Cadem and pension reform: 52% want it to be approved after the plebiscite and 84% that all the additional contribution or half go to their account

84% of people prefer that the additional contribution of 6% that is discussed in the pension reform, go in full to their individual accounts in the AFP, or that 3% have that destination, and the other half to a solidarity common fund .

That is what the latest Cadem survey carried out in September reveals, considering that the result showed that 51% want this additional contribution to go in its entirety to individual accounts, 33% would distribute half and half, and 12% would opt for everything goes to a common solidarity fund.

This result that the survey shows occurs precisely at a time when the government proposes that half of the additional contribution be allocated to individual accounts, and the other half to a collective fund; while in the opposition they demand that the full 6% go to a solidarity fund.

And the withdrawal of 10% was also noted in the survey: 84% of people now know that the funds they have in the AFP belong to people, the highest level of which there is registration, since now only the 8% say they belong to the AFPs, and 7% believe they belong to the State.

In this way, people’s perception of who they prefer to manage their pension funds also changed, since 78% want to be able to choose whether the additional 6% contribution is administered by a state institution, or its AFP; 16% want everything to be managed by a state institution, and 5% by the AFPs.

Roberto Izikson, public affairs manager at Cadem, makes an analysis of these results. “What the 10% withdrawal achieved is bringing the future benefit of what it meant to save for 40 more years to present value. The big problem with the pension system is that people save permanently for something they see in too long a term, so by bringing it to present value in a percentage, which in this case is the withdrawal of 10%, I think everything was strengthened the system, ”he says.

This is reflected, according to Izikson, in that “in the first place, people know that the funds are theirs, it increased more than 20 points. Second, freedom of choice, because for this additional 6% contribution, (they believe that) it is fine to have a state institution, but people want to be able to choose whether they want the AFP or a state institution to administer those money. Third, 51% want the entirety (of the additional contribution) to go to their account, 12% want distribution, and 33% are available to solidarity. That solidarity is a triumph of the October social movement, that is something that we did not see before, before people were much more individualistic in that sense ”.

That solidarity to which Chileans are now more willing, as well as the effect of the withdrawal of 10%, is also reflected in a possible contribution through VAT or other tax, an issue that has transpired that the government would be evaluating.

For example, when Cadem asked “Would you be willing to contribute more through a 1% increase in VAT or other tax on the purchase of goods or services, if it were guaranteed that these resources will improve pensions?” 64% said they would be willing, 33% said no, and 3% do not know or do not respond.

Moreover, those who answer affirmatively increase when asked: “And would you be willing to contribute more through consumption to improve pensions if the measure were to improve the pensions of those who have less?”. In this case, 71% answered that they would be willing, while 27% said no, and 2% did not know or did not respond.

In this regard, Izikson say that “basically, what Chileans want is that if the price is going to be 16% in total, they are available to 13% to be theirs, and add solidarity of 3%, or complement with an increase in VAT, so that there are also degrees of solidarity, but as long as it is more or less 13% and 3% ”.

On the creation of a state AFP that competes with the current AFPs, 68% say they agree, 28% disagree, and 4% do not know or do not respond.

On the other hand, when consulting people if they would “agree or disagree with the nationalization of the pension funds, that is, that they pass under the control of the State, form a solidarity fund, and cease to be an individual property account of the worker ”, 35% say they agree, 60% disagree, 4% do not know or do not respond, and 1% do not agree or disagree.

Cadem’s survey was conducted over the telephone between Wednesday, September 23 and Friday, September 25, and has a margin of error of 3.4 percentage points, at 95% confidence.

On the moment to carry out the pension reform there is an important division. The above, considering that 45% believe that the reform should be approved “now, as soon as possible with an agreement between the government and Congress.” Meanwhile, 52% believe that it should be “after the plebiscite.”

When disaggregating this item, it is observed that those who are on the right prefer that the pension reform be approved “now, as soon as possible”, while the majority of those on the left prefer that it be after the plebiscite. The people in the center are more divided, but still a majority prefer that the reform be approved now, while in the independents there is also a lot of division, but there are more who want the pension project to be approved after the plebiscite.

When analyzing by age, men prefer the reform to be approved after the plebiscite, and women are divided. By age, only those over 55 years of age are more inclined to see the reform approved now. In parallel, by socio-economic stratum, only those who belong to the lower segment prefer that the reform be approved now, the rest opt ​​for it to be after the plebiscite.

The truth is that currently the negotiations between the opposition and the government have failed to advance. In fact, for this Monday the opposition decided to summon to discuss its pension proposal in the Senate Labor Committee, a meeting that will take place today between 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m., and to which two of the experts who worked on this proposal were summoned: the economists Paula Benavides and Andras Uthoff.

The senator and president of this instance, Juan Pablo Letelier, affirmed that this meeting occurs because “two months ago, the opposition senators of the Senate Labor Commission, we delivered a proposal for the pension reform to the government. However, during this time the Executive has not said anything. This, despite the objective data, that the opposition’s proposal gives better results to increase today’s pensions, women’s pensions, as well as those of future generations ”.

One of the arguments that the ruling party has privately given to the opposition so as not to give in that the 6% additional contribution goes in full to individual accounts, is precisely that the surveys reveal that people prefer that part or all of the additional contribution go to your individual accounts.