contents
What would change? What arguments do proponents and opponents bring into play?
On September 25, 2022, those entitled to vote will decide on a reform of the AHV. The reform package includes two proposals: a change in the law on old-age and survivors’ insurance (AHV 21) and additional financing of the AHV through an increase in VAT.
The two templates are linked; if either is rejected, the whole reform fails. A referendum was held against the draft AHV 21 with a retirement age of 65 for women.
The increase in VAT in brief
target of the template
Because baby boomers are reaching retirement age and life expectancy is increasing, the financial stability of the AHV is at risk. The income from the AHV is then no longer sufficient to finance all pensions. The AHV reform provides for savings and additional income, so that the social work should be secured again for a few years.
That is new
There is now a uniform retirement age of 65 for women and men. The retirement age for women will be gradually increased from 64 to 65. This increase is cushioned for those affected with compensatory measures. Women born between 1961 and 1969 can take early retirement on better terms or receive a supplement to their AHV pensions if they work until the age of 65.
The proposal also brings flexible retirement between the ages of 63 and 70. In addition, more incentives are to be created so that over 65-year-olds can also pursue paid work.
Three arguments for it
- It is time that women (may or must) work the same hours as men. There is no reason for women to retire earlier.
- The compensatory measures will financially cushion the increase in the AHV age for women who are about to retire.
- The reform secures the AHV as a social security system without having to cut pensions.
Three arguments against
- The AHV reform is at the expense of women. On average, women receive a third less pension than men. And women get paid less for the same work. A higher retirement age for women is therefore out of the question.
- If the AHV reform is accepted, this will open the door to a further increase in the retirement age for politicians.
- The measures to make the retirement age more flexible are a hoax. Because only high earners can afford early retirement and only a few employers want to employ older jobseekers.
voting recommendations
The Federal Council and Parliament recommend AHV 21 for adoption. In the National Council, 125 members were in favor, 67 against. The amendment to the law was approved by the Council of States by 31 votes to 12.