[ad_1]
With a view to what will be the debate in the Chamber of the Chamber of Deputies regarding the second withdrawal of 10% of the pension funds, parliamentarians of Chile Vamos announced that will insist on incorporating modifications that were discarded by the Constitution Commission.
In that instance, three official proposals were accepted: the one that establishes a voluntary mechanism to replenish funds, with an over-quotation of 5%; the one that removes the tax exemption for the highest incomes; and the one forces authorities to incorporate the withdrawal of funds in their declaration of assets and interests.
However, one of the flags of the Government and Chile Vamos was rejected. This is an indication that sought to focus the benefit on unemployed people, or who could prove a reduction of at least 30% in their income.
In National Renovation, where they sponsored that proposal, deputy Miguel Mellado announced that they will insist with her and asked the opposition for a less obstructionist attitude in the debate.
“Sometimes the movers of these projects think that they have to come out the same as they placed them and they do not leave other people who think differently, to place some indications as appropriate in the legislative process,” stressed the official.
In the opposition bloc, however, although they recognize the need to reach a consensus with Chile Vamos, they would not be willing to modify the universal nature of the project.
Deputy DC, Miguel Angel Callisto, asked the ruling party not to insist with an excess of what he described as “fine print.”
“We want the withdrawal of 10% without fine print, without conditions, without mechanisms that seek in some way to restrict this right, no one can prevent this procedure, neither the State nor the AFPs,” the Falangist stressed.
Despite the differences in content, the support of the House seems to be assured. In the Senate, some opposition representatives have already opened up to support the project, changing your mind from your initial refusal.
In the ruling party there are still doubts. Senator UDI, David sandoval, who voted in favor of the first withdrawal, says he is “in reflection.”
While recognizing the situation of need in families, believes that La Moneda should promote an alternative that reduces the pension damage, but is consistent, in the remainder of the processing.
“There is even the possibility, within the applications, of a covid loan, that a loan is made from the State to the families. If people are told ‘Hey, look at the withdrawal of your funds or do you have this other alternative that will not mean charging your own resources’ (…) Obviously there is always a space ”, assured Sandoval.
To succeed in the Chamber, the bill that will be debated and discussed next Tuesday, November 10, needs a support of at least 93 votes.
[ad_2]
