Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
Politics and Religion
So you want a Scandinavian state pension system, eh?

So you want a Scandinavian state pension system, eh?

Last updated on: August 16, 2016 at 9:54 am by Jane the Actuary

So you want a Scandinavian state pension system, eh? 2016-08-16T09:54:32-06:00 Jane the Actuary

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Or, “no, please don’t fling us into that briar patch!”

I had observed the other day that progressives have increasingly abandoned the notion of Social Security as paid for by one’s own contributions over one’s working lifetime, in favor of calling for deficit-elimination and program enhancements paid for by turning the program into just another component of income tax, with no ceiling, and taxing all income, not just wages. Now President Obama has joined that chorus.

And the Scandinavian countries are being offered as role models for all manner of government programs. So let’s take a look at their pension systems, shall we?

Much of what I know about retirement comes from proprietary information at work, but there’s a great resource available called Pensions at a Glance, put together by the OECD, and a website, published by the Social Security Administration and the International Social Security Association, “Social Security Programs Throughout the World.” The following summaries are taken from these sites, though I welcome any correction if I’ve misread some piece of this.

Denmark:

There are a couple components to state pension benefits.

Universal basic pension: Everyone gets a flat benefit of about $10,500, based on current exchange rates. This benefit is reduced for earned income above approximately 75% of average earnings. A supplement is also paid to poorer households, of about an equal amount, for singles, and half this amount for married/cohabitating individuals, which phases out based on retirement income.

ATP pension: this is an odd bird, as far as what we’re used to in the U.S. It’s a contributory system, but with a flat contribution, variable only by hours worked, not by pay. The contribution works out to 270 kroner per month, split 2/3 employer, 1/3 employee — or about $13 per month per employee. And benefits are paid out in line with contributions paid in, as, functionally, a deferred annuity, with no intergenerational subsidies.

Defined Contribution plans: the bulk of Danish workers’ retirement income comes from good ol’ employer-provided DC plans. These are not 401(k)s; the employer pays the whole contribution, and it’s technically voluntary, but generally the result of collective agreements. Contributions are typically 12% of pay for lower-income workers, and up to 18% for higher income workers, because the state pension replaces proportionately less of their pay.

And Danish workers are protected from investment risks, not by any sort of magic, or governmental guarantees, but by something that’s well-nigh incomprehensible in the United States: the DC plan contributions are invested in deferred annuities.

Calculated replacement ratios, net of tax, all plan types, at median income: 66.4% of preretirement pay.

Norway:

Remember Bush’s individual account proposal for Social Security? Well, the Norwegians were paying attention. Sure, this isn’t a system of funded accounts, but benefits are based directly on contributions in a “notional defined contribution” formula, after a 2011 pension reform.

Individual workers contribute 8.2% of pay, and employers 14.1%; this funds old age retirement benefits as well as disability and maternity.

Standard Social Security benefits are based on accruals of 18.1% of pay, up to a ceiling of about $73,000 at current exchange rates. These accruals grow at the rate of annual average wage increases, and at retirement, are converted into benefits based on a life expectancy factor which varies each year based on life expectancy in that year. For years of unemployment, or parental leave, amounts are credited based on hypothetical earnings.

Low income workers will receive a minimum benefit of about 31% of average wages, payable at age 67.

In addition, there is a mandatory 2% of pay employer Defined Contribution benefit; it’s not clear how it’s invested, but at retirement it must be paid out in the form of an annuity.

Calculated replacement ratios, net of tax, all plan types, at median income: 60.2% of preretirement pay.

Sweden:

Another notional-account system, again as of 2011. Employees pay 7% of pay, employers 10.21% of pay for old age benefits, plus more for disability and survivor’s benefits, both up to a ceiling of about $55,000. Of this, 14.88% is allocated to the notional-accounts system and 2.33% to a true Defined Contribution account. As with Norway, the notional accounts are increased by economy-wide wage increases, as well as the reallocation of accounts of those who have died, within that age cohort. At retirement, the benefit is annuitized based on age-appropriate life expectancy and a real discount rate of 1.6% (that is, an after-inflation rate). Benefits are increased more-or-less in line with inflation after retirement but with adjustments for any imbalances in the “notional fund.”

Again, as with Norway, there is a minimum benefit, which works out to 24% of national average wages, but there’s also a housing allowance of up to about $650 per month for poor retirees.

A portion of the Social Security contribution also funds a true Defined Contribution account; workers may choose their fund allocation, and these are annuitized at retirement, with a fixed or variable annuity.

In addition, most workers, blue- and white-collar, are a part of nationwide collective agreements which include a further Defined Contribution account, called the ITP (or ITP1 or ITP2 or ITPK). At least half of this must be invested in “insurance” (that is, a deferred-annuity type investment).

Calculated replacement ratios, net of tax, all plan types, at median income: 55.8% of preretirement pay.

United States (for comparision):

Based on an assumed private DC contribution of 9% of pay, which the OECD determined to be the average contribution level, they calculate the net replacement rate for the US for median income earners as 81.9%. Considering Social Security alone, the rate is 44.8%

So, by all means, let’s reform our system to reflect the Scandinavian system. Which one do you choose?

(Updated 6/3 to add in replacement ratios from the OECD’s calculations.)

Image: eh, it’s Stockholm. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ARiddarholmen_from_Stockholm_City_Hall_tower.jpg; By Benoît Derrier from Stockholm, Sweden (Stockholm) [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Actuarial/Retirement Issues

Scandinavia

Social Security

Previous Post

June 1, 2016

M.A.D., 2016 edition

Next Post

June 3, 2016 The Day Care/Preschool Elixer

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Actuarial/Retirement Issues Politics Uncategorized

Select a Month September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 December 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 August 2021 June 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How long did judges rule over Israel?

Select your answer to see how you score.

400 years 250 years 300 years 350 years