The increase in longevity, spectacular in the 20th century, in industrial countries but also in developing countries, doubles as an improvement not less exceptional State of health up to 75 years.
Given this reality, almost all of the major industrial countries decided or proposed pushing gradually here in 2040, the legal age of retirement at the age of 67. Except in France. Not only, it was decided, in 1982, to reduce the legal age of retirement at age 60, but it massively appealed to early retirement in the 1980s and 1990s.
Three reforms to the system by distribution have already intervened to preserve its viability. The reform of the pension plans of the private sector, reached in August 1993, had initiated the adaptation of pension to the ageing of the population. This reform provided for the indexing of pensions on prices, the gradual lengthening of the period of legal duration of contribution from 37.5 to 40 years (with full effect from 1 January 2003) and the gradual of the reference period for the calculation of the pension of 10 to 25 years of income (with full effect from January 1, 2008). Until the reform 2003 Fillon, these measures apply only to the employees of the general social security regime for persons affiliated to the scheme of the craft, industrial and commercial professions, namely 79 of the assets.
Reform Fillon on August 21, 2003 was objective is to resolve pension in France record in aligning, first, the period of assessment in the public service over the period of assessment in the private sector. Then, secondly, could intervene a lengthening of the duration of contribution of reference for all 41 years in 2012. The Act fixed the objective of maintaining stable the ratio between the duration of activity (40 years old now) and the time spent in retirement (20 years).
The reform of the special pension plans (SNCF, RATP, etc.) fall 2007 has partially aligned these regimes on the General rules but with substantial developments to take into account the conditions of employment of the staff of these companies.
The three agreed reforms expected to limit the rise of transfers for the benefit of pensioners, without resolving the fundamental problem. Summarize the financial challenges of the next necessary reform.
Without the reforms of 1993 and 2003, pension spending had to spend 13 of GDP in 2006 to 18 of GDP in 2040 (assuming the return of the indexing of pensions on net wages). With these two reforms and that of the special schemes in the fall of 2007, pension expenditure could be only 14.5 of GDP in 2040, assuming that the required contribution period passes to 42 years by 2020. It is therefore a need for funding. A new package of reforms will be required from 2008 to ensure the balance of the distribution plan to 2030.
One can imagine, for example, to the period of assessment for 42 years from 2016, 43 years in 2020, 2024 44 years and 45 years in 2028. Pensions would be indexed on the price until 2028. With age of retirement at 61 years in 2012, then 62 years old in 2016 and 63 years in 2020, it solve lasting problem financing pensions in France.
These measures effective and fair to be acceptable, a pension card would be put in place, i.e. a retirement "actuarially neutral" (in the sense of the balance between contributions and benefits received) between 35 and 50 years of contributions, with a minimum age of retirement of 60 years. Similarly, a unlimited accumulation of income and the pension would be organized after 60 years. This system can give individuals 60 years of age the opportunity to try new adventures without unnecessary risk.
The retirement reform must be accompanied by the development of systems by capitalization, complementing plans by distribution. Capitalization is an individual savings over the life of a capital that may be paid in full at the time of retirement or from which it calculates a pension which is paid until the death of the beneficiary.
The capitalization system put in place by the Fillon law is too limited, as is feared to increase inequalities between those who can save money and those who cannot. The solution is to make the mandatory capital fund with a matching negotiated or compulsory for employers on the contributions made by persons with low wages. Thus, the lowest income earners would have access to a supplementary pension funded with significant income from their retirement.
Can you imagine the outlines of a plan by mandatory capitalization Suppose that the measures proposed above can stabilize the weight of pensions to 13 of GDP until 2040, which prevents not the replacement rate, defined as the ratio between the first received net pension and the last net wage paid is reduced. Might therefore wish to establish as of 2009, and by accumulating the necessary capital in 25 years, a complement of retirement by capitalization reaching the equivalent of 10 replacement rate for all workers. Future retirees benefit, at the end of this period, a double pension, in distribution providing most of their income and other in Cap providing a further slice of 10 of turnover. To finance this supplementary pension by capitalization, should build up a capital of the order of 35 of the GDP to pay 2.1 points of GDP for pensions after 25 years of capitalized savings. The amount of annual contributions paid by workers, in pension funds would be managed by financial intermediaries under the control of supervisory boards in which the unions who wish to could be represented, would not need to exceed 1 point of GDP per year, as these contributions would be capitalized during the period of savings.
It said while this "extra" savings effort because consumption. But the French, concerned about the future of their pension plans, are already spontaneously an effort of the order of 5 of GDP in life savings. But life insurance is invested mainly in government bonds. By reducing the public deficit, it would strongly limit State funding requirements. This would then switch one-fifth of the effort of saving life insurance to pension funds invested in more than 60 equity, to strengthen the own funds of our companies and therefore their ability to do the research and innovation, to create jobs. There is therefore no additional savings effort but a more judicious assignment of this savings.
The capitalization funds thus created would contribute to the strengthening of the business, and therefore to the growth of employment and wages, they would strengthen the economic base of the plans Division. The distribution and capitalization are thus complementary in terms of beneficial effects on the economy.