Lietuvos socialinio draudimo pensijų dalinio privatizavimo tikslai ir rezultatai

Management of pension schemes has always been a difficult task for governments and the challenges that governments are facing today are growing faster than many countries anticipated. Pension plans have evolved overtime as public and private sector schemes slowly switching to PAYG system of funding and the uncertainty over current contributors’ future is growing. However, the recent financial crisis turned attention towards this hidden deficit of the countries where pension funds around the world lost significant amount of their value and the mounting pressure forced the policy makers to take actions to address this issue which they did by suspending and scaling down pension privatisation which once was proposed by World Bank and supported by countries around the world specially in Eastern Europe to answer the funding problems of pension plans. Recent studies such as Drahokoupil and Domonkos (2013) and Orenstein (2014) among others have analysed the impact of financial crisis on pension funds and the role played by private pensions during that period but were unable to find any significant differences between public and private pensions in terms of returns and risks. These studies raise questions on the rationale behind the recent reforms that not only significantly reduced the funding through private pension plans but the initiatives such as UK government allowing pensioners to take their pension savings as single cash payment instead of buying annuity does not seem like a insightful step that can minimize the pension deficit but will result in extra cash burden on treasury (Flood, 2014). Many European countries such as Hungary, Latvia and Poland completely abolished private pensions as a response to resolve the problem of pension deficit. However, on comparing the portfolios of public and private pensions during the period of financial crash, analysts found that both were holding risky assets and due to the market turmoil, the fund lost their value but question of why only private pension funds were penalized is still far from answered that can make economic and financial reasoning. Resulting reforms imposes constraints and stringent requirement for pension funds where regulators in US and Europe have made attempts to prevent the use of financial derivatives to hedge the portfolio risk. The case for these regulations in reducing risk is debatable while some supported, other criticised as it leads to increased costs and impedes fund growth. These also resulting in misalignment of interests as assets managers are forced to focus on short-term volatility rather than sustainable returns (Randle and Rudolph, 2014). There are many reasons that have created this enormous pension deficit such as political, social, demographical, economic and financial. But some risk can be managed easily than others, as most of the literature focuses on the impact of political and social policies on pension plans, the discussion in this paper is on financial aspect of the problem and attempts to find solutions to manage the pension risks through financial markets. While many governments such as Detroit city sunk down the pension deficit abyss and defaulted on their obligations, Norwegian pension fund and Australian superannuation fund have emerged as ideal models that can be followed by countries facing pension crisis as the longer they take to react the deeper they sunk in to the deficit hole. The aim of this discussion is to: 1) gain insights into the underfunding problem of pension funds and the impact of financial crisis on pension liabilities and how it has amplified the pension risks and liabilities, with underfunding and risk mitigation as focal point. 2) Critically discuss post crisis pension reforms and how they are likely to resolve the problems. The focus will be on risks associated with private and public pension plans. 3) While regulatory law is not the main focus of this discussion but there are some regulations that directly impact the financial performance of the pension funds such as imposing constraints on investment of funds. Therefore the discussion follows the extent to which fed should intervene, and attention will also be drawn on inconsistent and biased regulations. 4) For sustainable pension plans strategies, Australian superannuation and Norway’s pension funds have been discussed in detail including their investment strategies, risk management techniques and supervision in order to find solutions that can be used by other countries such as US and UK.

