The appeal to the Congress leadership by the ministry of labour to overrule the prudent and valid objections by the ministry of finance on proposed tweaks to the Employee Pension Scheme (EPS) reinforces two things—(1) any pension reform debate involves people not only coming with their own opinions but also their own facts; (2) these tweaks are short-term, politically-driven rather than greater good motivated. We’d like to make the case that EPS—started by the Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) in 1995 despite employer objections and continued because of a Supreme Court Judgement—should be scrapped because (a) its design has birth defects that make it unviable without huge and continuous government infusion, (b) it is slowly reducing benefits despite a commitment to the Supreme Court that it would not need to, and (c) employees would be better off in reverting to individual defined contribution accounts that existed before this tinkering by EPFO.
The EPS saga has not villains but it does have victims. The noble original motivation of providing a monthly income linked to salary and working years has been negated by various design deficiencies, a one-size-fits-all structure and unrealistic assumption around investment returns, life expectancy and EPFO’s administrative capabilities. Most importantly, the benefits as originally envisaged are actuarially unsustainable—the deficit in 2009 was pegged at R54,000 crore. Since introduction, a number of modifications to the scheme have broken the connection between contributions and benefits. In 2008, the factor adjustment used for early pension was increased from 3% to 4% and the option for return of capital and commutation was deleted. In the same year, the factor for benefit payment of those who moved from the early scheme to EPS was adjusted to reduce benefits by 1% to 40% and the factor for resignation payments before 10 years was reduced by 3-6%. In 2010, the cap on wages for international workers was removed, essentially creating another subsidy for the scheme since most of them do not claim benefits. Recently, EPFO proposed to increase the ceiling for contribution and benefits that, in effect, will be negative for most participants. Even without the last