Hopfried Stutz: A split in the 2nd pillar? Purely wishful thinking

class=”sc-29f61514-0 fQbOYE”>

Today we are talking about separation – about the separation of the 1st pillar, AHV, as well as the 2nd pillar, occupational pension.

The division was introduced into the AHV in 1997. The goal is to improve the position of women who earn less. When calculating the pension, the incomes of both spouses for the years of marriage are added up and credited to each in half. Distribution – division – is carried out as soon as both spouses reach retirement age or their marriage is dissolved.

As long as it’s clear. And now in the 2nd column? Exactly: Here the split is wishful thinking, which it will remain. At a special meeting in early May, the National Council adopted the postulate of the social commission of the National Council. Accordingly, the Federal Council should study in a report how the separation model for couples dependent on children can be implemented in the Occupational Pensions Act (BVG). After the birth of the child, the pension fund assets of both parents must be divided by 50 percent each.

At first glance it seems modern. And this could alleviate the problem that women in the 2nd pillar receive, on average, less benefits than men. But someone who understands how the 2nd pillar works can hardly imagine how it should work in practice.

First of all, it should be noted that the separation will only benefit unmarried couples. In the case of married couples, the pension fund assets of both parents are divided in one way or another in the event of a divorce. And if the marriage is not dissolved, it can be expected that the spouses themselves will decide how to deal with the funds of the second pillar.

So how is separation supposed to work if the child’s partner and mother are not in a pension fund? Should the husband’s pension fund transfer the wife’s share to the guaranteed benefit account? Or should the pension fund also include a partner in its portfolio? Then how about a man go to the second round and father a child with another woman? Should the pension fund include this second woman in its portfolio? And what would splitting look like in this case? 50% for the man, 25% for both mothers? Or a third for a husband and two mothers?

Of course, this is just a postulate or a report that the Federal Council has to instruct. The report we already know today will not find a viable solution without making the system even more complex and forcing pension funds to work even harder.

Source: Blick