Directorate F: Social Statistics and information Society UnitF-3: Living conditions and social protection statistics. Working Group SOCIAL PROTECTION

Transcription

1 EUROPEAN COMMISSION EUROSTAT Directorate F: Social Statistics and information Society UnitF-3: Living conditions and social protection statistics Room Document 1 Working Group SOCIAL PROTECTION 28 th June 2011 BECH building Room Ampère Luxembourg CLASSIFICATION OF PENSION SCHEMES EXERCISE 2011

2 Objective of the documents: According to the methodology (Annex 1) for the classification of ESSPROS pension schemes, that has been approved last year, the data has been collected from Member States, Switzerland, Norway and Iceland. The purpose of these files is to inform the Working Group members about the results of the first exercise of the data collection concerning the classification of pension schemes. The Member States are invited to Take note of the classification of ESSPROS pension schemes for the year 2008.

3 Annex 1 Methodology for the classification of ESSPROS pension schemes 2010 Contents A. Introduction B. Field covered and scope C. Definitions C.1 Criterion 1: mode of financing C.2 Criterion 2: stakeholder bearing the risk D. Instructions for filling in the questionnaire A. INTRODUCTION ESSPROS pension schemes are classified according to mode of financing and stakeholder bearing the risk (see categories and definition in section C). Pensions are defined as specified in section B. The aim of this classification is to provide breakdowns of the OMC primary indicator currently calculated from ESSPROS data on pension 1 ; namely: Indicator 1: Total on pensions as a % of GDP B. FLD COVERED AND SCOPE The benefits considered as pensions (i.e. the field covered ) for the OMC primary indicator (Indicator 1 in section A) include the seven categories of periodic cash benefits: -Disability pension (NMT and MT) -Early retirement benefits due to reduced capacity to work (NMT and MT) -Old-age pension (NMT and MT) -Anticipated old age pension (NMT and MT) -Partial pension (NMT and MT) -Survivors pension (NMT and MT) -Early retirement benefits for labour market reasons (NMT and MT) In some Member States an extended definition of pensions might provide a picture closer to the actual pension system; this extended definition of pensions would include not only the seven pension categories above, but also other cash lump-sum benefits (OCLSB) for the functions disability, old age and survivors (both NMT and MT), when it is considered that these can be assimilated to pensions. Such other cash lump-sum benefits are named here as supplementary items. The classification can therefore be used to calculate a second set of breakdowns, i.e. for the indicator based on this extended definition of pension: 1 This indicator is defined as a "Commonly agreed national indicator", therefore it is based on commonly agreed definitions and assumptions that provide key information to assess the progress of MS in relation to certain objectives, while not allowing for a direct cross-country comparison, and not necessarily having a clear normative interpretation. These indicators/statistics should be interpreted jointly with the relevant background information (exact definition, assumptions, representativeness).

4 Indicator 2: total on pensions + on specific items of other cash lump-sum benefits as a % of GDP. A check on the appropriateness of including each OCLSB item in the field is to be carried out country by country, by verifying if what is recorded under the item actually corresponds to a pension paid as a lump sum. Only OCLSB payments that supplement or replace, totally or partially, periodic cash payments of pension benefits can be included in the field for the second indicator. They are payments directly linked to pension rights and that represent a lump-sum settlement (paid on a single occasion) of an amount which, alternatively, would be paid as a pension. One-off pension top-up payments are also included. By convention, each scheme that provides one or more pension benefits should be in the list of pension schemes (i.e. in the scope ). For each country and each year, the schemes selected for the classification (listed in the sheet schemes scope of the questionnaire) correspond to those that in the year indicated provided one or more of the ten types of benefits covered. If there are schemes meant to provide pension benefits in the future but for which, at the moment, only receipts are recorded (e.g. pension funds in the accumulation phase), it might be interesting to include them in the classification with all the relevant information. Schemes providing only disability benefits and early retirement benefits due to reduced capacity to work can be excluded from the classification under the second criterion stakeholder bearing the risk. The reason is that the definitions of the sub-criteria, as currently formulated, would be hardly relevant for such schemes. C. DEFINITIONS Criterion 1: Mode of financing Sub-categories: 1.1 Funded schemes 1.2 Unfunded schemes 1.3 Mixed schemes 1.1 Funded schemes A pension scheme is funded when identified reserves or individual accounts are accumulated with the explicit objective of ensuring the payment of the future benefits. In principle, such pension schemes should be fully funded, but in some cases the value of the assets may not cover the liabilities. Clarification In most countries some pension schemes are funded schemes. The contributions paid by insured persons and/or their employers (or the state or another party) go into a pension savings fund or pension fund which is invested in financial assets or real estate. The amounts saved are paid out to the retiree in the form of a pension (or a capital payment) upon retirement. Schemes that only have reserves to cover the risk of yearly cyclical movements in and receipts or to deal with demographic changes only are not funded.

