[ad_1]
The measure desired by the League to withdraw those who had reached the fateful 100 between years of contributions and age, seems destined not to be renewed. Wednesday first round table
Proposes the hypothesis fee 102 – Already in January, government technicians had leaked a way to avoid the sharp increase in the age requirement. This is 102, retired at 64 with 38 contributions. A presentation in the current window that would cost “only” 2.5 billion. A good saving compared to the 8,800 million needed to maintain 100 in 2020. Technicians are also evaluating the flows that benefit from this reform. Checking the 2019 data, the only complete ones, of the 350 thousand outgoing workers that only 120 thousand are expected to have actually used 100. With a nice saving for the state coffers. But hypothesis 102 has already received an unofficial “no” from the unions.
The counterproposal, fee 41 – And the unions are preparing their counterproposal to put on the government table. This is quota 41, that is, to allow the retirement of those who have paid 41 years of contributions. Regardless of age. To date, there is already a quota 41 which, however, takes into account the age of the worker and greatly restricts the population involved. However, any hypothesis must deal with the state coffers. For quota 41 to be sustainable, a reduction of the allocation of at least 3% is expected for each year before age 67.
[ad_2]
