The French pension The French pension schemes The

The French pension schemes
Governance
INTRODUCTION
Pag Schemes : 97%
Private Schemes : 3%
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE OF A PENSION SCHEME
(Barr – 1992)
• Consumption
C
ti
smoothing
thi
• Insurance
• Poverty relief
I. Decorum
II The
II.
Th Question
Q
ti
off
Sustainability
I. DECORUM
THE FRENCH MODEL OF SOCIAL SECURITY
ACCORDING TO THREE ANALYSES
CLASSIC
Private
Beveridge
Bismarck
TITMUS
Public
occupational
Fiscal
EE‐Andersen
Andersen
Liberal
Continental
Nordic
Source : Actuariat et Statistiqyes
The Nation Social Burden 2007
In million of euros
GDP :
Social Expenses
1 710 billions of €
:
505 bilions of € (29,56 % of the
GDP)
Global pension expenses :
195 billions of € (11,4
(11 4 % of the
GDP)
First pilar expenses
protection spendings)
Source : Actuariat et Statistiqyes
:
81 billions of € (16 % of social
The French pension schemes organisational caracteristics
A
A complex
l organisation
i ti
Basic schemes
((2/3)
/ )
Complementary
schemes
(1/3)
Special schemes + public services schemes
Pay As you
Go scheme
Law of finance for
Social security
Individual
Savings
Corporate
schemes
The French pension schemes organisational caracteristics
A
A mozaic
i of schemes
f h
™ A global dichotomy between schemes for public workers and schemes for the private
p
sector
™ Inside the private sector : different schemes for salaried and non salaried
and non salaried people, depending
people depending on the on the
socio‐economic category you belong to
™ the same differences exist between
complementary schemes
⇒ more than 36 main schemes
The French pension schemes organisational caracteristics
I
Importance of the general
t
f th
l scheme
h
: respective size of beneficiaries
ti
i
fb
fi i i
Salaried people schemes : 81,43 %
Local collectivities 3,62 %
Other special schemes
5 83 %
5,83
Civil servant and
military 9,36%
people
p schemes : 18,57
, %
Non salaried p
General scheme
51 38 %
51,38
Self employed people
9,59 %
farmers 8,98 %
Salaried people
in agriculture
11,24 %
Source : Actuariat et Statistiques
T t l off beneficiaries
Total
b
fi i i :
20 937 549
The French pension schemes organisational caracteristics
I
Importance of the general
t
f th
l scheme
h
: respective size of contributors
ti
i
f
t ib t
Salaried people schemes : 81,43 %
Local collectivities 7,38 %
Civil servant and military
10,04 %
people
p schemes : 18,57
, %
Non salaried p
Other special schemes
2,10 %
Self employed people
7,33 %
farmers
2,48 %
General scheme 67,95 %
Salaried people in agriculture
2,72 %
Total of contributors
contrib tors :
24 486 180
The french basis scheme contribution
(1/1/2007)
Contributions from employers :
%
Under cellings
totality of the salary
Contributions from employees :
under cellings
% Totality of the salary
%
celling :
8,30
8
30 %
1,60
6,65
0,10
2.682 €/month
All contributions
Generalised Social Contribution (CSG)
Reembursment of social debt (CRDS)
illness insurance
old age (basic scheme)
Widow insurance
old age (complementary scheme)
family benefits
occupational decease and work accident
unemployment (3)
housing (3)
A
Apprenticeship
ti
hi
professional formation
Transportations
TOTAL
Salaried
S
l i d
750
50
75
655
10
300
0
0
202
0
0
0
0
2042
« Brut »10 000, + 10 salaried people, Paris
Employer
E
l
0
0
1280
980
0
450
540
150
383
95
50
165
250
4343
Contributions
Salary
cost for the employer
perceived salary
10000
14343
7899
perceived salary/employer cost
employer burden
salaried burden
55%
« Brut » 10 000, + 10 salaried people, Paris
43%
21%
Complementary schemes
• ARRCO : complementary scheme for unskilled salaried workers
• created in december 1961
• cost of a point : 1,15 euros
• Contributions : 31,9 billions of euros
• beneficiaries : 11,3 millions of people
• benefits : 29,95 billions of euros
Complementary scheme
• AGIRC : complementary scheme for skilled salaried workers
• created in march 1947
• cost of the point : 0,4 euros
• Contributions : 15,13 billions of euros
• beneficiaries : 2,17 millions of people
• benefits : 15,84 billions of euros
Cnav revenues in 2006 :
83 billions of €
Amounts
(in billions of €)
contributions
Contributions paid by the Republic (CSG, taxes etc.)
