Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/106449325/2012-09-EFRP-Position-Paper-on-the-EC-White-Paper-on-Pensions
Timestamp: 2016-10-26 15:54:09
Document Index: 697736281

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'Art. 14', '§2', 'art 2016', 'art 1', 'art 1']

2012-09 - EFRP - Position Paper on the EC White Paper on Pensions
BrowseBrowseInterestsBiography & MemoirBusiness & LeadershipFiction & LiteraturePolitics & EconomyHealth & WellnessSociety & CultureHappiness & Self-HelpMystery, Thriller & CrimeHistoryYoung AdultBrowse byBooksAudiobooksComicsSheet MusicBrowse allUploadSign inJoinBooksAudiobooksComicsSheet MusicEFRP Position Paper on the EC White Paper on PensionsSeptember 2012 www.efrp.eu
EFRP Position Paper on the EC White Paper on Pensions – September 2012
About the EFRP
The European Federation for Retirement Provision (EFRP) represents national associations of pension funds and similar institutions for supplementary/occupational pension provision. Its membership covers institutions for work-related (second pillar) pension provision. Some members operate purely individual pension schemes (third pillar). The EFRP has 22 member associations in EU Member States and other European countries with significant – in size and relevance – work-related pension systems1. In October 2006 the EFRP established the Central & Eastern European Countries Forum (CEEC Forum) to discuss issues common to pension systems in that region. EFRP member organisations cover the work-related pensions of 83 million European citizens. Through its Member Associations the EFRP represents approximately € 3.5 trillion of assets (2009) managed for future occupational pension payments. EFRP Members are large institutional investors representing the buy-side on the financial markets. They are specialised institutions solely dedicated to the accumulation and decumulation of assets to provide a supplement to the State pension to avoid old-age poverty.
Contact: Mr. Matti LEPPÄLÄ, Secretary General/CEO Koningsstraat 97 rue Royale – 1000 Brussels Belgium Tel: +32 (0)2 289 14 14 / Fax: +32 2 289 14 15 matti.leppala@efrp.eu www.efrp.eu
EU Member States: Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, UK. Non-EU Member States: Croatia, Guernsey, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland.
The EFRP welcomes the European Commission’s White Paper on Pensions and finds many positive points in it. With demographic and economic developments placing a strain on Member State public finances, work-related pensions may have to and indeed can play a more important role in achieving the goal of adequate, sustainable and secure pensions in Europe. That is why we support proposed initiatives to increase coverage of supplementary pensions and to provide information to pension savers through tracking services and individual pension statements. We welcome the recognition of the special place of “second pillar” pensions and the role of the social partners in them. One major source of concern for the EFRP is the EC’s determination to create a “level playing field” between pension funds covered by the IORP Directive and insurance companies. We believe that the EC should not treat them in the same way and fear that doing so could have major negative impacts on the future provision of work-related pensions, the stability of the financial markets and ultimately growth and job-creation in the EU. We call on the EU to take a comprehensive approach to pensions, to create an enabling environment for work-related pensions, which already contribute to adequate pension benefit provision in some Member States and can play a larger role. Equally, pension funds have an important stabilising role in the financial markets which we believe should be preserved. We stand ready to contribute our expertise to the proposed initiatives as the EU institutions move towards the concrete design and implementation of the announced proposals. Acceptance of the wide diversity of existing pension systems and the proportional application of EU rules to smaller pension funds will also be key to the successful adoption of a regulatory framework for work-related pensions in Europe. In those countries where work-related pensions have recently been set up, efforts should be made to strengthen and support them.
