<<
>>

1.3. The analysis of theoretical and methodical approaches to working out of problems of assets management of not state pension funds


In Russia as has shown the carried out analysis, problems of assets management of not state pension funds, first of all, closely related with the contents and the purposes of pension reform carried out in Russia [61].

As is known, up to the termination of 2001 pension system of Russia was completely distributive (a principle of "solidarity of generations»), i.e. financing of current pensions was carried out exclusively at the expense of the means collected from employers in a type of tax or kvazinalogov on the wages fund [86].
It is possible to discuss long an interesting question on, whether such system «system of pension insurance» is, or in the conditions of alignment of the size of pensions and their separation from received salaries to it the name of "system of a social relief aid» more beseems, but the main principle is simple and clear: the collected pension instalments are not invested, and spent at once.
The reasons of crisis of distributive system repeatedly also are in detail described in the literature [25,49]. It is Thus obvious enough, that at decrease in the relation of number of the working population to number of pensioners [7] it is impossible to construct stable model of distributive system with constant significances of tax load, a pension age and factor of replacement [8]. It is necessary either increase taxes, or to raise a pension age [9], or to reduce replacement factor. Or - to reform system and to search for the decision of problems behind its limits.
Changes in principles of charge and payment of distributive pensions (is minimum necessary experience; the period, the salary for which is considered at definition of the size of pension; degree of the account of the received salary / the paid pension instalments; system of indexations; a limiting parity of minimum pension and a subsistence; a marginal level of the maximum pension; division of pension on base and insurance; introduction of is conditional-memory accounts etc.), at all importance, in itself the name «pension reform» hardly deserve. During 1991-2001 such changes occurred repeatedly [12]. They corrected pension system with allowance for financial possibilities of the state and submissions about relative social justice, but have not resulted and cannot lead to cardinal improvement of position in pension sphere neither in flowing, nor in the long-term plan.
Main changes - introduction of a memory element in system of an obligatory provision of pensions and the admission of private financial institutions to management (investment) of pension accumulation.
Certainly, in short-term aspect these changes as cannot improve a situation, as well as updating of distributive principles. Moreover, in a transition period load on pension system as a whole should increase (to save at least invariable level of a provision of pensions for present pensioners and thus to accumulate means for pensioners future). But in the long-term plan from introduction of memory pensions it is possible to expect following favorable changes: increase of well-being of the future pensioners at the expense of long term of accumulation of means for financing of pensions; attraction pension «long money» as investments into a national economy, and as consequence - maintenance of higher rates of economic growth; load decrease on the state pension system; increase of a share of official ("white") salaries, and as consequence - labour market development; development of equity market and a financial infrastructure.