Contributions paid by the Republic for unemployed
Contributions paid by Republic - poor retired people and childhood
Family Institution payment for retired people who raised childs
Other revenues
Total
Source : CCSS septembre
p
2006
58,3
7,1
7,6
4,8
4,2
1,0
83,0
The basic national pension scheme for salaried people
((Cnav))
Fi
Financial aspects
i l
t
‐ Cnav receipts : more of 83 billions of Euros
: more of 83 billions of Euros
• 70% = contributions
• 30% = taxes and apparented
NB : contribution rate for salaried people : 25% du salaire
brut
‐ Cnav
C
expenses : more of 85 billions of Euros
f 85 billi
fE
• 90% = pensions
• 8,8 % = others (social care expences and help for other schemes)
• 1,2 % = administrative burden
1 2 % = administrative burden
Jean Marcel Jeanneney
Mi i t off Ch
Minister
Charles
l De
D Gaulle
G ll
The General Schemes structure
Parliement
Minister in charge of social security
Minister in charge of Finance
National
level
Regional
level
Local
Level
CNAV
CNAV
(Ile de
France)
CRAV
(AlsaceMoselle)
CGSS
(DOM)
CNAM
CNAF
ACOSS
CPAM
CAF
URSSAF
CRAM
UCANSS
Authorities
Parliement
Government
Board
Chief Executive Officer
S per isor Board
Supervisory
Authorities Process
Parliement
Law of Finance for Social
Security
Supervisory board
Governement
Objectives and management
covenant
Trustees Board and CEO
The Parliement
Votes Laws of Finances for Social Security
The Governement
Enforces the decisions made by
y law in term of objectives
j
Has reglementary powers
Is the supervising Authority
The Trustees Board
The Trustees Board
Votes the administrative budget
g of the Institution
Makes compulsory advices on government projects of law and decrees
linked to social security issues
Follow the Chief Executive officer decisions
The Trustees Board
(34 members)
Deliberating members
- Big
Bi employers
l
(M d f)
(Medef)
- Small employeurs (Cgpme)
- Tiny employers (upa)
- Unions (cgt, cfdt, fo,cftc, cgc)
- qualified personalities
Consultative members
- Personnel
P
l representatives
t ti
- Family representatives
33
10
3
3
13
4
3
1
4
The Chief Exective Officer
Named by the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister
altogether in the board of the ministers
Is in charge of the well functionning ot the institution
Is in charge of the Personel
Prepares Budgets
Decides on litigations
The Supervisory Board
Supervises the objective and management covenant
Its President writes an annual report to the Parliament
F
Formulates
l t advices
d i
f a better
for
b tt application
li ti
off the
th OMC
The Supervisory Board
3 MP and Senators
1 Mayor and 1 Président of district
3 Représentatives of elder people organisation
(
(CNRPA)
)
14 Représentatives of institutions working in Social
and Economics Fields (Non profit organisation in
housings, for example)
4 qualified people
II. Sustainability
The Macroeconomic Formula
sWL=PN
WL PN
•
•
•
•
•
s = PAYG Social
S i l Security
S
it contribution
t ib ti rate
t
W = the average real wage
L = the number of workers
P = the average real pension
N = the number of pensioners
GDP evolution
e o u o ((In billions of euros)
b o s o eu os)
1650
1600
1550
1500
1450
1400
1350
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Active population evolution
Active
population evolution
(in thousands of people)
27000
25000
23000
21000
19000
17000
15000
1975
1982
1990
1995
2000
2005
Average income evolution
(in 1994 francs)
140000
120000
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
1951
1967
1978
1984
1994
2004
National Stock Exchange evolution
Evolution of Cnav Results
En millions d’euros courants
2 000
1 000
0
-1 000
-2 000
-3 000
-4 000
-5 000
-66 000
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
2000
1999
1999
1998
1998
1997
1997
1996