The European Commission published its White Paper on Pensions in spring 2012. The EFRP welcomes the White Paper and fully subscribes to the European Commission’s goal to achieve “adequate, safe and sustainable pensions”. In this Position Paper, we present our views on the European Commission pension agenda for the coming years. The EFRP is committed to promoting cost-efficient, adequate and sustainable workrelated pension schemes across Europe. On a broader level, the EFRP supports and promotes good pensions for all people in Europe. We believe that the White Paper offers a great opportunity to further develop work-related pension systems and we support most proposals in relation to this. We remain very concerned, however, about the IORP revision process (proposal 11), which is currently underway. Preserving the sustainability of public finances will be crucial for the Member States in the coming years and this has an impact on how governments manage expenditure on pensions. The European Commission’s country-specific recommendations of 30 May 2012 drove home this point by urging no fewer than seventeen Member States to undertake reforms to their pension systems in order to help maintain macro-economic stability in the European Union. The Ageing Report 2012 forecasts that ageing will be the main driver of public pension expenditure in the next five decades and that reforms such as higher retirement ages, higher employment rates of older workers and less generous pension entitlements will be unable to completely offset this increase in expenditure2. A considerable decline in the public pension replacement rate, sometimes up to 20%, is projected in most Member States between 2010 and 20603. The White Paper itself adopts a comprehensive approach on pensions, linking it to the ageing European society, the financial and economic crisis and the Europe 2020
“The 2012 Ageing Report – Economic and Budgetary Projections for the 27 EU Member States (2010-2060)”, provisional version, European Commission 2012, p.118 3 See note 2 above, p.130
Strategy for growth. It states that “people in the future will have to rely more on complementary retirement savings”4 and that there is “much scope for further development of complementary pension savings opportunities in many Member States”5.
The growing need for and importance of supplementary retirement savings in providing adequate retirement income is undeniable. The EFRP, as the leading voice for work-related pensions in Europe, recognises and welcomes the trend towards a more prominent role for supplementary pensions. While each of the three pension pillars (state, work-related, individual) plays its own part in public policy to ensure adequate pensions, we believe that the best way to achieve good pensions for all is by adopting a comprehensive approach at both national and EU level. This means, looking into both the adequacy (social aspects) and the sustainability (economic and financial aspects) of pensions and examining the impact of reforms in one pillar on the other pillars. Work-related pensions are an efficient way of saving for supplementary pensions. In contrast to individual pension products, they offer: 4
Economies of scale in governance, administration, asset management and insurance underwriting Organisational efficiency and enhanced negotiating power of the IORP visà-vis financial and other service providers Risk pooling and intergenerational risk-sharing in some plans No or low acquisition costs Often “not-for-profit” and some/all of the costs are borne by the employer Members of work-related pension schemes often benefit from a contribution paid by the employer Wide-scale coverage due to sector-wide participation, soft-compulsion elements, or sometimes because of auto-enrolment Enhanced governance due to participation of the social partners.
“An Agenda for Adequate, Safe and Sustainable Pensions”, European Commission COM(2012) 55/2, 16 February 2012, p. 17 5 See note 4 above, p. 6
Access, affordability and addressing constraints should be the main issues for workrelated pensions in the coming years. The shift from Defined Benefit to Hybrid and Defined Contribution schemes has continued in recent years and we believe that the White Paper initiatives should reflect this, while taking into account the consequences that this shift entails. We ask the EU to maintain a comprehensive approach to pensions and make it visible, reflecting the social, economic and financial aspects of pensions and their role in Member States’ public policies. This entails the recognition of the total outcome and the separate roles of the pension pillars in each Member State. We therefore call on the European institutions to strengthen supplementary pension systems, particularly work-related pensions. This means, developing an enabling environment for these pension systems, keeping costs down for pension funds so they can provide the best pensions to scheme members, while ensuring a high degree of transparency towards members and supervisors and ensuring they comply with high governance standards. We are concerned however that the revision of the IORP Directive may hamper the development of work-related pensions. The EFRP sees several positive points in the White Paper on Pensions: A more prominent role for supplementary pensions and a comprehensive approach to pensions Concern for the adequacy of pensions now and in the future A distinction between the 2nd and 3rd pillar Recognition of the role of the social partners The EFRP is happy to be invited to contribute to the good practice initiative for occupational pension schemes, but would like to see this take the shape of a survey of good practices rather than a code. The EFRP also identifies a major point of concern: The determination to proceed with the IORP revision in order to “maintain a level playing field with Solvency II” (proposal 11) could have severe micro and macro-economic effects.
Part 1. Balancing Time Spent In Work and Retirement The EFRP agrees that linking the retirement age to life expectancy and restricting access to early retirement schemes could be two ways to contribute to the goal of balancing time spent in work and retirement. The powers to change these issues lie with the social partners and other policy-makers at Member State level. This is also true of the revision of mandatory retirement ages, voluntary retirement arrangements and pension-related tax policies. We welcome the EC plan to take on the gender gap in public pensions as matter of fairness. The pay gap between men and women is an important challenge in this respect. The EFRP is also in favour of addressing the gender gap in work-related pensions in order to improve coverage and contributions towards adequate pensions.