5 Examples 1. The funded tier of statutory schemes such as the Premium pension scheme in Sweden or most occupational schemes (as in the UK or NL). 2. The Belgian scheme capitalisation individuelle (closing scheme, last contributions being paid in 1967), although fully funded, is protected by non-contributory means (e.g. use of general taxes) against some risks (for example loss of assets due to inflation, etc.) entailing assets not sufficient to cover liabilities. 1.2 Unfunded schemes A pension scheme is unfunded when social benefits are paid out of its own current yearly receipts without assigning specific reserves for this purpose. However, unfunded schemes may have some reserves designed to offset short-term fluctuations in the economy so as to secure the payment of benefits, though not intended as a major source of finance for the payment of future benefits. Those reserves do not make the scheme funded. The benefits are paid by the entity responsible for the scheme. Clarification Pay-as-you-go (PAYG) schemes are unfunded schemes: this is the case for a number of pension schemes. In a pay-as-you-go scheme, pensions are financed on the basis of current receipts. The current contributions paid by economically active people finance the current pensions of current pensioners. Current resources can be based on social contributions, but also taxes or partly income transfers from government. Examples 1. Non-contributory schemes, which are generally financed by the general state budget or by transfers and possibly partly by social contributions (for example, the Service de l allocation spéciale vieillesse SASV in France or the Office national des pensions: Revenu garanti aux personnes âgées in Belgium). 1.3 Mixed schemes A mixed scheme is a scheme where payment of benefits is based on two distinct financial channels, one funded and one unfunded. Clarification Schemes in transition between the two other sub-criteria should be considered mixed. Schemes using reserves to complement a PAYG system should also be considered mixed. Conversely, all schemes where funds settled on budgetary reserve may be used to supplement a main PAYG-type financing should be classified as unfunded schemes. Examples 1. An additional funded pension scheme is created to complement the PAYG scheme. 2. The Finnish earnings-related pension scheme : benefits are paid partly from collective funds and partly from current contributions. 3. A change in the rules for occupational/contractual pension schemes have the consequence that benefits are paid partly during a period when the schemes are mixed or unfunded and partly during a period when they function as pure funded schemes, with contributions to the schemes paid into individual accounts (Sweden).

