Rarely have leading scientists been in such agreement. 46 of them consider the unraveling of the pension package to be a mistake - and explain why in a call available to the Handelsblatt.
Berlin. Shortly before the cabinet meeting, 46 economists appealed to the federal government. In the document, which is available exclusively to Handelsblatt, the experts warn urgently against reopening the planned pension package. “Only the whole package has the necessary effect!” it says.
The call was initiated by economist chairwoman Monika Schnitzer, Constanze Janda, rector of the University of Speyer, Jörg Rocholl, president of the international business school ESMT Berlin and economist Martin Werding.
The other signatories include prominent names from the world of economics, including the economist Gabriel Felbermayr and ex-council member Ulrike Malmendier, the institute presidents Clemens Fuest from Ifo, Nicola Fuchs-Schündeln from the WZB, Moritz Schularick from the Kiel Institute, Reint Gropp from the IWH, Michael Hüther from the IW and Florian Heider from Safe. Also there are Michael Eilfort, head of the Market Economy Foundation, and Bert Rürup, head of the Handelsblatt Research Institute.
A joint call from such a group is rare. Economists are worried that the federal government will abandon the hard-earned compromise to make statutory pension insurance future-proof after around ten years without reform.
In early summer, a commission of experts appointed by the federal government made 33 suggestions to reform the pension system. This should make it possible to deal with the challenges of demographic change. Because fewer and fewer workers have to care for more and more pensioners, social contributions and tax subsidies for pension insurance are threatening to continue to rise.
The black-red federal government immediately agreed to implement the present package as a whole. Both Chancellor Friedrich Merz (CDU) and Labor Minister Bärbel Bas (SPD) spoke of a “total work of art”.
However, in view of the recent elections in Saxony-Anhalt, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania and Berlin, in which the CDU and SPD largely performed poorly, leading representatives of both parties have again questioned the compromise. During the election campaign, the CDU prime ministers had already criticized the package's proposal to abolish early retirement without deductions after 45 years of contributions (“pension at 63”).
It is now primarily the SPD that is taking action against this proposal. Party leader Bas now also sounds different and is calling for comprehensive transition periods and exceptions instead of abolishing the “pension at 63”. Chancellor Merz is sticking with the proposal so far, but has already said that he wants to talk again in principle about the government's reform plans.
In their call, the economists now warn that the pension commission's proposals should be discussed again from the beginning. “The key point: the Commission’s recommendations are a consistent set of measures,” they write. The proposals made old-age provision “more reliable, more fiscally sustainable and more socially targeted”.
The experts explicitly oppose the demands not to abolish the “pension at 63” or to water down the plan. They call early retirement without deductions a “very expensive special state benefit” from which higher earners, healthier people and men often benefit. It would make more sense to follow the Commission's proposal to abolish early retirement and provide more targeted support to people who, shortly before retirement, are no longer able to carry out their long-standing job for health reasons, as well as to those who, despite many years of contributions, cannot live on their pension.
Anyone who deletes individual components must name an effective replacement: "Otherwise the entire concept will collapse and the ever-increasing problems will continue to be postponed - to the detriment of the younger people, who are already under increasing pressure."
There is some evidence to suggest that this concern is justified. The pension commission was not only made up of scientists, but also politicians from the CDU, CSU and SPD. The proposals that the group agreed on contain unreasonable demands for all sides.
Proposals such as the abolition of the “pension at 63”, the reintroduction of the sustainability factor to slow down pension levels and the introduction of capital pensions are rather difficult for the SPD. However, measures such as the abolition of mini-jobs or the inclusion of the self-employed pose a challenge for the Union parties.