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
-7 000
Encaissements-décaissements
Source : CCSS
40
2 000
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1996
1997
1997
1998
1998
1999
1999
2000
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Evolution of Cnav’s results
1980 2010
1980 ‐
Optimistic Economic Scenario
En millions d’euros
1 000
0
-1 000
-2 000
-3 000
-4 000
-5 000
-6 000
-7 000
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1996
1997
1997
1998
1998
1999
1999
2000
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Evolution of Cnav’s results
1980 2010
1980 ‐
Pessimistic Economic Scenario
En millions d’euros
2 000
1 000
0
-1 000
-2 000
-3 000
-4 000
-5 000
-6 000
-7 000
Demographic Challenge
Encaissements-décaissements
Islan
de
2,03
Finlande
1,80
INDICATEUR CONJONCTUREL
DE FECONDITE
A 1
Au
1er jjanvier
i 2004
Norvège
1,81
Total fertility rate
Lituanie
Royaume-Unis
1,74
Russi 1,26
e
Pays-Bas
Espagne
1,32
Lettonie
1,24
Danemark
1,78
Bélarus
Pologne
Belgique
1,73
rt
1, uga
42 l
RUSSIE
Estonie
1,40
e
nd
Irla 9
1 ,9
Po
Suède
1,75
1,23
Allemagne
1 64
1,64
1,37 Rép. Tchèque
Luxembourg
Ukraine
1,23
1,7
Slovaqu
ie
France
Suisse
Autriche
1,25
Moldova
Hongrie
1,42
1,42
1,90
1,28
Slovénie
Roumanie
Italie
Croatie
,
1,22
1 29
1,29
1,35
1,33
Bosnie
Serbie
Herzégovine
Bulgarie
1,29
Macédoine
Albanie
Grèce
1,29
Malte
1,37
≥ 1,7
1,6 – 1,7
1,5 – 1,6
1,4 – 1,5
1,3 – 1,4
≤ 1,3
Pyramid of ages of the French Population in 2006
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Hom m es
500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50
Fem m es
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Pyramid of ages of the french population in 2050
96
Femmes
88
Hommes
80
72
64
56
48
40
32
24
16
8
0
-500000
-400000
-300000
-200000
-100000
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
Pyramide of ages of the french population
In 2006 and in 2050
In 2006 and in 2050
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
96
Femmes
Hommes
88
Femmes
Hommes
80
72
64
56
48
40
32
24
16
8
0
500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
-500000
-400000
-300000
-200000
-100000
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
Successive reports on pension issues since the 1990’s
•
•
•
•
•
Le Livre blanc (1991)
Le rapport Briet
pp
((1995))
Le rapport de Foucault
Le rapport Charpin (1999)
Le rapport Teulade (2000)
•
Le Conseil d ’orientation des retraites (COR) :
Le premier rapport : « Renouveler le contrat social entre générations (2001) Le 2ème rapport : les réformes en France et à l'étranger ; le droit à l'information (2004)
Le 3ème rapport : perspectives 2020 et 2050 (2006)
è
Le 4ème
rapport : questions et orientations pour 2008 (
(2007)
)
49
THE ABAQUE :
REFORM and EQUITY
C h o ix 2 0 4 0 : P ré lè v e m e n ts , Ag
g e , N iv e a u d e la re tra ite
B
14
point de co
otisa tion / sa la ire brut
Augm e nta tion de s pré lè ve m e n
nts e n é quiv a le nt
16
Age s d e
D u ré e de la
ce s s a tio n d 'a
a ctivité
retraite,
e t d e d é p a rt à la
es tim ation *)
re tra ite
s c énario de
référenc e
+ 5,5 ans
+ 1 an
+ 4,5 ans
+ 2 ans
+ 3,5 ans
+ 4 ans
+ 1,5 an
+ 6 ans
- 0,5 an
12
A
10
8
6
+ 9 ans
4
2
C
D
E
0
0,78
8
Ratio 2040
à réglementation constante
0,76
6
0,74
4
0,72
2
0,70
0
0,68
8
0,66
6
0,64
4
0,62
2
0,60
0
0,58
8
0,56
6
0,54
4
0,52
2
0,50
0
0,48
8
0,46
6
0,44
4
0,42
2
A x e h o riz o n ta l :
ra tio p e n sio n m o ye n n e n e tte
su r sa la ire m o ye n n e t
- 3,5 ans
*) Variation de la durée de la
retraite par rapport à 2000 ;
es tim ation approchée
approchée, fondée s ur
la bais s e de la m ortalité et
l'allongem ent de l'es pérance de
vie en projection, et tenant com pte
des hypothès es des âges de
ces s ation d'activité dans le
s cénario de référence.