6 Criterion 2: stakeholder bearing the risk Sub-categories: 2.1 Defined-benefit (DB) scheme 2.2 Defined-contribution scheme 2.3 scheme 2.4 Scheme in transition 2.5 Notional defined-contribution () scheme The risk in question concerns the level of benefits. 2.1 Defined-benefit (DB) scheme In a defined-benefit pension scheme, the level of pension benefits promised to participating employees is guaranteed. The level is usually defined by a formula based on the years of employment and the wages and salaries earned. The risk is born by the scheme operator. Clarification 1. Defined-benefit pension schemes can be funded, partly funded or unfunded. 2. Calculation rules can be modified over time following changes in law or adjustments in social partners agreements. 3. Non-contributory schemes should be classified as DB. 2.2 Defined-contribution scheme In a defined-contribution pension scheme (or money-purchase pension scheme) the levels of pension benefits directly depend on the performance of the scheme and, individually, also on the amount contributed to the scheme. The risk is borne by the future retiree. Clarification Defined-contribution pension schemes are in most cases fully funded. There may be a state commitment in the form of a guarantee (e.g. for some non-contributory periods or in the event of low levels of return for excessive inflation). Example In the Belgian scheme capitalisation individuelle (cf. second example above for funded schemes) the state compensates for the dilution of established rights due to inflation and for the general rise in welfare (since the closing of the scheme in 1967). It thus guarantees that there is still some kind of basic link between the assets constituted and the benefit ultimately granted. 2.3 scheme In a hybrid scheme, both defined-contribution and defined-benefit elements are present or, more generally, the risk is shared by the scheme s operator and beneficiaries. Clarification schemes are mature schemes and not in transition. Schemes where regulation usually takes the form of adaptations of contribution rates, benefit calculation rules and eligibility rules (which can be applied at the same time) are hybrid schemes. When a scheme itself mixes different types of provision (DB, DC and ) at the same time (for instance some kind of distinct DB or DC provision in unfunded schemes), it should also be classified as hybrid. This should be a scheme where such different provision structurally coexists and is not for a limited period. This includes cases where the provision is combined for a single beneficiary and, by convention, also cases where the provision is differentiated according to groups of beneficiaries e.g. by type of contract, pension provided, etc..

7 Examples 1. Unfunded schemes where regulation usually takes the form of adaptations, through different channels, of contribution rates, benefit calculation rules and eligibility rules. 2. A DC scheme with a state commitment in the form of a guarantee designed to ensure that benefits reach a pre-determined level. In such a scheme, benefits may be supplemented by income transfers from government. 3. For each member of the scheme, a defined-benefit part of the scheme allows the member to receive a core (or minimum) level of benefit, while a defined-contribution part of the scheme determines the remainder. 2.4 Scheme in transition In a scheme in transition, different provisions coexist during a predetermined, limited period of transition. Clarification Schemes in transition between any other two sub-criteria, except for transition to provision, should be considered in transition; a scheme could be classified as a scheme in transition when, for a limited time, both DB and DC provision is present. Provision might be temporarily combined for a single beneficiary, or differentiated according to groups of beneficiaries. Example 1. A scheme with two sections: a closed defined-benefit section for old entrants and a definedcontribution section open to new entrants (examples include some occupational pension schemes in Sweden). 2.5 Notional defined-contribution () scheme In an, contributions to the scheme (from both employee and employer) are credited to, and accumulated in, individual accounts. These individual accounts are notional, in the sense that the contributions to the scheme are used to pay pension benefits to current pensioners. Accrued life-time contributions are annually revaluated at a notional rate of return (linked to some macroeconomic indicator, for instance the moving average growth rate for real income, nominal GDP, wage growth or wage bill growth), in order to evaluate the actual value of matured rights. At retirement, the accumulated balance is converted into an annuity through some formula, based, among other factors, on a measure of life expectancy and annually revised in order to catch up with the standard of living or cost of living. Clarification Generally the passage to this type of provision requires a transitional period during which any beneficiary might be entitled either to the old system or to the new one or to a weighting of the two. In this case, the scheme is classified as in as far as contributions are paid to the system (even if current pensions are still paid strictly according to the rules of the old provision).