Part 2. Developing Complementary Private Retirement Savings Efficiency and cost-effectiveness of tax and other incentives for private pension saving; designing cost-effective supplementary pension schemes (proposal 9) The EFRP would strongly welcome initiatives to extend coverage of supplementary pension schemes and to find tax and other incentives to encourage work-related pension saving. Our member associations would welcome the opportunity to contribute to reflections on these proposals. We believe that collective work-related pension systems are the most efficient and effective tool to complement retirement income for the reasons set out in the introduction. The auto-enrolment system “NEST” rolled out in the United Kingdom will capture many of those who were traditionally “under-pensioned” such as women and people working in SMEs. Similarly, the French PERCO and the mandatory funded systems in many Central and Eastern European Countries are good examples for achieving high coverage. The Super Trust model, specific to the United Kingdom, could be a cost-effective way of organising DC pensions there.
A particular challenge is extending coverage to low income workers. Experience in Germany has found that waiving social security levies on 2nd pillar pension contributions has increased participation among low income workers significantly. Access to work-related pension schemes through soft compulsion, auto-enrolment or the pooling of SME pension arrangements are among the options that warrant further explorations. The social partners play an important role in creating and facilitating coverage of these schemes and should be included in any EC initiatives on this subject. An important factor in the success of work-related pensions is a supportive tax environment, which should be stable, simple, modern and take into account today’s working practices (people change jobs, go from employed to self-employed and spend time in unemployment between jobs). To encourage people to continue saving for their pension, it is important to maintain or improve fiscal benefits. This is particularly important during these difficult economic times. Breaking up a supportive tax environment for pension savings today, means shifting and enlarging the problem in the near future. Equally, sustainability problems will arise if tax arrangements are engineered in such a way as to be able to damage overall sustainable fiscal systems. Many countries apply an “EET” tax system to pensions (contributions and investment returns are tax-exempt while benefits are taxed). This stimulates employer contributions, which is particularly helpful in a voluntary work-related pension system. A uniform system of taxing pension contributions, investment returns and pension benefits would facilitate cross-border pension activities. One element in current taxation discussions is the financial transaction tax. The EFRP believes that pension scheme members will receive lower pension benefits if pension funds are subjected to a financial transaction tax and that is why we have and continue to call for an exemption from it. This has been understood and recognised by the European Parliament and the Council.
Pension initiatives in the field of transparency and information provision to members will further strengthen trust in the pension system and encourage people to save for work-related pensions. This means that pension entities can explain the choices they have made (including risk distribution and risk-sharing mechanisms) and prove good governance and disclosure practices. The EFRP calls on the EC to maintain the distinction between the different public policy aims underlying 2nd and 3rd pillar pensions and to reflect this in any initiatives it undertakes to increase coverage of pension funds. Better information provision to individuals (proposal 10) The EFRP is in favour of providing better information provision about pensions, including through individualised pension statements. Offering insight into how much a person will be receiving from each pension pillar will raise awareness of the need to save for retirement, help show the benefits of long-term saving and encourage that person to plan for retirement. One reservation here is that the costs that this could entail for IORPs (especially small ones) should not be excessive. While a European pension statement seems unfeasible at this time due to the costs and resources this would involve for IORPs, an initiative to work towards a uniform information document at national level, taking into consideration the relevant local social and labour laws, would be welcome. The EFRP is in favour of strengthening information provision for DC IORPs towards their members as part of the IORP Directive revision process. Revision of the IORP Directive (proposal 11) The White Paper on Pensions also mentions the revision of the IORP Directive as a policy instrument designed to improve second pillar pensions in Europe. The White Paper asserts that the objective of the IORP Directive is to improve pension provision in Europe and to maintain a “level playing field” with insurance companies through aligning pension legislation with the Solvency II Directive (European legislation for insurance companies). The EFRP believes that the IORP Directive is a suitable instrument to accommodate and stimulate efficient workplace pension schemes
