The Lega-M5S pension reform project continues to shed its skin. The innovations recorded in recent weeks aim to make the dismantling of the Fornero law more sustainable for the state coffers, but also risk reducing the convenience for workers who would like to retire.
The counter-reform envisaged by the new government rests on two pillars:
- quota 41, i.e. access to early retirement with 41 years of contributions, regardless of age;
- quota 100, i.e. the possibility of retiring when the sum of age and years of contributions gives at least 100 as a result.
The problem is that, in these terms, the accounts do not add up.
HOW MUCH DO “QUOTA 41” AND “QUOTA 100” COST
According to Tito Boeri, president of INPS, "overcoming the Fornero reform through a quota of 100 between age and contributions or with 41 years of contributions at any age would have an immediate cost of 15 billion and once fully operational it would cost 20 billion a year".
Stefano Patriarca, former consultant of Palazzo Chigi for social security and now head of the consultancy company Tabula, says instead that the account would be 12,3 billion in the first year and almost 16 when fully operational.
Numbers very different from those envisaged by the government contract, which on page 33 speaks of allocating just "five billion to facilitate the exit from the labor market of the categories currently excluded".
BRAMBILLA PENSION REFORM
To reduce the gap between costs and available funds, the latest version of the yellow-and-green reform – the one proposed by Alberto Brambilla, a Lega pension expert – modifies the original text by making the requirements for early retirement more stringent.
In particular:
- the years of contributions required to retire regardless of age rises from 41 years to 41 years and 6 months;
- retirement at "quota 100" becomes possible only if you are at least 64 years of age (and therefore at least 36 years of contributions).
The Brambilla proposal also introduces a two-year ceiling on notional contributions in the event of layoffs or sickness and above all provides for the recalculation of the pension using the contributory method for the period from 1996 to 2011. In this way, paradoxically, the Lega-Stella reform would complete the path that began with the Dini law of 1995 (which introduced the contributory method for new workers) and continued with the Fornero reform of 2011 (which extended the contributory to all workers starting from 2012).
It means that many taxpayers could retire earlier than expected, but with a smaller benefit than they expected. According to Tabula, the difference would be 10% on average.
GOODBYE TO THE SOCIAL APE, WE BET ON CATEGORY FUNDS
Finally, the reform devised by Brambilla envisages not to refinance the social bee, which therefore from 2019 would cease to exist. In this way tens of thousands of people in difficulty would lose the right to the bridging income paid by the State for a maximum period of three years and seven months before retirement.
A sacrifice that risks turning out to be useless, given that – again according to Tabula's calculations – even with all these changes, the pension reform would still cost nine billion. Almost double what was expected from government contract.
However, Brambilla disputes these conclusions, underlining that the limit of five billion could be kept by focusing on redundancy or solidarity funds, "which already exist for every professional category". The idea is to "replicate the model of the banking sector - explains Brambilla in an interview with Repubblica - which, thanks to its fund, fed by the 0,30% paid on each gross salary, has retired 2000 employees since 60 without burdening on the state". In short, the category funds would guarantee early retirement "to all those who have serious health or family problems".