Ratio actuel
Reforms already made
1993 :
- UNICALLY FOR GENERAL SCHEME
- Parametric reform
• pensions
i
and
d salaried
l i d taken
t k into
i t accountt indexed
i d
d on PRICES
• From 37,5 years to 40 yers of contribution period
• Average salary calculated from the 10 to the 25 best years
• Creation of the Solidarity Fund for elder People
Calculation formula for the basic pension
of the General Scheme
SoR
S
RXR
Rate
t XD
Duration
ti
off insurance
i
(i
(in
trimesters)
160 trimesters
+
Point value * number of points accumulated
+
PERP and PERCO
Reforms already made
A progressive implementation of new parameters
A progressive implementation of new parameters
Année des
60 ans
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Génération
Taux p
plein 50 %
Salaire moyen
y
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
Trimestres
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
160
160
160
160
160
Années
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Reforms already made
2003 :
- All schemes are converging
- Diverses measures :
- concerning the pension calculation
- destined to increase the elder people rate of activity
- Individualisation of the pension right
⇒
Objective: financial equilibrium in 2020
MAIN MEASURES
¾ For all : 160 trimesters (40 years) of contributions for civil servant in 2008 41 in 2012 42 in 2020
servant in 2008, 41 in 2012, 42 in 2020
¾ Warrantee of a minimum of 85% of the minimum salary
¾ Possibility of erlay
of erlay retirement for those
retirement for those who started to work
to work
at the age of 14, 15 of 16
¾ Possibility of purchasing
of purchasing years of studies
of studies
¾ Indexation of pensions on prices
MAIN MEASURES
MAIN MEASURES
¾ Increasing contributions for pensions
¾ drop (5% a year) and overvalue (3% a year beyond 60)
¾ Encourageing pension funds ‐ individual (PERP) or collective trough companies (PERCO)
¾ Evolution of the compulsory
Evolution of the compulsory retirement age
retirement age (from 60 to 65 60 to 65
years)
EVOLUTION OF THE REPLACEMENT RATE
EVOLUTION OF THE REPLACEMENT RATE
¾For Unskilled salaried people : from 83.6% in 2003 to 64.4% in 2050
¾For Skilled people : form 64.1% to 42.7% in 2050
THE CHOICE OF INCREASING
PERIODS OF
CONTRIBUTION
The french remaining preretirement scheme
The need for Formation investment in favour of elder
35
salaried people
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
EU-15
B
25 - 34
Eurostat 1999
DK
D
EL
35 - 44
E
F
IRL
I
45 - 54
L
NL
A
55 - 64
P
FIN
S
UK
A communication plan for increasing the eleders rate of activity
• TV SPOTS
SPOTS
• Alain…
SPOTS
• …Bernadette…
SPOTS
• …Mohand…
PAINTS AND PRESS INSERTS
The communication campain was well understood
Q19. What did you understand form the last communication campain on retirement
scheme
Tout à fait
d’accord
Plutôt
d’accord
Plutôt pas
d’accord
Pas du tout
d’accord
Ne se prononce pas
100%
I can work beyond the age
of 60
71
29
11%
81%
I cancumulate pension and
income form activity
40
41
7
29
4
8
23%
74%
The retirement scheme
is now a question of
individualchoice
45
En %
12
11
3
The communication campain was well understood
Q13. Are you now aware that you have the choice of your retirement age ?