across Europe, but is concerned about the plans to adopt a Solvency II – style type of regulation to work-related pensions. The European Commission is likely to propose harmonised capital requirements for workplace pension funds, with a strong focus on a high level of short-term security. The regulatory framework would be based on the Solvency II framework for insurance companies and the holistic balance sheet. This proposal could significantly harm the future offering of occupational pensions. Therefore, the EFRP urges the European Commission to align the IORP revision and the White Paper on Pensions and to re-think the revision process with a view to pursuing the security of pensions from a comprehensive approach, focusing on adequacy and sustainability now and in the future. The revised IORP Directive should be an important tool to stimulate and regulate adequate, sustainable and secure work-related pension provision in Europe. The revision will be significant, since the Directive will be adapted to apply to DC schemes. The EFRP is ready to cooperate with the European institutions in developing quantitative standards testifying to the security of workplace pension schemes. However, the IORP Directive should be used as a starting point for this rather than the Solvency II Directive. EU-wide principles in the framework of a revised IORP Directive may only guarantee the security of work-related pension provision if they take into account the uniqueness and diversity of IORPs, that is, their structure and their activity. We believe that the Directive should aim to enhance the coverage and efficiency of workplace pensions, rather than to pursue theoretical “level playing fields” between providers that do not compete in reality. Pension funds are only engaged in pension activity and are prohibited from borrowing or leveraging capital. Moreover, they do not sell any “products” on “markets”. The involvement of social partners and pension fund governance provide protection to members in addition to backing from the sponsoring employer. The EFRP invites the European Commission to align the IORP revision and the White Paper on Pensions, with a view to pursuing the security of pensions and the joint objectives of adequacy and sustainability; to re-think the revision process within
the exclusive framework of the IORP directive, for the purposes of consistency, fairness in the approach to IORPs, respect for their social role and structure and, finally, for practicability of any envisaged solution. Protection of workers’ occupational pension rights in the event of insolvency of their employer (proposal 12) The EFRP believes that this is an opportunity to improve protection of workers’ pension rights in the event of insolvency of their employer. A broadening of the scope of the 2008 Directive6 could lead to wider coverage of protection and new rules on the priority of creditors in favour of IORPs and pension plan members could also be envisaged. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the Robins case7 has further defined what national protection measures must achieve and the Directive, if revised, should reflect case-law. Finally, a restriction on owning company shares in pure DC schemes could also enhance protection of pension plan members in the event of the insolvency of their employer. In many countries this is already the case. Raising the quality of third-pillar retirement products (proposal 13) We believe that it is important to recognise the distinct role and functions of workrelated (second-pillar) pensions and individual (third-pillar) pensions. It is beneficial to learn from the different pillars, although lessons from one pillar may not always be applicable to the other. Third-pillar pensions promote and improve citizens’ overall retirement benefits. The EFRP would be in favour of and follow initiatives to further improve third-pillar pension quality, for example through certification schemes, with interest. A code of good practice for occupational pension schemes (proposal 14) The EFRP is pleased to be invited to take part in this initiative and is ready to contribute is know-how on occupational pension schemes, but would be in favour of a survey of good practices rather than a code. A survey would recognise the
Directive 2008/94/EC Robins v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, C-278/05
diversity in the European occupational pensions landscape, while a code may encourage adoption of a good practice in Member State A that would not necessarily be good practice or suitable in Member State B due to the different pension set-up there. A survey of good practices could be organised by further developing the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) on this and by covering items such as the organisation and development of funded work-related pension systems, communication, disclosure governance and the role of the social partners. Exchanges of good practices within the OMC have worked successfully for a number of years. A Pension Portability Directive and a pan-European pension fund for researchers (proposal 15) The EFRP welcomes the proposal to resume work on a Directive to improve the acquisition and preservation of supplementary pension rights. We believe that the scope of this Directive should cover those covered by work-related pensions and the self-employed. The Council conclusions of the 2007 discussions are the best starting point for renewed discussions, especially where the preservation of rights is concerned. The EFRP believes that a Directive that would prescribe high-level facilitation may be agreed upon more easily, since it would take account of the diversity of pension systems across Europe (such as vesting and waiting periods). One way to facilitate agreement on the Directive, and which the EFRP supports, is to make the Directive applicable only to new entrants after the entry into force of the Directive. In this way existing obstacles to mobility could be overcome over time. Where supplementary pensions are provided on a voluntary basis, employers will be discouraged from offering pensions if entry age and waiting periods are tightly regulated; they are and should be negotiated by the social partners. The Directive should therefore aim not to interfere with agreements negotiated on a voluntary basis.