8 D. INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILLING IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE In the questionnaire sent, countries will find country-specific tables with the list of selected schemes (preliminary list): they correspond to the schemes that in a given year N have provided one or more of the benefits in the field covered as defined in paragraph B. The section "scope" of the questionnaire (see figure 1) is filled in by Eurostat: for each scheme considered in the preliminary list, the level of on pension benefits is obtained from the ESSPROS quantitative data for the year N. For schemes providing other cash lump-sum benefits (see supplementary information in the questionnaire), countries have to verify if what is recorded under the item corresponds to pensions paid as a lump sum, and then decide whether to keep them in the list of pension schemes. For the schemes providing only lump-sum benefits not considered to be pension benefits, the country can remove it from the classification as it would be irrelevant: the list provided by Eurostat is not to be considered definitive, but rather a proposal to be checked by the national delegates based on their knowledge of their national systems. Once they have established the list of relevant schemes, countries are invited to fill in the classification section in the questionnaire. For schemes providing only disability benefits and early retirement benefits due to reduced capacity to work, the cells for the criterion stakeholder bearing the risk are greyed out, as their definitions are not relevant for such schemes. Schemes identified at first as mixed first criterion or as hybrid schemes with provision combined at scheme level but differentiated by groups of beneficiaries (i.e. different sections inside the scheme) second criterion should be split into more homogeneous components. This split should be discussed in bilateral exchanges on the basis of the specific features of each case. For those schemes for which the split is problematic or impossible, further qualitative information (to be inserted in the Comment column) is required in order to: - determine the predominant character; - establish how the different components are combined; - identify the provision components (in the case of hybrid schemes); - etc. For mixed schemes (first criterion), we especially recommend making a clear statement specifying if a scheme is in a transitional period. Any other comment helping to understand national pension systems is welcome.

9 Figure 1. Questionnaire SCOPE disability old-age survivors' unemployment supplementary information disability old-age survivors' Total on pension (extended) Other cash lump sum benefits (MT) Other cash lump sum benefits (NMT) Other cash lump sum benefits (MT) Other cash lump sum benefits (NMT) Other cash lump sum benefits (MT) Other cash lump sum benefits (NMT) Total on pension Early retirement benefit for labour market reasons (MT) Early retirement benefit for labour market reasons (NMT) Survivors' pension (MT) Survivors' pension (NMT) Partial pension (MT) Anticiped old age pension (MT) Old-age pension (MT) Partial pension (NMT) Anticiped old age pension (NMT) Old-age pension (NMT) Early retirement benefit due to reduced capacity to work (MT) Disability pension (MT) Early retirement benefit due to reduced capacity to work (NMT) Disability pension (NMT) codes benefits scheme scheme scheme scheme Total CLASSIFICATION codes benefits Mixed Unfunded Funded Mode of financing Comments Defined-benefit (DB) Defined-Contribution Stakeholder bearing the risk Scheme in transition Notional defined-contribution () Comments scheme 01 X scheme 02 X scheme 03 X X scheme 10 X

10 Annex 2: Summary table Definition of the pension schemes' list and benefits included metadata Classification of the pension schemes comments Other cash lump sum benefits (OCLS benefits) Number of schemes in mixed (in criterion 1) the field Number of schemes schemes providing selected by OCLSB Eurostat schemes providing only OCLS benefits BE hybrid (in criterion 2) Structure Special features OCLSB 7 unfunded but not classified by the 2nd criterion (as they are providing only disability pensions), 2 funded DC, 20 unfunded DB Other relevant comments In principle we don t report (have) in Belgium hybrid systems or mixed systems. They are eighter funded or payg, and for the other dimension DC (benefits defined by masses of contributions really paid or based on wages). For the legal pension system, where old age pensions paid to retirees is partly PAYG and partly a remainder of our former funded system, both parts are being separated since always within ESSPROS in two different schemes, so there cannot be any mixup (in these cases the PAYG part of the pension and the funded part of the pension correspond to different periods in the workers career). And if it should be the case that in some exceptional (individual) case somewhere a pension entitlement could contain other characteristics, we apply the rule that the majority of the scheme defines the model. BG unfunded DB, 1 funded DB, two funded DC scheme 14 which provides OCLSB is not a pension CZ no no 1 funded DC, 2 unfunded DB DK DE unfunded DB, 2 funded DC, 1 scheme 04, 06, 16 and 83 not to be mixed DB considered as pensions 8 unfunded DB, one unfunded but not classified under the 2nd criterion, 1 fundede DC, 2 mixed scheme 05 unfunded is a PYGS but hybrid, 1 funded hybrid cannot be classified under 2nd criterion six schemes are excluded from the list as they are not considered to be pension schemes scheme 29: no supplement or replace for payments of pension benefits: no pension scheme EE unfunded DB EL unfunded DB, 2 funded DB ES schemes are funded hybrid, 9 unfunded DB FR funded hybrid, 30 unfunded hybrid, 1 funded DC, 6 unfunded DB, 3 unfunded but not classified under 2nd criterion IT funded DC, 8 unfunded DB, 7 unfunded, 1 unfunded but not classified under 2nd criterion system in 7 schemes the four schemes that have been excluded have provided severance payments CY LV two unfunded DB, three funded DB 4 unfunded DB, 1funded, 1 scheme 6 not classified according to the unfunded but not classified under second criterion the 2nd criterion