The transferred shifts concern practically all spheres of an economic and social life, therefore pension reform is for today one of the major institutsionalnyh changes in Russia. It is very important to use its potential completely. However it is necessary to recognise, that level of readiness of all basic participants of process (the state, private business and the population) to sharing in reform is rather far from the ideal.
It is necessary to consider, that within the limits of memory system the diverse models differing, first of all, on degree of liberalisation of given sector and a role of the state structures in its functioning also are possible. Development of system of a provision of pensions depends on it for decades forward.
The carried out analysis of a current condition of affairs in pension sphere has shown, that key laws in the field of a provision of pensions for today are: the Federal law from April, 1st, 1996 N 27-FZ «About the individual (personified) account in system of obligatory pension insurance» (in red. The federal law from 31.12.2002 N 198-FZ); the Federal law from December, 15th, 2001 ¹ 166-FZ «About the state provision of pensions in the Russian Federation»; the Federal law from December, 15th, 2001 ¹ 167-FZ «About obligatory pension insurance in the Russian Federation»; the Federal law from December, 17th, 2001 ¹ 173-FZ «About labour pensions in the Russian Federation»; the Federal law from July, 24th, 2002 ¹ 111-FZ «About investment of means for financing of a memory part of labour pension in the Russian Federation»; the Federal law from May, 07th, 1998 ¹ 75-FZ «About not state pension funds» (in red. The federal law from 10.01.2003 N 14-FZ).
According to the current legislation [4, item 5], the labour pension [10] is divided into a base, insurance and memory part. The base part is identical to the majority of pensioners and does not depend on earnings, which
Q
The pensioner in the past received. It is indexed after allowing for inflation. The insurance part is with difficulty adhered to the sum of the pension instalments [11] received for the given citizen considered on so-called «the is conditional-memory account», and also is subject to indexation - after allowing for inflation, salaries and «an index of growth of incomes PFR counting on one pensioner». It should supply the basic differentiation of pensions paid today. Both base, and an insurance part are elements of distributive system: they do not assume investment of the collected pension instalments, and are financed at the expense of distribution of current receipts. Formally «financing of payment of a base part of labour pension is carried out at the expense of the sums of the uniform social tax (instalment) paid in the federal budget, and financing of payment of insurance and memory parts of labour pension - at the expense of means of the budget of the Pension fund of the Russian Federation» (the Federal law from 15.12.2001 ¹ 167-FZ, item 9).
However this subtlety is not distinguished, most likely, by overwhelming majority of tax bearers, let alone pensioners: after all a source of payment of both components is the same tax - ESN. It is paid in the federal budget; then its half is transferred from the budget in PFR and qualified any more as the tax, and as «a tax deduction» from ESN, «individually vozmezdnyj obligatory payment». And second half too is transferred from the budget in PFR and used for payment of base pensions. Formation of the third part of labour pension which is referred to memory, just and represents a main component of pension reform. The certain percent of pension instalments differing depending on age of the worker and its earnings, is accumulated in PFR and considered in so-called «a special part of the individual personal account of the insured person». Thus different age groups in different degree are involved in the memory scheme (tab. 1.18). Seniors of age »(men of 1952 of the river also are more senior, women of 1956 of the river and are more senior) do not participate at all in this system.
«Age averages» (men 1953-1966 of a birth inclusive, women 1957-1966 of a birth inclusive) are involved, but ogranichenno: obligatory instalments for them in a memory part do not exceed 2 %. «Junior age» (1967 of the river and is younger) participate in the maximum volume - to 6 %. Apparently, the size of a memory component is small enough in percentage terms, furthermore in a transition period 2005 are established even more low interests of deductions in a memory part for junior age (tabl 1.19).
Besides, regressive character ESN from which, all pension instalments anyhow undertake, leaves the mark and on financing of a memory part: in case of excess of the certain size of earnings of deduction in a memory part cease.
The blanket tariff of the insurance instalment for financing insurance and
Memory part of labour pensions

Base for charge of insurance instalments on each separate worker an accruing result from the beginning of year

For men of a 1952 also is more senior also women of a 1956 and is more senior

For men with 1953 for a 1966 and women with 1957 for a 1966

For ĖČÖ²967 than a year of birth and is younger
On financing of an insurance part of labour pension On financing of a memory part of labour pension On financing of an insurance part of labour pension On financing of a memory part of labour pension On financing of an insurance part of labour pension On financing nako - pi-telnoj parts
The labour
Pensions
To
100000
Roubles
14,0 % 0,0 % 12,0 % 2,0 % 8,0 % 6,0 %
From
100001 to 300 000 roubles
14 000 roubles + 7,9 % from the sum exceeding 100 000 roubles 0,0 % 12000 roubles + 6,8 % from the sum exceeding 100000 roubles 2 000 roubles + 1,1 %ń the sum exceeding 100 000 roubles 8000 roubles + 4,5 % from the sum exceeding 100000 roubles 6000 roubles + 3,4 % from the sum exceeding 100000 roubles
From
300001 to 600 000 roubles
29 800 roubles + 3,95 % from the sum exceeding 300 000 roubles 0,0 % 25 600 roubles + 3,39 % from the sum exceeding 300 000 roubles 4 200 roubles + 0,56 % from the sum exceeding 300000 roubles 17 000 roubles + 2,26 % from the sum exceeding 300 000 roubles 12 800 roubles + 1,69 % from the sum exceeding 300000 roubles
SvyshebOO 000 roubles 41 650 roubles 0,0 % 35 770 roubles 5 880 roubles 23 780 roubles 17 870 roubles
/> the Source: Kokorev R.A.Problemy of formation of a memory part of system obligatory pension the Obespechenijadinformatsionno-analytical report, ¹ 40, May, 2003, p. 7 or the Federal law from 15.12.2001 ¹ 167-FZ, item 22, item 2, subitem 1.
. Rates of the insurance instalment for workers of a 1967 and are younger in a transition period 2002-2005 gg