Анотація. Метою статті є ґрунтовний аналіз сучасного стану ринку недержавного пенсійного страхування України, характеристика основних підходів біхевіористичної теорії фінансів і пропозиції щодо їх використання у вітчизняній практиці. Розвиток національної пенсійної системи є можливим лише за умови залучення широкого кола громадян до участі в діяльності НПФ, які в багатьох країнах є основою пенсійних систем. Безперечно, обсяги залучення НПФ як третього рівня пенсійної системи України є значно меншими, ніж у зарубіжних країнах, проте можна стверджувати, що останні роки стали для НПФ одними з найбільш продуктивних і результативних, а це означає, що існує розуміння, в якому напрямі можлива розбудова системи приватних пенсій, а отже, обсягу залучення приватних осіб до ще більшого забезпечення їх при досягненні пенсійного віку. На думку вчених, доцільно застосувати для цього підходи, які ґрунтуються на використанні біхевіористичної теорії фінансів, котра набула своєї особливої активізації після глобальної фінансової кризи. В останні роки вчені, що працюють у сфері біхевіористичної теорії фінансів, виявили, що хоча люди намагаються максимізувати своє особисте благополуччя, існують певні фактори, які значно обмежують їхній вибір. Визнання існувань цих обмежень суттєво змінило розуміння сучасної науки про процес ухвалення окремих економічних і фінансових рішень, особливо тих, що стосуються довгострокового споживання і заощаджень, зокрема таких, як акумуляція і декумуляція активів у пенсійних схемах. Таким чином, такі особливості поведінки людини успішно використовуються у світі при розробленні пенсійних програм, для посилення довгострокових пенсійних заощаджень. У статті свого розвитку дістали науково-методичні підходи щодо підвищення мотивації громадян до пенсійних заощаджень у недержавних пенсійних фондах на основі біхевіористичної теорії фінансів, що, у свою чергу, дозволяє обґрунтувати ефективні програми розвитку третього рівня пенсійної системи України. Результатом проведеного аналізу сучасного стану ринку недержавного пенсійного страхування України має стати розуміння того, що за сучасних економічних умов головні зусилля уряду щодо подальшого реформування вітчизняної пенсійної системи мають бути зосереджені на підтримці третього рівня, основу якого в Україні становлять недержавні пенсійні фонди (НПФ), що діють за пенсійними схемами з визначеними внесками. Головна перевага участі недержавних пенсійних фондів у системі пенсійного забезпечення полягає в тому, що вони дозволяють розподілити між трьома її складовими ризики, пов’язані зі змінами в демографічній ситуації (до яких найбільш чутливою є солідарна система) і з коливаннями в економіці й на ринку капіталів (що найбільшим чином впливає на накопичувальну систему). Такий розподіл ризиків дозволяє зробити пенсійну систему більш фінансово збалансованою і стійкою, що є обов’язковою умовою для ефективного її функціонування усієї системи соціального страхування України. Ключові слова: недержавні пенсійні фонди, пенсійні нагромадження, біхевіористична теорія фінансів, акумуляція активів, декумуляція активів. Формул: 0; рис.: 0; табл.: 1; бібл.: 12.

The aim of this article is to define the Japanese, South Korean and Lithuanian latest pension system reforms and measures during economic crisis. Problems of the Japanese, S. Korean and Lithuanian pension systems are similar to the others industrial Asian or European Union countries: ageing, impact of economic crisis and pension system budget deficit. Moreover, the Japanese, S. Korean and Lithuanian population ageing rapidly (low birth rate, longer life expectancy) and it influences the entire society and requires more complex and pressing pension systems reforms. All countries of the world fighting against the ageing and searching for the pension system financial sustainability. After the universal pension system reform in 1985, the task of Japanese government is to ensure for each participant an adequate and regular pension income, to implement the social justice and solidarity. Pension system reforms in S. Korea began intensively only since 1997 and this was associated with a global currency crisis. Since the end of the last century until 2009, S. Korean government has developed a modern social security and social assistance systems. The government is constantly increasing social security coverage and benefits (from 1999 to 2009, social benefits increased almost four times). However, the social security coverage is still insufficient, income disparities increasing and the financial disbalances require to reform the pension system for a long-term perspective. The pension system reform of 2003 and 2011 raised the wide discussion on the state social pension insurance system future development of Lithuania. This reform clearly demonstrates that the government in 2003 opted for a liberal position and in 2011 – it was decided to strengthen state social insurance guarantees. KEY WORDS: pension system, reform, crisis, ageing, Japan, S. Korea, Lithuania.

The article under the title "Analysis and prospects of private pension funds in Russia" deals with the pension system of the Russian Federation and the problems that the private pension funds will be facing with the introduction of the new pension reform. In addition, the article also deeply studies the private pension funds market in Russia. The study presented in the article also aims to thoroughly analyze the key drivers of the recent boom of the private pension funds sector. In addition, the study also reflects on the prospects of development of private pension funds and the major growth factors for the future taking into considerations the latest pension reform. It is exactly the pension capital that constitutes the major role to the growth of the the private pension funds market. In addition, taking into account the latest developments in the pension legislature, which imply no pension capital available to the private pension funds for the period 2014-2015 years, it is easy to foresee that the only growth factor left is pension reserves. Overall it obviously means that private pension funds should develop private pension schemes. Moreover, private pension insurance may become the major driver of the whole pension industry in the near future.

In all states of European Union reforms in pension system are being made, likewise in Latvia. Demographic and economic problemsthat are occurred forces pension reforms to be made. New developed pension reform includes different processes, like – formation offinancial equilibrium between incomes and costs, limit performance in going early in pension, increasing of age of going in pension,rebalancing between men and women. Simultaneous formation of state and private pension systems could prevent some of the majordrawback in system of pension that undermines the pension system of nowadays. Unfortunately the high social security contributionsof state sector persons lacks of money, for deposit in private pension funds. Using method of logic synthesis, as the target authorsnominated to examine problems of pension systems in the Baltic States, as well as similarities and divergences in problems andperspectives, with the status of private pension funds in accumulating pension system.KEY WORDS: labour market, pension system, pension funds, the Baltic States.

