case, the solution is to reduce these benefits.

The other tax is the pay-roll tax paid by employers. In theory, this "tax" can be passed on to workers through lower wages (in exchange for a higher pension). But it is a reality in developing countries that many employers, particularly small, low-productivity firms, might not be able to afford the tax. These, for the most part, are firms that also pay low wages and operate informally.

So in this case, the solution could be to reduce or eliminate pay-roll taxes for the firms (they would be targeted by productivity level, not size) but also the benefits that would have been financed from those taxes. Worker in these firms would be registered in the pension system (to be eligible for the social pension workers should be required to register/enroll) and they can contribute if they want. If there are concerns that their pension could be "too low," then the subsidies would be channeled through the "social pension." Basically, this pension would focus on the redistributive function of the pension system. Nick Barr in his recent JKP blog discusses this in the case of Chile. The social pension could take the form of deposits in the individual accounts. But again, the subsidies would go toward the poorest workers — whether wage employees in the informal sector or self-employed, and whether they contribute or not.

The JKP plans to continue this debate on pension reform through our blog. Also, a heads up for a new book that is coming out on the topic co-authored with Carmen and others: "Social Insurance, Informality, and Labour Markets: How to Protect Workers While Creating Good Jobs."

Comments

Sophia Johnson says
I really enjoyed reading your article. I found this as an informative and interesting post, so I think it is very useful and knowledgeable online video downloader
 on  10/11/2018 10:49:47 AM  

Add Comment

Name *


Email *

Body *

 
 

 CATEGORIES

 
 

 AUTHORS

 
  
expand Author : Abdullah Al-Dailami ‎(1)
expand Author : Adriana Kugler ‎(2)
expand Author : Alice Githu ‎(1)
expand Author : Amadeus Kamagenge ‎(1)
expand Author : Amelie Constant ‎(1)
expand Author : Amina Semlalia ‎(1)
expand Author : Anil Swarup ‎(1)
expand Author : Arup Banerji, Asli Demirguc-Kunt, and Jaime Saavedra Chanduvi ‎(1)
expand Author : Arup Banerji, David A. Robalino ‎(1)
expand Author : Baptiste Cammareri ‎(1)
expand Author : Branka Minic ‎(1)
expand Author : Brij Kothari  ‎(1)
expand Author : Cai Fang ‎(1)
expand Author : Carmen PagÉs ‎(1)
expand Author : Charles Sabel ‎(2)
expand Author : Claudia Baddini ‎(1)
expand Author : Claudia Sepulveda ‎(7)
expand Author : Constantino Gonzalez ‎(1)
expand Author : Dala T. Korkoyah, Jr. ‎(1)
expand Author : Daniel Hamermesh ‎(1)
expand Author : David A. Robalino ‎(14)
expand Author : David A. Robalino and Mattias Lundberg ‎(1)
expand Author : David Grubb and Jochen Kluve ‎(1)
expand Author : Dennis Szeszko ‎(1)
expand Author : Dickson Malunda  ‎(1)
expand Author : Edgard Rodriguez ‎(1)
expand Author : Fernando Fabre ‎(1)
expand Author : Francois Bourguignon ‎(2)
expand Author : Gabriela Inchauste ‎(1)
expand Author : Gerardo Esquivel ‎(2)
1 - 30Next
 

 Archives

 
  
expand MonthYear : 10/1/2014 ‎(1)
expand MonthYear : 9/1/2014 ‎(1)
expand MonthYear : 7/1/2014 ‎(5)
expand MonthYear : 6/1/2014 ‎(4)
expand MonthYear : 5/1/2014 ‎(6)
1 - 5Next
 

  Tag Cloud

 
 

 WORLD BANK ON JOBS

 
Retrieving Data
 

 Recent Blog Posts

 
  
The JKP Blog Has Moved
Remittances from Qatar:  Less-informed Families Receive Less
Jobs and the “Great Recession” – Part 2
Jobs and the “Great Recession” – Part 1
Juggling Labor, Credit, and Crops in Zambia