In the autumn, if the Letta government manages to survive the consequences of the sentence inflicted on Silvio Berlusconi, the pensions chapter should open. There are many issues on the agenda: from the introduction of flexible retirement criteria to the definitive solution for the so-called redundant; from the old/young relay to the penalisation, in a solidarity key, of the so-called golden pensions.
The latter intervention is certainly the most probable for many reasons: firstly, because it is the only one among those indicated that can provide a flow of revenue, even if modest, against the substantial increases in expenditure that the other measures would entail; secondly, because Prime Minister Letta has shown, on so many occasions, great sensitivity towards "politically correct" issues that are appreciated by a public opinion which wishes, often in vain, for itself to retire as soon as possible and with the treatment the highest among those allowed and which, therefore, is implacable with whoever performed that miracle.
Among the most popular hypotheses (one by “Fratelli d'Italia'”, another by Yoram Gutgeld, Matteo Renzi's guru, yet another by Giuliano Amato: all proposals which, at first glance, promise from totally improbable Garden of Miracles) the objectively more serious one is being elaborated (quite advanced) in the parliamentary groups of Civic Choice for Italy (after all, what to expect differently from a party of refined intellectuals, professors and lecturers emeriti as well as personalities expressed by the best civil society, in which those who do not have at least two surnames are looked down upon?).
Let's see what it is. The basic idea is to recalculate even with the contributory system, the treatments provided with the salary calculation exceeding 90 thousand euros per year (assuming this level as reasonable, in the presence of those circulating, is an indication of not giving oneself to easy demagoguery ). If a difference emerges between the two amounts, a solidarity contribution is applied to it for five years (whether in a fixed or progressive percentage depending on the extent of the difference is being discussed). The resources thus obtained should enhance the funds for nursery schools and youth employment.
The proposal is suggestive and theoretically fair: however, it comes up against a more substantial obstacle than the Berlin Wall. The operation of the recalculation according to the contribution system can only be carried out in the private sector, since INPS has available the individual contribution positions starting from 1974. However, it is precluded for state employees (where the highest pensions are hidden: for magistrates, super-bureaucrats, high military ranks, members of authorities, etc.) since for them a pension management system was established - actually only on paper - starting from 1996, while previously the administrations paid the pensions on their own, at like salaries. And they weren't required to set aside the contributions.
It is also necessary to bear in mind another aspect: while in the salary, the length of service useful for defining the amount of the pension is blocked at a ceiling of 40 years, in the contributory count all the payments made even for a greater number of years. Therefore, those who stayed longer at work could even earn money through the recalculation or in any case would be exempt from the solidarity contribution.
