Pensions, Quota 100 remains but it is already a flop

The new government is sending some indications as to how it intends to tackle, in the context of a financial maneuver shared with Brussels, some important issues which in the more or less recent past have been at the center of the political debate. The intentions seem conciliatory. The new Minister of Labour, Nunzia Catalfo, who as president of the Senate Labor Commission was dealing with several dossiers on the subject, made unexpected statements regarding the jobs act stating that she does not have a partisan position and that in blocking the measures there are also suitable solutions.

Of course, when asked for an example, she limits herself to citing the institution of Anpal, which, however innovative, after the rejection of the Boschi reform, can only be seen "from the waist up", because the Regions have kept their primary powers in the field of active employment policies. On the contrary, to be malicious, one would think that the flattering judgment on the Agency derives from the fact that Mimmo Parisi is in charge of it, the person - a real "grey eminence" - who brought the Mississippi to flow along the peninsula. It must therefore be assumed that there are still no clear ideas on the jobs act, but that the times in which the exponents of the M5S accused of all wickedness that provision that so characterized the innovative breakthrough in the field of work implemented by the Renzi government . In the same interview in which he issued a pass for the jobs act, the new Minister of Labor guaranteed that the 100 quota will also expire, while there will be some improvements to the basic income and the establishment of a salary will be completed minimum. A few hours later, at his debut in Helsinki, the "red" owner of the Mef Roberto Gualtieri made statements similar to that of his "yellow" colleague on the same topics.

In particular with regard to the 100 quota, the minister stated that “will stay until it expires”, though the measure linked to early retirement does not make him enthusiastic, because “in a context of scarce resources, the intervention on pensions had to be done in a different way; but it is wrong to constantly change the rules of the game in social security matters”. That quota of 100 pensions is confirmed in 2020 it seems quite safe (mostly the discussion is about possible new stakes or restrictions: just look at the numerous rumors of recent weeks). But Gualtieri - we repeat - has flaunted security: at least for the three-year experimental duration, the government is not oriented towards modifying its structure. This hypothesis is also supported by some research according to which the package of pension measures adopted by the yellow-green government would have given results well below expectations, already in 2019 (this estimate should be better verified when the public employees arrive). In an article in the Sole 24 Ore, Davide Colombo and Marco Rogari summarized in a table the lack of interest of potential users of the 100 quota, as emerges from the progressive decline in applications.

THE FLOP OF ODDS 100

From Il sole 24 ore of 16 September 2019

Among the possible reasons for this debacle – we are convinced of it – there is certainly the greater convenience of using the contribution-only channel, also because, for the most part, retiring baby boomers could obtain the right at an age below the canonical 62 years envisaged from quota 100. Especially since the data reported in the article by Colombo and Rogari and referring to all early retirement benefits demonstrate that it would be wrong to concentrate on quota 100 without reconsidering, in an overall plan, also the other forms (Ape sociale, 41 unists, disadvantaged workers, the women's option) which are used to the same extent by the subjects concerned, according to their convenience. And what about the next few years?

According to the Di Vittorio Foundation of the CGIL there will be “a considerable saving compared to the resources allocated in the budget law; “€9 billion and 615 million will be saved over the three-year period (2 billion 258 million in 2019; 3 billion 924 million in 2020; 3 billion and 432 million in 2021). This saving will be due to the involvement of only 35% of the audience estimated by the previous government, i.e. 341.266 instead of 973 thousand." Even Social Security Itineraries argues that in 2020 Quota 100 will be able to continue which, even without any intervention, would already provide for savings in the three-year period 2020-22, of around 9 billion, also because 80% of potential applicants for Quota 100, having 60% of the pension calculated with the mixed system (contributory since 1/1/1996) with 62 years of age, will have a permanent reduction of the pension of 10%. That is, if they earned 100 as workers, with the normal pension they would get about 70%, and with Quota 100 less than 63%. Therefore, the questions - according to Itineraries - will not be more than 50 thousand in 2020 and even fewer in 2021. As it is easy to see, the estimates of the two authoritative study centers converge.

The fact is that for pensions paid under the 100 quota scheme, the three-year period concerns the period in which the right can be asserted, not the duration of the benefit which continues until the death of the de cuius (with the normal impact on survivors). According to the State General Accounting Office (RGS), quota 100 and the other measures of decree n.4/2019 could cost 63 billion in total between 2019 and 2036. And the deviation in the 2019-2021 time frame compared to the level of expenditure previous year it would be equal to 0,50 points of GDP or 8,8 billion euros per year.

In the annual report on pension and healthcare expenditure, the RGS underlines the effects on expenditure deriving from the use of the blocked contribution channel. "However, the unfolding of the first negative effects of the demographic transition due to the retirement of the baby boom cohorts, together with the recent measures adopted in Legislative Decree 4/2019 converted with Law 26/2019 which, for the period 2019-2026 provide - it is written - the non-application for the age-independent early retirement channel of the adjustments to life expectancy of the contributory seniority requirements are factors that act in the opposite direction, limiting the reduction in the ratio between pension expenditure and GDP. In the following fifteen years (2030-2044), the ratio between pension expenditure and GDP starts to grow again, at first with more intensity and then more gradually, until it reaches a peak of 16,1% in 2044, due to the increase the number of pensions. This increase depends - he continues - both on the baby boom generations who pass from the active phase to the retired phase, and on the progressive rise in life expectancy. The latter effect is contrasted by the higher minimum requirements for access to retirement correlated to the evolution of survival, which apply to both the mixed and the contributory schemes”.

In addition, there are two other issues that deserve clarification. If it is true that quota 100 has a three-year duration, the requirements for early retirement envisaged by the Fornero reform will remain blocked (42 years and 10 months for men, one year less for women) with respect to the automatic adjustment to life expectancy , up to the end of 2026. Even this rule – which represents an important emergency exit for baby boomers (who are able to accumulate a high level of seniority at a lower age than the standard one – will be reconfirmed without modifications and until 2026? Isn't it risky for the public finances? If the considerations of the Accounting Department are founded, this institute will determine a more lasting and consistent growth in spending. Then, once the experimentation is over and the blockade has ended, what will become of the pension system? Quota 100 and the other measures resemble a bridge thrown towards the void (like the section of the Morandi Bridge after its collapse.) When the derogatory rules expire, will those of the Fornero reform come back into force? This for now is all that passes the convent. Basically a return to the future.