The article considers topical issues of determining the current state of development of the private pension system in Ukraine, and defines the concept of "private pension fund". In economic essence, the system of non-state pension fund is defined as an integral part of the system of accumulative pension provision, based on voluntary participation of individuals and legal entities in the formation of pension savings in order to receive additional pension contributions. Problems that hinder the development of private pension funds, namely the shadowing of wages and labor relations, lack of public awareness, lack of legislation are identified. The functioning of private pension funds in the country depends not only on reforming the existing pension system, but also on the growth of incomes, their de-shadowing and development of the financial market in general. The current pension system is not able to provide the population with the necessary pension assets. This problem can be solved by intensifying the activities of private pension funds. Emphasis is placed on the need and importance of a voluntary private pension system and its role in ensuring the development of the state economy. As world experience shows, in a market economy, the development of private pension funds is one of the important components to ensure effective functioning of the state. Private pension funds are powerful investment investors because they can mobilize additional investment resources. The main purpose of investing pension assets is to preserve the savings of the population. The main indicators of activity of non-state pension funds are analyzed, namely: pension contributions, pension payments, the number of concluded pension contracts, the amount of investment income, etc. Further trends in the development of private pension provision in Ukraine are noted, substantiated the necessary measures to intensify activities in modern economic conditions, proposed recommendations for solving existing problems of institutions. However, in implementing the proposed measures should be remembered participation of both individuals and legal entities.

In all states of European Union reforms in pension system are being made, likewise in Latvia. Demographic and economic problems that are occurred forces pension reforms to be made. New developed pension reform includes different processes, like – formation of financial equilibrium between incomes and costs, limit performance in going early in pension, increasing of age of going in pension, rebalancing between men and women. Simultaneous formation of state and private pension systems could prevent some of the major drawback in system of pension that undermines the pension system of nowadays. Unfortunately the high social security contributions of state sector persons lacks of money, for deposit in private pension funds. Using method of logic synthesis, as the target authors nominated to examine problems of pension systems in the Baltic States, as well as similarities and divergences in problems and perspectives, with the status of private pension funds in accumulating pension system.

This paper studies the appropriateness of a public or private orientation of pension systems in the light of the recent financial crisis, which has underscored the difficulties and contradictions associated with each system. The different institutional arrangements, in which public or private pension systems are embedded, are key components when assessing their responses to the crisis. Particularly, private pension systems are intertwined with financial markets, while social insurance-based pension systems are linked to the labour market mechanisms. This paper compares the British and French pension systems, as “archetypes” of private-oriented and public-oriented systems, respectively, the first relying on the market and private pension schemes, and the second on mandatory social insurance. This paper shows that the crisis has upheld the founding principles of the public (French) and private (British) pension systems to maintain the existing institutional configurations. At the same time, both systems have strengthened the role played by means-tested benefits and minimum pensions for low-income groups to offset the weaknesses of one or the other system, as emphasised by the crisis.

European governments are increasingly retreating from public pension provision and promoting the expansion of private pension funds. Analysts of comparative social policy have traditionally considered that the politics of pension privatisation is driven by politicians’ and socio-economic actors’ concerns about the generosity and costs of pension arrangements. But, when they are fully-funded instead of being financed on a pay-as-you-go basis, pensions generate funds that are injected into the financial system. The existence of such a welfare-finance nexus means that stakeholders in the pension system are also attentive to how pension funds invest their assets, and may try to actively shape the institutional design of pensions in accordance with such financial concerns. This paper focuses on the role of labour and business – that is employers and the financial industry – in pension privatisation and develops theoretical expectations on how these actors’ interest in maximising control over private pension funds’ financial assets affects pension politics. The argument is tested with a case study of French pension privatisation between the 1980s and the 2000s.

European governments are increasingly retreating from public pension provision and promoting the expansion of private pension funds. Analysts of comparative social policy have traditionally considered that the politics of pension privatisation is driven by politicians’ and socioeconomic actors’ concerns about the generosity and costs of pension arrangements. But, when they are fully funded instead of being financed on a pay-as-you-go basis, pensions generate funds that are injected into the financial system. The existence of such a welfare–finance nexus means that stakeholders in the pension system are also attentive to how pension funds invest their assets, and may try to actively shape the institutional design of pensions in accordance with such financial concerns. This article focuses on the role of organised labour and business, that is, employers and the financial industry, in pension privatisation and develops theoretical expectations on how these actors’ interest in maximising control over private pension funds’ financial assets affects pension politics. The argument is tested with a case study of French pension privatisation between the 1980s and the 2000s.