Total Oui 60%
46%
19%
14%
Oui,
O
i
vraiment
Total Non 30%
11%
Oui,
O
i un
peu
N
pas
Non, pas Non,
N
vraiment du tout
10%
Ne sait pas
The communication campain was well understood
Q14. Do you believe that you know more now about freedom of
choice of retirement age
Oui, vraiment
Oui, un peu
Non, pas
vraiment
Non, pas du
tout
Total Oui 42%
N saiti pas
Ne
Total Non 52%
39%
34%
18%
6%
3%
Q15. Would you like to know more about this issue ?
Total Oui 84%
Oui, tout à fait
Oui, plutôt
Non, plutôt
pas
Non, pas du
tout
54%
Ne sait pas
Total Non 13%
30%
4%
9%
3%
Q16. Did you feel incitated to contact your retirement scheme to know how to use this freedom of choice
Total Oui 63%
51%
12%
Total Non 26%
19%
7%
11%
Question about confidence of the youngers
Q14 What do you think of your present Retirement scheme ?
Q14.
The present pension scheme….
Tout à fait d’accord
Plutôt d’accord
Pas du tout d’accord
Plutôt pas
d’accord
82%
Is complicated
43
7
28
32
30
26
6
5
37%
19
18
3
46%
20
20
83% des cadres
50%
Is not concerned by the market
evolution
13%
39
50%
Avoid to big difference between richs
and poors
En %
97% des cadres
60%
Embodies solidarity between
generations
Ne sait pas
24
22
26
4
40%
18
10
Question about confidence of the youngers
Q14. What do you think about the present retirement scheme ?
The retirement scheme….
Tout à fait d’accord
Plutôt d’accord
Pas du tout d’accord
Plutôt pas
d’
d’accord
d
13
28
30
26
34%
Is well managed
9
25
11
31
27
20%
Is financially solid
5
28
56%
18
40
7
65% des 35-39 ans
29
76%
15
3
71% des 35-39 ans
59%
29%
Is not expensive
En %
56%
41%
Garantees the reembursement of all my
contributions
Ne sait pas
15
88% des 35-39 ans
36
4
MAIN MEASURES
MAIN MEASURES
¾ Increasing contributions for pensions
¾ drop (5% a year) and overvalue (3% a year beyond 60)
¾ Encourageing pension funds ‐ individual (PERP) or collective trough companies (PERCO)
¾ Evolution of the compulsory
Evolution of the compulsory retirement age
retirement age (from 60 to 65 60 to 65
years)
FOCUS : PERP AND PERCO
FOCUS : PERP AND PERCO
¾ PERP :
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
Individual
Fiscal deduction
Private management (insurers) – Eurobale Ratios
Anticipated payment in case of accident
pension
¾ PERCO :
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
Collective via the company
No individual fiscal deduction
No individual
fiscal deduction
The employer can pay 4600 euros a year (tax free)
Dedicated societies management
Anticipated payment in case of purchasinf of a house or accident
P i
Pension or Capital
C i l
7% of the GDP
FOCUS : PERP AND PERCO
FOCUS : PERP AND PERCO
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
Financial intermediary (Banker or insurer)
p
deduction for contributions till 10% of the main income
Input :
Output : low rate of contribution on life annuity
Cash blocked till retirement age
compulsorily life annuity
Financial Securities :
¾ Each PERP is isolated, which means that even in case of bankrupcy, capital is safe
¾ Each PERP is ruled by a non profit organisation (representative of members) – THE GERP‐ which the aim is to survey the PERP and inform its members by a Survey comitee
¾ Each PERP is supervised by the French Insurance Control Authority (ACAM)
¾ Annual report from the Survey Comitee
¾ Protections :
¾ In case of death
In case of death : life annuity
: life annuity for family
for family or pre
or pre‐determined
determined beneficiaries
¾ Two years before retirement age : 90% of the fund is placed in a euro investment (low risk and high
secured placement). All capital is invested in bond at the retirement age
FOCUS : PERP AND PERCO
