| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font
First page > Show document

Show document Help

Title:PRIMERJAVA DRUGEGA STEBRA POKOJNINSKEGA SISTEMA SLOVENIJE IN ŠVICE
Authors:ID Protner, Vitomil (Author)
ID Bobek, Vito (Mentor) More about this mentor... New window
Files:.pdf UNI_Protner_Vitomil_2009.pdf (458,71 KB)
MD5: 550075BAF175363B5EF6637150992026
PID: 20.500.12556/dkum/1def12a5-79c1-4750-8d8f-d39411ff64f8
 
Language:Slovenian
Work type:Undergraduate thesis
Organization:EPF - Faculty of Business and Economics
Abstract:Mnogo razvitih držav je zaradi demografske transformacije, ki smo ji priča zadnja desetletja, reformiralo svoje pokojninske sisteme, pri čemer jih je večina predstavila oziroma povečala vlogo naložbenih pokojnin. Pogoji za nadaljnjo uspešno širitev naložbenih pokojninskih shem oziroma drugega stebra zahtevajo dobro poslovanje pokojninskih skladov in uravnotežen regulativni okvir, ki izboljša javno zaupanje. Pri tem je še posebej pomembna zaščita zavarovancev, saj so gospodinjstva vedno bolj izpostavljena finančnim tveganjem zaradi naraščanja pokojninskih shem z določenimi prispevki. Slednje državam postavlja nove izzive tako pri institucionalni ureditvi kot pri regulaciji drugega stebra. Osnovne rešitve institucionalne ureditve drugega stebra se nanašajo na obveznost udeležbe, sistem pokojninskih shem ter na mehanizem financiranja. V obeh obravnavanih državah se tako drugi steber financira na osnovi zunanjega mehanizma. Tudi rešitve glede sistema pokojninskih shem so nedvoumne. Slovenija, ki je drugi steber uvedla v zadnjem desetletju, ima v veljavi pokojninsko shemo z določenimi prispevki, shemo z določenimi pravicami pa sploh ne pozna. Švica, ki je drugi steber uvedle daleč pred Slovenijo, sheme z določenimi pravicami sicer ima, vendar pa se njihov delež hitro zmanjšuje. Manj jasne pa so rešitve glede obveznosti udeležbe. Slovenija je tista, ki se ni odločila za obvezen drugi steber, vendar zaradi tega ne moremo reči, da gre za napačno odločitev, saj se je potrebno zavedati, da je tema o pokojninskih reformah politično izjemno občutljiva. Enostranski ukrepi so zato skoraj neizvedljivi, vse nacionalno soglasje pa je pogoj za postopno prilagoditev sistema spremenjenim demografskim spremembam. Rešitve, ki sta jih državi ubrali za ureditev aktualne problematike drugega stebra, se med seboj razlikujeta. Vsaka država ima namreč drugačne zgodovinske, gospodarske in politične predispozicije, ki so vplivale tudi na ureditev »problematičnih« področij drugega stebra. Regulativni okvir, tveganje za posameznika, omejitve investiranja, zajamčeno donosnost, izplačilo pokojnin, prakso nadzora in strukturo ter višino provizij, vse to so področja, ki jih obravnavani državi urejata na svoj način. Kljub temu pa obstajata tudi dve področji aktualne problematike, kjer se državi posložujeta enakih rešitev. Prenos pravic med posameznimi pokojninskimi načrti je namreč dovoljen pri obeh državah, poleg tega pa imata obe državi davčni režim, ki predstavlja neposredni davek na potrošnjo. Sicer pa ima vsaka država svoje specifike. Švica je tako ena izmed redkih držav z relativno zrelim drugim stebrom pokojninskega sistema, ki predstavlja velikokrat citiran primer. Glavne značilnosti ureditve drugega stebra predstavlja veliko število pokojninskih institucij ter visoka koncentracija članov med njimi. Švica ima tudi najbolj sproščen regulativni okvir izmed vseh držav, glavne pomanjkljivosti pa se nanašajo na razdrobljen nadzor in izključitev zaposlenih z nižjimi dohodki iz drugega stebra. V Sloveniji smo od uvedbe prostovoljnega prostega zavarovanja priča precejšnjemu porastu sredstev, vendar pa se slovenski sistem dodatnega pokojninskega zavarovanja sedaj nahaja v fazi, ko je potrebno predstaviti nove spodbude tako zavarovancem skladov kot tudi upravljavcem. Potencialne zavarovance je namreč potrebno spodbuditi k vključenosti v drugi steber, že obstoječe zavarovance pa k višjemu plačevanju premij. Upravljavce pa je potrebno ponuditi takšne spodbude, da bi začeli s sredstvi upravljati na način, ki bi naložbeno strategijo čimbolj približal posameznemu zavarovancu. Vsaka pokojninska reforma in uvedba drugega stebra torej predstavlja obsežen poseg v gospodarstvo države, pozitivni učinki pa se praviloma pokažejo šele v daljšem obdobju. Specifične razmere v katerih se nahaja posamezna država in njeno gospodarstvo so privedle do tega, da je vsaka država razvila svoj, unikaten sistem tako drugega stebra kot tudi pokojninskega sistema na spl
Keywords:obvezno pokojninsko in invalidsko zavarovanje, prostovoljno dodatno pokojninsko zavarovanje, I. steber, II. steber, III. steber, zavarovalnica, pokojninska družba, kapitalska zavarovanja, rentna zavarovanja
Place of publishing:Maribor
Year of publishing:2009
PID:20.500.12556/DKUM-9837 New window
COBISS.SI-ID:9897500 New window
NUK URN:URN:SI:UM:DK:IAXB3SKQ
Publication date in DKUM:29.06.2009
Views:3357
Downloads:269
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
Categories:EPF
:
Copy citation
  