The subject of the research is the formation of pension savings on compulsory pension insurance by public and private pension insurers. The paper’s relevance comes from the lack of a conclusive solution in contemporary research to the dilemma of selecting between maintaining competition in the pension market and centralizing pension savings. The purpose of the research is to assess the effectiveness of the formation of pension savings for mandatory pension insurance in private pension funds in comparison with the Pension Fund of Russia, both from the point of view of the interests of insured persons and society as a whole. Research methods include comparative analysis and logical generalization, economic-mathematical and statistical methods, methods of financial mathematics. The information base of the study is data from the official websites of the Pension Fund of Russia, the Central Bank of Russia, the Federal State Statistics Service, the Deposit Insurance Agency, the Moscow Stock Exchange, VEB.RF, etc. The effectiveness of the formation of pension savings from public and private pension insurers was assessed by a number of criteria: from the standpoint of the interests of insured persons — these include the profitability of pension savings the reliability of the pension insurer, the possibility of choosing investment strategies; from the standpoint of the interests of society — the evaluation criterion is the use of pension savings as a long-term investment resource for economic development. As a result, it is concluded that the Pension Fund of Russia manages the pension savings of citizens more effectively than private pension funds. This raises the question of whether private pension funds should participate in compulsory pension insurance.

The article focuses on the reform of the pension systems in North Macedonia and Russia, which resulted in switch from one-pillar to multi-pillar pension systems, and current legal and institutional architecture in both legal systems with emphasis on private pension funds which are widely recognized as the core drivers for the improvement of the living standards of retirees. The article starts with the general overview of Macedonian and Russian pension systems which provides the necessary background for understanding of the legal regime of private pension funds. The general overview of the pension systems is followed by the detailed analysis of the legal status of private pension funds in both countries, with more attention being paid to the experience of North Macedonia where private pension funds play a more important role in the pension system. In Russia private pension funds have shown their positive effect, but their coverage in general is still moderate. The overview of general rules of taxation of contributions to private pension funds and pensions concludes the article. The comparative research allowed to make the conclusion that both countries have made different progress in moving to a three-pillar pension system especially from the viewpoint of the established legal and institutional framework, and the establishment and operation of the private funds, both mandatory and voluntary.

The new pension system launched in Hungary in 1998 is epoch-making for having introduced a mandatory private pension scheme (MPPS). However, the political decision-making on pension reform and the scheme operations have been greatly influenced by conflicts of interests among ministries, political conflicts between parties, and the presence of special interest groups, including trade unions and financial institutions. This situation may have had a certain negative influence on the legal framework of the MPPS and on the management performance of private pension funds. In order for the MPPS to be sustainable in the future and to make insurance beneficiary profits a top priority, the corporate governance reform of pension funds and reinforcement of the monitoring system over them, and political neutralisation of the public pension system are necessary.

The article discusses position and role of private (non-state) pension funds in solving social problems. Activity of private pension funds related to the investment of pension savings or use of funds from pension reserves is analyzed. Principles and goals of investing these funds, list of investment objects, as well as requirements for the structure of the investment portfolio are disclosed. Private pension funds are looking for opportunities for highly profitable investment options for collected receipts, because this will increase their attractiveness to potential clients (it will correspond to their macroeconomic function within the country’s economy), and will also meet the objective of increasing their own profit (within the framework of microeconomic function of the company as a business entity).

Although controversial, investment and other draconian regulations for private pension funds are suitable for countries with weak capital markets and little tradition of private pension provision. But regulations should be relaxed as private pension funds gain in maturity. Like other financial institutions, private pension funds require a panoply of prudential and protective regulations to ensure their soundness and safeguard the interests of affiliated workers. These regulations include authorization criteria (such as minimum capital, fit and proper, and business plan requirements), asset segregation and external custody, professional asset management, external audits and actuarial reviews, extensive information disclosure, and effective supervision. These regulations resemble those applied to banks and insurance companies and are not particularly controversial. But private pension funds in developing countries are often subject to structural and operational controls that are more controversial. Such controls include special authorizations and market segmentation, one account per worker and one fund per company rules, nondiscrimination provisions, regulations on fees and commissions, investment limits, minimum profitability rules, and state guarantees. Vittas discusses the use of such regulations in developing countries that have implemented systemic pension reforms. He draws a distinction between this approach and the more relaxed regulatory regime that relies on the prudent person rule found in more advanced countries. He argues that the draconian regulatory approach can be justified on several grounds, but especially by the compulsory nature of the pension system, the absence of strong and transparent capital markets, and the lack of a long tradition of private pension funds. But the regulations should be progressively relaxed as private pension funds and their affiliated workers gain in experience, sophistication, and maturity. This paper - a product of the Development Research Group - is part of a larger effort in the group to study pension funds and institutional investors.