Base for charge of insurance instalments on each separate worker an accruing result from the beginning of year

2002 - 2003

2004

2005
On financing of an insurance part of labour pension On financing of a memory part of labour pension On financing of an insurance part of labour pension On financing of a memory part of labour pension On financing of an insurance part of labour pension On financing of a memory part of labour pension
To 100 000 roubles 11,0 % 3,0 % 10,0 % 4,0 % 9,0 % 5,0 %
From
100 001 to 300 000 roubles
11000 roubles + 6,21 %ń the sum exceeding 100000 roubles 3000 roubles + 1,69 % from the sum exceeding 100000 roubles 10000 roubles + 5,64 % from the sum exceeding 100000 roubles 4 000 roubles + 2,26 % from the sum exceeding 100 000 roubles 9 000 roubles + 5,08 % from the sum exceeding 100 000 roubles 5000 roubles + 2,84 % from the sum exceeding 100000 roubles
From
300001 to 600000 roubles
23 420 roubles + 3,1 %ń the sum exceeding 300 000 roubles 6 380 roubles + 0,85 % from the sum exceeding 300 000 roubles 21 280 roubles + 2,82 % from the sum exceeding 300 000 roubles 8 520 roubles + 1,13 % from the sum exceeding 300 000 roubles 19 160 roubles + 2,54 % from the sum exceeding 300 000 roubles 10 640 roubles + 1,41 %ń the sum exceeding 300 000 roubles
SvyshebOO 000 roubles 32720
Roubles
8 930 roubles 29 740 roubles 11910
Roubles
26 780 roubles 14 870 roubles