Average score:(0 votes)
Your score:Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:Bookmark and Share



Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:COMPARISON OF SECOND PILLAR OF THE PENSION SYSTEM OF SLOVENIA AND SWITZERLAND
Abstract:Due to demographic transformation of the last decades have many developed countries reformed their pension systems and the importance of investment pensions was in most of them increased. For successful further broadening of investment pension schemes or second pillar good monetary operation of pension funds is demanded as well as a balanced regulative frame that enhances public trust. Protecting the insured is of utter importance since many households are being more and more exposed to financial risks caused by rising of the pension schemes with defined contributions. Countries are therewith faced with new challenges as regards institutional regulations and regulations of the second pillar. The basic institutional regulation of second pillar deals with necessity of participation, pension scheme system and the financing mechanism. The second pillar is in all researched countries financed on the basis of external mechanism and the solutions of pension scheme systems are also unambiguous. In the countries that introduced the second pillar in the last decade the pension schemes with defined contributions are in force, while the schemes with defined benefits are unknown to such countries. Switzerland introduced the second pillar far ahead of the others and does have schemes with defined benefits but their share is rapidly decreasing. It is less clear how the necessity of participation is dealt with in different countries. Among the researched countries is Slovenia the only one that did not decide for a mandatory second pillar. However, the decision should not be considered wrong, taking into consideration how politically delicate the pension reforms are. One-sided measures are therefore almost unfeasible and moreover, general national consensus is the prerequisite for a gradual adjustment of the system to the demographic changes. Countries have chosen different ways of dealing with current second pillar problems. Each one of them has diverse historical, economic and political predispositions that influenced the regulation of problematic aspects of second pillar. Regulative frame, individual’s risk, investment limitation, guarantee return, paying out the pensions, inspection, the structure and the height of provisions – all these fields are taken care of in a specific way in each separate country’s economy. However, there are two areas of concern that are treated alike. In all the researched countries the benefit transfer among different pension plans is allowed and additionally they all have tax regimes that represent direct expenditure taxes. Switzerland is one of the rare countries with relatively established second pillar of the pension system and is therefore an often quoted example. The main characteristics of the second pillar are a large number of pension institutions and a high concentration of their members. Switzerland has the loosest regulative frame, its biggest disadvantage being the fragmented inspection and the exclusion of the workforce with lower income from the second pillar. Since the voluntary insurance was implemented in Slovenia, the funds have been on increase. However, the Slovenian system of additional pension insurance has come to the stage when new incentives need to be presented to the fund managers and to the insured. The potential insurants should be encouraged to participate in the second pillar, and the existing ones made pay higher premiums. Fund managers need to be offered such stimulations that they would start managing the funds in the way that draws investment strategies as near as possible to the individual insurant. Each pension reform and second pillar implementation encroaches massively into country’s economy, its positive effects usually being seen only after a longer period of time. Specific circumstances of each separate country and its economy have resulted in many unique schemes of the second pillar as well as pension system in general. This dissertation compares second pillar policies in different countries and through the analyses leads to the c
Keywords:compulsory pension and disability insurance, voluntary additional pension and disability insurance, the 1st pillar, the 2nd pillar, the 3rd pillar, insurance company, pension company, capital insurance, annuity insurance


Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)
0 - 0 / 0
 
There are no comments!

Back
Logos of partners University of Maribor University of Ljubljana University of Primorska University of Nova Gorica