FOCUS : PERP AND PERCO
¾ 2 millions of contributors in 2008
¾ 3.4 billions of euros placed
3 4 billions of euros placed
¾ Stocks : 22‐23% of the capital
¾ Prudential ratios :
ratios :
¾ 90% of secure investments (Bonds, equity, no stocks) 2 years before retirement
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
80% from
80%
from 5 to 2 years
5 to 2 years before retirement
65% from 10 to 5 years
50% from 15 to 10 years
0% o 20 to 15 years
0 to 5 yea s
40% from
0% beyond 20 years before retirement ange
FOCUS : PERP AND PERCO
FOCUS : PERP AND PERCO
¾ Made by the enterprise via a collective agreement
¾ Cash blocked till retirement age (exception in case of accident, unemployment or purchasing
of a residence)
of a residence)
¾ Input : contribution of the enterprise is exempted of income tax, interest of the constituted
capital are exempted of any tax
¾ Output : Life annuity is taxed in a favourable level
¾ Compulsory
l
lf
life annuity
(
(exception in case of accident, unemployment
f
l
or purchasing
h
of a f
residence)
¾ Securities :
¾
¾
¾
Financial tools must be the property of a body agreed by the french Credit and investment companies comitee
Funds ruled by an investment company agreed by the French Financial Market Authority
Each Investment Fund (FCP) is surveyed by by a bipartite –empler and employees‐ supervisory board. The President is an employee
¾ Protection :
¾ In case of death
In case of death : life annuity
: life annuity for family
for family or pre‐determined
or pre determined beneficiaries
FOCUS : PERP AND PERCO
FOCUS : PERP AND PERCO
¾ 56.000 companies covered in 2008
¾ 1.4 Billions of euros of capital
1 4 Billi
f
f
it l
¾ 350.000 salaried people covered
¾ Sources :
¾ participation : 35.8%
¾ Volontary contributions from
contributions from salaried people : 48.9%
people : 48 9%
¾ Intéressement : 15,3%
FOCUS : PERP AND PERCO
Fi l
Fiscal expenditure
di
¾ Cost:
¾ Over 900 millions of euros of fiscal deductions
¾ main measures
¾ Deductibility from income tax till the Social security celling
¾ Exonerability from the wealth tax of the capital placed in retirement placement
FOCUS : PERP AND PERCO
PARLIAMENT RECOMMANDATIONS
PARLIAMENT RECOMMANDATIONS
¾ Simplification:
¾ Legal personnality for PERP Survey comitee and PERCO Supervisory Board
(litigation)
¾ A better distinction between PERP GERP and Survey comitee
¾ Lower
L
th
the qorum
f PERP
for PERP general
l assemblies
bli
¾ Developping a label ‘Epargne Retraite’ to inform the Public
¾ Better adequation between risks and security :
¾ After
Aft five years, PERP must have grouped
fi
PERP
th
d 2000 people and invested
2000
l
di
t d more than
th 10 10
millions of euros (other contracts are less heavy to develop) : for the parliament, there is reasons to to lower this obligation till the level of other retirement plans p
people
p
p
such as the one open for self salaried
¾ Technical rate of 0%
¾ Lack of a wanrantee fund in case of bankrupcy of the financial intermediary
FOCUS : PERP AND PERCO
PARLIAMENT RECOMMANDATIONS
PARLIAMENT RECOMMANDATIONS
¾ Communication :
¾ Annual reports on the evolution of PERP and PERCO
¾ Better control :
¾ Solvency II : ratio implemented
II ratio implemented by a decree
by a decree of march
of march 2008
¾ Specific chapter on the annual report of the Control authority for insurance
companies and mutuality
¾ Tax ependiture :
¾ Contributions form enterprises on PERCO should be totally deductible from
income
¾ Confirm the deductibility from income and wealth tax
CONCLUSION
Key elements for a successful
pension scheme
Conclusion : prerequisite for a successful Scheme
(S
(Samuelson)
l )
Thank You for your
Attention