In the interest of fairness, cross-border situations should not be more advantageous than domestic ones, and unfair or unequal treatment between groups of workers or individual workers where the preservation of rights is concerned should also be avoided. Other proposals that could improve worker mobility would concern removing tax obstacles as well as the coordination of social and labour law. The EFRP takes a favourable view on the initiative to set up a pan-European pension fund for researchers and follows developments with interest. We would however ask for the fund to be designed in such a way as to avoid interference with existing, recently-set up pension schemes for university staff or researchers, such as the one in Austria. Extending the scope of Regulation 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems (proposal 16) The EFRP supports the aim of safeguarding pension savers’ rights and stands ready to participate in reflections on whether and which occupational pension schemes might be included in the scope of Regulation 883/2004. It would be helpful if the Commission provided a list of occupational pension arrangements which it considers would fall under the scope of this Regulation. It would be undesirable, however, if the application of social security rules to occupational schemes led to a confusing legal patchwork across pension pillars and Member States. Promotion of pension tracking services (proposal 17) The EFRP would like to see pension tracking services adopted and recommends that they be set up before measures to enforce minimum standards for the acquisition and preservation of supplementary pension rights are taken (proposal 15). The EFRP would like to see pension tracking services set up at national level and then at EU level under EU rules under a two-step approach. Care should be taken to ensure that national tracking services are compatible with other national tracking services through an EU interface, while new rules should not negatively affect existing national tracking services. The EFRP can provide expertise on how tracking services operate in some of the Member States, for example the “Pensioenregister”
used in the Netherlands, which allows pension savers to see their 1st and 2nd pillar pension entitlements. Financial education campaigns should support these services to help people understand and interpret the data they receive on their pension entitlements. Tackle tax obstacles to cross-border mobility and cross-border investments (proposal 18) The EFRP is in favour of implementing a modern, stable tax system for collective pension systems in Europe, which takes account of modern working practices (people with atypical contracts, moving from being employed to being self-employed and spending time in unemployment between jobs). Such tax systems would greatly improve the scope for cross-border mobility of pensions. We would support an EC survey among Member States and pension fund associations to map the specific tax obstacles they encounter. One problem that we have encountered is that national tax laws do not always exempt contributions to a foreign IORP from tax unless the foreign pension arrangement mirrors the home country arrangement (which it is unlikely to do) or is mentioned in a tax treaty. Another problem is that even if the respective pension arrangements were recognized, there may be a cap on contribution limits. For example, maximum annual contributions to a German IORP are €4,488 per person, while they are much higher in the UK and elsewhere. This means double taxation for a person moving to Germany and who brings a contribution that is higher than the cap above, which is taxed. He is taxed again when he reaches retirement. In Italy, in a situation where pension capital accrued is transferred to a pension scheme established in a Member State that is not authorized to operate in Italy, this transfer is treated as a withdrawal for tax purposes. Removing contract law-related obstacles to the design and distribution of life insurance products (proposal 19) The EFRP has no position on this proposal.
Part 3. Enhancing the EU’s Monitoring Tools on Pensions and Strengthening Synergies Across Policy Areas (proposal 20) The EFRP welcomes the 2012 Ageing Report, which demonstrates the important impacts of demographic trends on pension expenditure in the coming decades, and the Pension Adequacy Report. We look forward to the publication of the Commission’s 2012 Sustainability Report and the attention it gives to pensions.
