À propos de cet article
Publié en ligne: 14 avr. 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/wrlae-2025-0003
Mots clés
© 2025 Jarosław Poteraj, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
j_wrlae-2025-0003_tab_001
| Year | Reform | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| 1992 | Introduction of individual pension accounts (SPP) alongside SNP | Shift from public PAYG to private funded schemes; increased competition |
| 2002 | Implementation of guaranteed minimum pension in SPP | Enhanced financial security for low-income retirees in SPP |
| 2012 | Mandatory participation of self-employed in SNP; new social pension introduced | Increased coverage of pension system, addressing informal sector issues |
| 2020 | COVID-19 pandemic-related measures allowing mass withdrawals from SPP | Significant reduction in retirement savings; risk to long-term system stability |
j_wrlae-2025-0003_tab_002
| Criteria | SNP (Public PAYG) | SPP (Private Funded) |
|---|---|---|
| Funding Source | Employee contributions (13%) + state subsidies | Employee contributions (10%) + investment returns |
| Retirement Age | 65 (both genders) | 65 (early retirement possible with conditions) |
| Pension Calculation | Based on average salary over last 60 months | Based on individual account balance |
| Tax Treatment | No tax incentives; pensions taxed | No tax incentives; pensions taxed |
| Impact of ‚Black Swans’ | Limited due to state guarantee, but fiscal pressure increases | High vulnerability due to possibility of mass withdrawals |