11 LT funded DC, 5 unfunded DB The schemes No 8, 9, 16, 20, 24, 27, 28 has to be abolished from the exercise, as they do not include pension benefits. The benefit of the scheme No 10 has to be abolished from the exercise - not classified as pension benefit or similar. The benefits & of the scheme No 13 has to be abolished from the exercise - not classified as pension benefits or similar. LU unfunded DB, 1 unfunded but not classified under 2nd criterion scheme 04 and scheme 12 are not to be considered as pensions Expenditure items of schemes 4 classified under 112 should not be considered as real pensions as they correspond mainly to a compensation of the loss of physical capacities due to an injury. THEY SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED. Expenditure items of scheme 12 classified under 113 represents punctual support to older people, no periodic pension payments. THEY SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED. HU unfunded DB MT unfunded DB NL AT PL PT 10 4 RO scheme: its OCLSb are pensions 1 scheme: its OCLSB for old age are not pension unfunded DB 10 unfunded DB, 7 funded DB, 6 unfunded but not classified under the 2nd criterion 7 unfunded DB and 1 mixed hybrid 7 unfunded DB, 1 unfunded but 2nd criterion do not apply 5 unfunded DB, 2 funded DB, 2 funded DC. 1 funded but not classified under 2nd criterion 10% of of Pension Funds in scheme 59 are. scheme 19 is not to be considered as pension The 2593 million HUF recorded in the scheme 19 at the code is not pension but other cash lump sum benefit. According to the effective legislation pension benefit would be paid only in relation to the old-age function from The amount remitted to the compulsory state insurance and the beneficiaries' lump sum benefits are not pensions. For your information: At the end of the year 2010 a new rule came into force that repealed the earlier obligatory membership in the private pension funds. As a result of this maintaning the membership is so disadvantageous that the situation will probably lead to cessation of private pension funds, because nearly all of the members will leave the private funds. Scheme 26 is not a pension scheme, it is a collection of very small schemes that mostly last only a few years, and are therefore not classified as separate schemes. A very tiny part of it was survivors pensions. The survivors part of it has ended and we won't fill it anymore. scheme 10 provides only disability pension the scheme 44 which had been selected by ESTAT has been eliminated. A new scheme, scheme 64, has been included by the delegate SI unfunded DB, 1 funded DC one scheme provinding OCLS benefits for old age is considered not relevent SK FI SE UK unfunded DB, 2 funded DC, 1 unfunded but not classified under 2nd criterion 3 unfunded but not classified under the second criterion, 2 mixed DB, 2 funded DB, 11 unfunded DB 5 unfunded DB, 1 mixed scheme in transition, 1 mixed, 1 funded DC, 1 funded DB 1 funded DB, 3 unfunded DB, 1 mixed hybrid; 1 unfunded but no 2nd criterion apply delete the item (scheme 6) from the table SCOPE These benefits are not pensions paid out as lump sum and are not also components of the disability pension Schemes 26, 28,29 and 36 are definitely not pensions IS unfunded DB, 1funded DC NO unfunded, 2 unfunded DB, 1 funded DB A pension reform implemented 1. January 2011 where the National Insurance System is transformed to an Notional defined - contribution scheme CH unfunded DB, 1 funded DC, 1 mixed DB, 2 unfunded but not classified under the 2nd criterion