More From This UserNieuwsbrief - 1 Leergang Pensioenrecht 2016-2017Jaarlijks verslag 2016 Studiecommissie voor de Vergrijzing - Powerpoint - persconferentieKrachtlijnen van het Jaarverslag 2016 van de Studiecommissie voor de VergrijzingHOGE RAAD VAN FINANCIËN - Studiecommissie voor de vergrijzing - Jaarlijks verslag 2016NB4 Leergang Pensioenrecht Juni 2016Het belang en de samenstelling van gelijkgestelde periodes in de drie pensioenstelsels Een stand van zaken De Impact Van de Vergrijzing Op de Lokale ActorenThemavoormiddag Eindeloopbaan en Pensioen KleinNationale Arbeidsraad Rapport 097 NLRAPPORT 97 van 07.06.2016 Harmonisering statuut arbeider/bediende - Aanvullende pensioenen - Art. 14/4 §2 van de WAP - EvaluatieDE TOEKOMSTIGE KWALITEIT VAN ONS PENSIOENSYSTEEMAdvice 37Documenten Actualiteitscollege 22 Maart 2016Nieuwsbrief 2 - Leergang Pensioenrecht 2015-2016Actualiteitscollege 24 November 2015 - De nieuwe rendementsgarantie - actualiteitscollege van de Leergang Pensioenrecht - KULeuven Nieuwsbrief 1 - Leergang Pensioenrecht 2015-2016VBO over nieuw minimum rendementsgarantie Mededeling over de informatieverschaffing bij uittreding uit een aanvullende pensioentoezegging KUL Waarom Vervroegd PensioenStudiecommissie voor de vergrijzing - Jaarlijks verslag 2015 Leergang Pensioenrecht Nieuwsbrief 4fsma_sp_2015fsma_wapz_2015EU-rapport 'On Ageing 2015'Rapport 042015 Nl Rapport april 2015 (aanvullend advies)Nieuwsbrief 3 - Leergang Pensioenrecht
2012-09 - EFRP - Position Paper on the EC White Paper on Pensions by pensiontalk750 viewsEmbedDownloadDescription2012-09 - EFRP - Position Paper on the EC White Paper on Pensions2012-09 - EFRP - Position Paper on the EC White Paper on PensionsRead on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.Copyright: Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)Download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate contentShow moreShow less
RelatedEIOPA-OPSG-12-06_Feedback_Statement_on_EC_White_Paper_on_Pensionsby pensiontalkProvident Funds in Asia_some Lessons for Pension Reformersby Bharti Vijaya41633395 Term Paper RM Abhinavby Achal JainPen Spd 10312010 Finalby Kalpana Devigist of 7CPC memorandum submitted by BRMSby Staff_CornerUntitledby eurolexSocial Security: 2005-03by Social SecurityIra401k-Slides Lecture 7by Joe OgleSocial Security: 2003-12by Social SecuritySocial Security: 2006-03by Social SecurityA Guide to Pension Plansby Peter GikonyoNotionalby yanlazamSocial Security: 2005-07by Social SecurityAFC 3440 answers tutorial 4 20080by neo54Social Security: 2006-05by Social SecurityDB Overviewby anandpandey90Pensions Explainedby Enock KasasaPension Reforms readingby Saumya Misra DwivediPENSIONISSSTEby 4gen_5Defined Benefit Versus Defined Contribution Pension Plansby Claude ThibaudJordan Goodman_How to Retire Rich(Part 1)by atik103The Disappearing DBby itzprasuSocial Security: 2005-01by Social SecurityCSCP Final Report Vols1-2by valeriefleonard68328_1965-1969by FRASER: Federal Reserve ArchiveEuropean Commission: Private pensions schemes - their role in adequate and sustainable pensionsby pensiontalkRobert C Pozen-Policy Prescription on Chinese Pension System-Paulson Policy Memorandumby Anand KrishnanPension Bill Overviewby Kerri CrosbySimilar to 2012-09 - EFRP - Position Paper on the EC White Paper on PensionsEIOPA-OPSG-12-06_Feedback_Statement_on_EC_White_Paper_on_PensionsProvident Funds in Asia_some Lessons for Pension Reformers41633395 Term Paper RM AbhinavPen Spd 10312010 Finalgist of 7CPC memorandum submitted by BRMSUntitledSocial SecurityIra401k-Slides Lecture 7Social SecuritySocial SecurityA Guide to Pension PlansNotionalSocial SecurityAFC 3440 answers tutorial 4 20080Social SecurityDB OverviewPensions ExplainedPension Reforms readingPENSIONISSSTEDefined Benefit Versus Defined Contribution Pension PlansJordan Goodman_How to Retire Rich(Part 1)The Disappearing DBSocial SecurityCSCP Final Report Vols1-268328_1965-1969European CommissionRobert C Pozen-Policy Prescription on Chinese Pension System-Paulson Policy MemorandumPension Bill OverviewArticle-Voluntary Pensions, The Best Way ForwardSocial Security