Source: Kokorev R.A.Problemy of formation of a memory part of system of an obligatory provision of pensions//the information-analytical report, ¹ 40, May, 2003, p. 8 or the Federal law from 15.12.2001 ¹ 167-FZ, item 33, subitem 1.
Hence, following the results of 2002 at one worker, even the most highly paid, it could not be accumulated in «a special part of the individual personal account» more than 8930 roubles. Considering, that
The official average salary on the country has made 4416 roubles in ģåń’ö18, or about 53000 roubles a year, at the tariff (or 3 % for junior age) accumulation of the average citizen for 2002 have made of 2 % about 1060 roubles (1590 roubles accordingly). It is possible to expect, that dispatch by the Pension fund of Russia of advices of a condition of individual personal accounts becomes for many Russians an unpleasant surprise. The aggregated data of the Pension fund of Russia give even smaller figures.
As it has been noted above, the main contents of pension reform it is not simple creation of memory sector in PFR, but also transfer of pension accumulation for investment to the private companies. While translating means of pension accumulation in NPF which became possible since 2004, the legal regime of these means essentially varies. The proprietor of voluntary pension deductions becomes NPF, and the insured person is considered concluded the agreement of obligatory pension insurance with it NPF - i.e. it will be the party of the agreement allocated with certain liability laws. While it is difficult to assume, as these legal distinctions will affect on institutsionalnoj a competitiveness between UK and NPF.
The question on warranties of safety of pension accumulation is one of the most painful and stubborn questions in all pension reform. In our opinion, statement of a question on any warranties in the conditions of transition to memory pensions contradicts basic principles of this reform and is either self-deception, or attempt to calm the people (public) by means of populist slogans. However it does not mean, that it is not necessary to build system of reasonable distribution of risks.
Investment of capital of pension accumulation by forces of the state structures (PFR, the Central Bank, Vneshekonombank and izhe with them) in the state securities, bears in itself an inevitable price risk.
The state securities, even in the conditions of a balance budget and absence of defaults, cannot on long-term sections in some decades bring yield above inflation - about it speaks all experience of the developed countries (section 1.2 more in detail see).
Remained "clients" PFR, citizens practically do not risk to lose a face amount of the pension instalments made in their advantage, but their real buying power by the exit moment on pension practically garantirovanno will fall. The alternative consists in investing pension accumulation in share securities (shares), and also corporate promissory notes (bonds) for what it is necessary to choose private UK or NPF.
Unconditionally, majority UK will try to supply high reliability of investments in the first years and will generate conservative enough portfolios with a high share of debt papers. At all because of compensation (which it is not paid if the sum of pension accumulation under management has decreased), and for the sake of reputation. But at the same time low yield which is reliability back, will reduce appeal of private managing directors against state UK, and from competitiveness reasons some of them can go on additional risks. And to whom these higher risks will be assigned? It is not quite clear, why, but the legislator has decided not to mention at all this major question. In the Law ¹ 111-FZ the situation, when UK on nonprofessionalism or for the objective reasons (equity market crash, bankruptcy of large emitters, etc.) basically is not considered Has lost a part of the means transmitted to it: conditionally speaking, from 10 million the roubles which have acted in UK, in a year remains 9 million. But unless it is impossible?
Even at an investment in diversifitsirovannyj a portfolio of corporate bonds the investor cannot be assured, that all means to it will return: the Russian bond market all the same is still young enough and has not passed «check on durability» in the form of crisis. As investments in the share especially can bring both high profits, and substantial damages even during the acritical periods.
The federal law ¹ 111-FZ provides variety of the measures directed on decrease of risks of investment of pension accumulation: appointment of the state authorised body, Social council creation on investment of means of pension accumulation, the control for UK from the party spetstsepozitarija, responsibility obligatory self-insurance, obligatory audit PFR, UK and spetstsepozitarija, acceptance of codes of a professional etiquette. But in any way it is impossible to name all these measures warranties in relation to the insured persons: at the best it is tools of management of risks.
Difficulty of acceptance of pension reform just also consists that the state recognises the inability only by own strength «to supply to citizens a worthy old age» and declines all responsibility for it. The problem of "maintenance of a worthy old age» should be decided in new system of a provision of pensions by common efforts of the state, the citizen and the employer.
With reference to nominal safety of the pension accumulation kept by citizens in PFR and invested through state UK, investment of these means will be made only in highly reliable (and consequently nizkodohodnye) the state securities and hypothecary securities with the state warranty in any situation, except a sovereign default, the sum of pension accumulation will increase in due course a little. However to guarantee any minimum yield the state nevertheless cannot - in - the first, because of unpredictability of a conjuncture, secondly, not to create overwork stimulus for "taciturn persons".
In our opinion, the strategic line of reform should consist in inducing the maximum number of citizens to transfer the accumulation in a private sector (UK and NPF) with their higher yield, bolshej economic feasibility (as only there these means can become the investment resource so necessary for the Russian economy), - and, unconditionally, with the big risk.
So, the state is quiet can, not incurring unrealizable obligations to guarantee safety of pension accumulation in PFR - face value, instead of on buying power. To guarantee on its own behalf even nominal safety of the pension accumulation transmitted in private UK and NPF, the state does not undertake not to stimulate last to inadequately risky investment policy.
Whether it is necessary to create the incorporated guarantee fund financed at the expense of deductions from all UK and used for cover of obligations of the broken companies? It depends on what concept of distribution of investment risks between participants of system will be accepted. If risks bears PFR or the insured persons then responsibility of the managing director is limited by losses because of illegal actions of staff, computer crimes, etc., here again for management of risks there is enough liability insurance. If UK will be obliged to cover at own expense the losses of pension accumulation connected with contraction in business conditions in the financial markets the general guarantee fund makes sense. Existing information problems of reform are obvious. Any financial market is characterised by asymmetric distribution of the information between its participants. For the market of pension deductions this problem becomes aggravated excessively - owing to long character of investments, uncertainty of obligations of the executor (UK) and illiteracy of the insured persons. Significant educational work, first of all from business is for this purpose necessary, but from it should not be eliminated and the state. Meanwhile choice UK requires, at least, ability to compare investment declarations of the different companies and ability to compare the reached yields, and not absolute, but corrected (at least approximately) with allowance for risk. On the other hand, that this information to compare, it at least is necessary for having. Meanwhile questions on a format of the reporting opened by managing directors (no less than represented by them in regulating bodies), about periodicity of such disclosing are not solved. Besides, it would be expedient to accumulate on-line from the very beginning the opened information on activity UK on a popular site - as it has been made for share investment funds from first days of their work.
According to research of World Bank about investment performances of means of the state pension funds in 22 countries, on horizons in 10-30 years only 10 funds from 22 have shown a positive effective yield, and only 2 funds (South Korean and malajzijsky) have received an average effective yield above 3 % of the annual. Moreover, 12 funds from 22 have lost in level of average yield even to bank deposits! (However, sample is not quite representative, as includes mainly the countries of Africa and Latin America.) [12]. However, on the other hand, raises the doubts and expediency of wide use of shares in investment portfolios private UK [107,122].
Let's look, for example, data of World bank about average stranovoj to structure of investment portfolios of pension funds in 1990 [118]. Investments of pension funds in the share of the enterprises and financial institutions in Canada made 29 % from a total sum of assets under management, in Japan - 27 %, in Holland - 20 %, in Germany and Switzerland - 18 % and 16 % accordingly. And only in the countries with the highest degree of an involvement of the population in equity market - the Great Britain and the USA - this share has made 63 % and 49 % accordingly. For insufficiently deep, volatilnogo and potentially manipulated Russian equity market this share obviously should be more low. As neither shares, nor state bonds are not the best choice management companies should pay the greatest attention to corporate bonds, and also, maybe, to debt papers of subjects of Federation (the last give attractive enough yield in comparison with federal bonds, but their emitters are less transparent, than corporate giants. Furthermore it is doubtful, that the means enclosed thus will be invested in real business.)
Occurrence of hypothecary securities - long-term and highly reliable financial instruments, furthermore closely related with real sector can become break in this area. According to the administration bill concept «About hypothecary securities», these financial instruments are supplied by a pool of other securities - mortgages which, in turn, are supplied directly by the real estate. It would be attractive method of investment both for private UK, and for means PFR (the truth, for last the state warranties on such papers are required). However till now the Law «About hypothecary securities» is not accepted. One more theoretically interesting and often discussed question - about expediency international diversifikatsii a portfolio. In 2003 of the investment into foreign securities were not supposed; in 2004-2005 they can make to 5 % of an investment portfolio, and by 2010 this quota will gradually grow to 20 % [111]. If at level of normative statements exchange control engineering problems (for example, necessity are removed to receive special permission of the Central bank to each «the currency transaction connected with capital flow»), to use such possibility, in our opinion, costs - at least for expansion of an outlook of investment managers. However it is clear, that cardinal effect on results
Pension system: model for Russia and foreign experience. Moscow, 2003.) 5 %-s' share of investments all the same will not render a portfolio. And sharp increase in "export quota" to expect it is not necessary, as investment resources are necessary and in Russia.
<< | >>
A source: GUSEV Polina Aleksandrovna. ASSETS MANAGEMENT of not STATE PENSION FUNDS In Russia. 2006