12 Annex 3: Breakdown of schemes after first criterion crossed with second criterion Mode of financing (2008) Unfunded Funded Mixed Stakeholder bearing the risk Stakeholder bearing the risk Stakeholder bearing the risk total n.c II criterion Defined-Contribution Defined-benefit (DB) n.c II criterion Defined-Contribution Defined-benefit (DB) n.c II criterion Defined-Contribution Defined-benefit (DB) number of schemes BE BG CZ DK DE EE 2 2 EL ES FR IT CY LV LT LU HU 2 2 MT 4 4 NL AT PL PT RO 3 3 SI SK FI SE UK IS NO CH * component included

13 Annex 4: Breakdown of schemes after second criterion crossed with first criterion Stakeholder bearing the risk (2008) number of schemes DB DC hybrid n.c. II criterion Mode of financing Mode of financing Mode of financing Mode of financing Mode of financing Mode of financing mixed unfunded funded mixed unfunded funded mixed unfunded funded mixed unfunded funded mixed unfunded funded mixed unfunded funded total BE BG CZ DK DE EE 2 2 EL ES FR IT CY LV LT LU HU 2 2 MT 4 4 NL AT PL PT RO 3 3 SI SK FI SE UK IS NO CH * component included

14 Annex 5: Breakdown of schemes by type and criterion 2008 without OCLSB 2008 with OCLSB Funded Mode of financing Unfunded Mixed Definedbenefit (DB) Stakeholder bearing the risk Defined- Contribution excluding disability BE 3.7% 96.3% 0.0% % 4.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% BE 10.8% 89.2% 0.0% % 12.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% BG 0.1% 99.9% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% BG 0.2% 99.8% 0.0% % 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% CZ 0.2% 99.8% 0.0% % 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% CZ 0.2% 99.8% 0.0% % 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% DK 17.9% 78.8% 3.4% % 17.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% DK 17.9% 78.8% 3.4% % 17.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% DE 1.1% 88.9% 10.0% % 1.1% 10.1% 0.0% 0.0% DE 1.1% 88.9% 10.0% % 1.1% 10.1% 0.0% 0.0% EE 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% EE 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Funded Mode of financing EL 0.8% 99.2% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% EL 2.9% 97.1% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% ES 2.5% 97.5% 0.0% % 0.0% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% ES 2.5% 97.5% 0.0% % 0.0% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% FR 2.1% 97.9% 0.0% % 0.1% 97.9% 0.0% 0.0% FR 2.3% 97.7% 0.0% % 0.1% 97.9% 0.0% 0.0% IT 0.6% 99.4% 0.0% % 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 81.2% IT 1.6% 98.4% 0.0% % 1.6% 0.0% 0.0% 80.9% CY 69.8% 30.2% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% CY 68.1% 31.9% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% LV 87.3% 12.7% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 87.9% LV 87.3% 12.7% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 87.9% LT 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% LT 0.1% 99.9% 0.0% % 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% LU 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% LU 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% HU 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% HU 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% MT 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% MT 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% NL 39.9% 60.1% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% NL 39.9% 60.1% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% AT 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% AT 0.1% 99.9% 0.0% % 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% PL 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% PL 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% PT 8.4% 91.6% 0.0% % 0.04% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% PT 9.25% 90.75% 0.00% RO 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% RO 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% SI 0.2% 99.8% 0.0% % 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% SI 0.2% 99.8% 0.0% % 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% SK 0.4% 99.6% 0.0% % 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% SK 1.9% 98.1% 0.0% % 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% FI 2.2% 54.7% 43.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% FI 2.2% 54.7% 43.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% SE 0.2% 26.0% 73.8% % 0.2% 0.0% 24.2% 60.1% SE 0.2% 26.0% 73.8% % 0.2% 0.0% 24.2% 60.1% UK 65.2% 1.8% 32.9% % 0.0% 33.2% 0.0% 0.0% UK 59.7% 4.7% 35.6% % 0.0% 35.9% 0.0% 0.0% Unfunded Mixed Definedbenefit (DB) Stakeholder bearing the risk Defined- Contribution excluding disability IS 52.3% 47.7% 0.0% % 52.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% IS 52.3% 47.7% 0.0% % 52.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% NO 3.5% 96.5% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 85.7% NO 3.6% 96.4% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 85.6% CH 35.1% 62.1% 2.8% % 39.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% CH 44.6% 53.1% 2.4% % 49.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

