“In the coming months we will talk about pension reform, someone will try to return to the Fornero law, we will barricade inside and outside the Parliament to avoid it”. Matteo Salvini said this today at the inauguration of the Lega headquarters in Montevarchi (Arezzo). On pensions the square still seems very far away. The unions are aware of the delicacy of the moment. The problem of pensions “is not just exceeding the 100 mark, which in itself is a problem. But the issue is whether a flexible system is introduced with which one can leave from the age of 62, if one recognizes the diversity of jobs “explains the leader of the CGIL, Maurizio Landini, underlining that for young people” we need to introduce a guarantee pension “.
The current stalemate worries the unions, who are asking to “start a discussion on tax and pension reforms or” I think the role of the union is to call for democratic mobilization “, adds the general secretary of the CGIL. The first measures of the government. in the coming weeks will be “the proxy laws on competition and taxation, then we will see the part of active labor policies, the reform of the shock absorbers and then the question of pensions and quota one hundred” assured Prime Minister Mario Draghi. But it’s time to to pass from words to deeds, or at least to start a finally centered discussion, after months of so many impractical hypotheses.
There are 4 months left until Quota 100 expires
There are 4 months left until Quota 100 expires, and it is not clear what will happen when early retirements with at least 62 years of age and 38 contributions are no longer allowed. The strategy of the Draghi government on pensions is not known. The table with the social partners announced by Minister Orlando was interlocutory. The staircase risk exists and it is concrete. The staircase would lead to an increase in retirement requirements of six years in the night between December 31, 2021 and January 1, 2022, like the one introduced in 2011 by the Monti government. But at the moment there is no economic emergency comparable to that of 2011 to justify in some way an immediate and heavy inequality of treatment.
Suddenly, retirement would only be accessible from the age of 67. It would go towards very complex scenarios. From 31 December 2021, without any harmonization, there will be a sharp increase of five or six years in retirement requirements for the excluded. Here is an extreme case: Mario and Giovanni worked 38 years in the same company, only the first was born in December 1959 and the second in January 1960. Mario will retire (if he wants to) at 62, while Giovanni will have to opt between an early retirement with 42 years and 10 months in 2026 or old-age retirement with 67 years and nine months, even in 2029. This staircase would even go beyond that of the old Maroni reform (law 243/2004), when a difference was introduced of three working years between those who would have accrued the right to a pension on 31 December 2007 and those who would have done so on 1 January 2008.
Retired for 63 years but with actuarial reduction
The last concrete idea comes from the economists Tito Boeri and Roberto Perotti, in view of exceeding Quota 100. There is “a way to reconcile greater flexibility in the retirement age with the sustainability of the system: you can retire when you want, starting from 63 years, but accepting an actuarial reduction, which today is applied only to the contribution rate, on the entire amount of the pension, as proposed by the INPS 6 years ago “, the two experts reason. Today this “would mean – explain the economists – an average reduction of one and a half points for each year in advance of the pension offered by quota 100; in the future even less since the generations who retire in the coming years will have a higher contribution share. high on which the reduction is in any case already applied in the event of early retirement “.
“It is never a good idea – is the premise of Boeri and Perotti – to radically change the rules of the pension system at the last moment, because those who are close to retirement see their life plans upset and have no time to remedy them. Yet even this time we arrive at the last minute to decide what to do with ‘Quota 100’, that is, early retirements with at least 62 years of age and 38 contributions “.
The idea launched by Boeri and Perotti would aim at “reducing the inequalities in treatment between contributory and ‘mixed’ pensions, because it would also allow holders of the latter to retire earlier, provided they have at least 20 years of contributions and a pension above a minimum threshold (currently around 1,450 euros per month) in order not to risk ending up in conditions of poverty, especially when strongly encouraged by the company to leave “. The threshold of 1,450 euros “is clearly above the Istat poverty threshold. It could be lowered to a thousand euros, about 2 times the minimum pension, making the audience potentially interested in early retirement wider”.
Two shares to retire
The support for this hypothesis, all to be filed in any case, is there from many sides. The ok of the INPS President, Pasquale Tridico, is almost taken for granted, given the positions he has expressed in recent months. Different from those of Boweri-Perotti, but based on an inevitable differentiation. The number one of the INPS reasoned on the hypothesis of reform of the pension system that would meet the problem of checks destined to become lower and lower, based on a “division of the pension quota into two parts: salary and contributory”. In practice, a pension advance only for the contributory part: 62/63 years and 20 years of contributions. The remainder (the wage share) is obtained at the age of 67. Thus one could foresee “1 year less for each child for working mothers, or an increase in the transformation coefficient correspondingly and 1 year less for every 10 years of heavy / heavy work, or an increase in the transformation coefficient correspondingly (simplifying the certification ) “. In addition, the “blocking of life expectancy for cohorts”. The pension advance for the contributory part could therefore be given at 62-63 years while the rest (the salary quota) would be obtained only years later, at 67 years of age.
But let’s go back to the plan of the two Boeri-Perotti economists. The path indicated appears sensible because it would not increase the path of public debt and the additional costs from 2022 onwards would be almost entirely offset by slightly lower pension amounts. In summary: there would be no excesses given that the possibility of retiring early remains, but with a slight reduction in the amounts. Draghi has the task of pulling the strings.