More on topic 1.3. The analysis of theoretical and methodical approaches to working out of problems of assets management of not state pension funds:

  1. Working out of methodical recommendations about assets management of not state pension funds in Russia
  2. CHAPTER 2. METHODICAL BASES of ASSETS MANAGEMENT of not STATE PENSION FUNDS In Russia
  3. methods and models of assets management of not state pension funds
  4. Foreign experience of assets management of not state pension funds
  5. CHAPTER 3. TOOLS of ASSETS MANAGEMENT of not STATE PENSION FUNDS
  6. GUSEV Polina Aleksandrovna. ASSETS MANAGEMENT of not STATE PENSION FUNDS In Russia, 2006
  7. structure, classification of assets of not state pension funds
  8. CHAPTER 1. FINANCIAL PROBLEMS of MANAGEMENT of not STATE PENSION FUNDS In Russia
  9. Recommended financial strategy for efficient control assets of not state pension funds
  10. 1.3. The analysis of theoretical and methodical approaches to the decision of problems of financing of passenger motor transport
  11. 1.3. The analysis of theoretical and methodical approaches to research of problems of activity of banks of commerce on a securities market
  12. the analysis of theoretical and methodical approaches to research of problems of activity of banks of commerce on a securities market
  13. § 1. Not state pension funds and insurance companies as insurers in system of additional pension insurance
  14. the Basic concepts, functions, a role and a place of not state pension funds of system of not state provision of pensions
  15. the State of the art and prospects of development of not state pension funds in Russia
  16. 1.3. The basic approaches to formation of a policy of management by organisation circulating assets
  17. Pension funds
  18. 1.4. Theoretical and methodical approaches to account of the rate of restoration
  19. 1.2. A role of the analysis of circulating assets in management of the organisation