15 Annex 6: Breakdown of schemes by criterion and type Breakdown of pension s 2008 without OCLSB 2008 with OCLSB Funded Mode of financing Unfunded Mixed (million NAC) Defined-benefit (DB) Stakeholder bearing the risk Defined- Contribution (excluding disability) (million NAC) BE BG CZ DK DE EE EL ES FR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK FI SE UK IS NO CH 3.7% 96.3% 0.0% % 4.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 89.2% 0.0% % 12.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 99.9% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 99.8% 0.0% % 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 99.8% 0.0% % 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 99.8% 0.0% % 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 78.8% 3.4% % 17.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 78.8% 3.4% % 17.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 88.9% 10.0% % 1.1% 10.1% 0.0% 0.0% % 88.9% 10.0% % 1.1% 10.1% 0.0% 0.0% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 99.2% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 97.1% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 97.5% 0.0% % 0.0% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% % 97.5% 0.0% % 0.0% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% % 97.9% 0.0% % 0.1% 97.9% 0.0% 0.0% % 97.7% 0.0% % 0.1% 97.9% 0.0% 0.0% % 99.4% 0.0% % 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 81.2% % 98.4% 0.0% % 1.6% 0.0% 0.0% 80.9% % 30.2% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 31.9% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 12.7% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 87.9% % 12.7% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 87.9% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 99.9% 0.0% % 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 60.1% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 60.1% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 99.9% 0.0% % 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 91.63% 0.00% % 0.04% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% % 90.75% 0.00% % 1.02% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 100.0% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 99.8% 0.0% % 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 99.8% 0.0% % 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 99.6% 0.0% % 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 98.1% 0.0% % 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 54.7% 43.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 54.7% 43.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 26.0% 73.8% % 0.2% 0.0% 24.2% 60.1% % 26.0% 73.8% % 0.2% 0.0% 24.2% 60.1% % 1.8% 32.9% % 0.0% 33.2% 0.0% 0.0% % 4.7% 35.6% % 0.0% 35.9% 0.0% 0.0% % 47.7% 0.0% % 52.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 47.7% 0.0% % 52.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 96.5% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 85.7% % 96.4% 0.0% % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 85.6% % 62.1% 2.8% % 39.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% % 53.1% 2.4% % 49.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% BE BG CZ DK DE EE EL ES FR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK FI SE UK IS NO CH

16 Annex 7: Breakdown of pension as % of GDP, by type 2008 without OCLSB 2008 with OCLSB Funded Mode of financing Unfunded Mixed % GDP Defined-benefit (DB) Stakeholder bearing the risk Defined- Contribution (excluding disability) (million NAC) % GDP BE BG CZ DK DE EE EL ES FR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK FI SE UK Funded Mode of financing Unfunded Mixed % GDP Defined-benefit (DB) Stakeholder bearing the risk Defined- Contribution (excluding disability) (million NAC) % GDP IS NO CH

17 Annex 8: Breakdown of pension as % of GDP, by criterion 2008 without OCLSB 2008 with OCLSB BE BG CZ DK DE EE EL ES FR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK FI SE UK Funded Mode of financing Unfunded Mixed Breakdown of pension s as a percentage of the GDP Stakeholder bearing the risk (million NAC) % GDP Defined-benefit (DB) Defined- Contribution (excluding disability) (million NAC) (excluding disability) % GDP BE BG CZ DK DE EE EL ES FR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK FI SE UK IS NO CH IS NO CH