Inter­pel­la­ti­on Wyss (22.4011): Digi­tizati­on BVG. Added value for all?

Inter­pel­la­ti­on Wyss (22.4011): Digi­tizati­on BVG. Added value for all?

Sub­mit­ted text

More than 15 per­cent of employees chan­ge jobs each year (700,000 job chan­ges). Many of them seam­less­ly chan­ge their employer and thus their pen­si­on fund (PF). The pro­ce­du­re for this is still very paper-based. The insu­red per­son recei­ves a let­ter from his or her pre­vious pen­si­on fund.

To faci­li­ta­te the exch­an­ge of LOB infor­ma­ti­on bet­ween the PFs, the BVG Auf­fang­ein­rich­tung estab­lished a plat­form: BVG-Exch­an­ge. This allo­ws data on insu­red per­sons to be trans­fer­red digi­tal­ly as soon as it is clear that the per­son is swit­ching from PF A to PF B. This saves the PF up to 80 per­cent time in pro­ce­s­sing. This saves the PF up to 80 per­cent time in processing.

What remains is for the old PF to wri­te to the insu­red per­son so that he or she knows whe­re the reti­re­ment assets must be trans­fer­red. This step could also be digi­ti­zed. The new PF has alre­a­dy been infor­med by the employer that a new insu­red per­son is joi­ning. If it shares this data on a plat­form, the trans­fer­ring PF can iden­ti­fy the new one and trans­fer the reti­re­ment assets and infor­ma­ti­on to the new PF wit­hout the insu­red per­son having to do anything.

The Fede­ral Coun­cil is reque­sted to ans­wer the fol­lo­wing questions:

a. Is the Fede­ral Coun­cil of the opi­ni­on that such a digi­ta­lizati­on of the occu­pa­tio­nal pen­si­on sche­me can signi­fi­cant­ly opti­mi­ze the pro­ce­s­ses and thus the costs of the pen­si­on scheme?

b. Does the Fede­ral Coun­cil belie­ve that the digi­tizati­on of pen­si­on pro­vi­si­on can increa­se access to and under­stan­ding of pen­si­on pro­vi­si­on among the population?

c. Curr­ent­ly, Artic­le 1(2) of the Ordi­nan­ce on Vest­ing in Pen­si­on Plans requi­res the insu­red per­son to trans­mit the data to the pre­vious and new pen­si­on fund: would the Fede­ral Coun­cil be pre­pared to amend the pro­vi­si­on of the Ordi­nan­ce to the effect that digi­tizati­on beco­mes pos­si­ble, but that at the same time the insu­red per­son can wai­ve such digi­tizati­on in the event of proac­ti­ve noti­fi­ca­ti­on (opt-out)?

d. Are the­re any other ordi­nan­ce or legis­la­ti­ve pro­vi­si­ons that would need to be adapt­ed so that digi­tizati­on can be car­ri­ed out? Is the Fede­ral Coun­cil pre­pared to take the neces­sa­ry steps to this end?

State­ment of the Fede­ral Coun­cil of 16.11.22

In Switz­er­land, the­re are appro­xi­m­ate­ly 1500 pen­si­on and vested bene­fits insti­tu­ti­ons, which dif­fer great­ly from one ano­ther in terms of orga­nizati­on and struc­tu­re. They have exten­si­ve orga­nizatio­nal auto­no­my for the ful­fill­ment of their tasks.

a) The level of digi­tizati­on in pen­si­on fund admi­ni­stra­ti­on is alre­a­dy very high today. Many insti­tu­ti­ons, espe­ci­al­ly the lar­ger ones, have alre­a­dy digi­ti­zed the exch­an­ge of data and infor­ma­ti­on both among them­sel­ves and with insu­red per­sons and employers. All recur­ring and auto­mata­ble pro­ce­s­ses are alre­a­dy car­ri­ed out digi­tal­ly to the grea­test pos­si­ble ext­ent. The admi­ni­stra­ti­on of enroll­ments and with­dra­wals of insu­red per­sons men­tio­ned by the inter­pel­lant repres­ents only a small part of the admi­ni­stra­ti­ve tasks of pen­si­on funds. The insti­tu­ti­ons should also be able to deci­de for them­sel­ves how to mana­ge the exch­an­ge of data and infor­ma­ti­on in this sub­area in accordance with their orga­nizatio­nal and admi­ni­stra­ti­ve cir­cum­stances. They have a strong inte­rest in orga­ni­zing this effi­ci­ent­ly and with a good cost/benefit ratio in order to keep their admi­ni­stra­ti­ve costs as low as possible.

b) The Fede­ral Coun­cil is awa­re that the sub­ject of occu­pa­tio­nal pen­si­ons is a deman­ding one. Pen­si­on insti­tu­ti­ons can con­tri­bu­te to a bet­ter under­stan­ding of their insu­red per­sons through simp­le, clear and trans­pa­rent com­mu­ni­ca­ti­on. In this con­text, digi­tal initia­ti­ves that streng­then trans­pa­ren­cy about per­so­nal pen­si­on pro­vi­si­on are to be wel­co­med. Even more than digi­tal exch­an­ges bet­ween pen­si­on plans, tools that allow insu­red per­sons to inter­act direct­ly with pen­si­on plans digi­tal­ly and get an imme­dia­te over­view online of a future reti­re­ment pen­si­on based on life events are a step toward even more trans­pa­rent infor­ma­ti­on vis-à-vis insu­red per­sons. This could encou­ra­ge youn­ger peo­p­le in par­ti­cu­lar to look into reti­re­ment plan­ning at an ear­ly stage.

c/d) Accor­ding to the Ordi­nan­ce on Vest­ing in Occu­pa­tio­nal Reti­re­ment, Sur­vi­vors’ and Disa­bi­li­ty Pen­si­on Plans (Ver­ord­nung über die Frei­zü­gig­keit in der beruf­li­chen Alters‑, Hin­ter­las­se­nen- und Inva­li­den­vor­sor­ge; SR 831.425), employees only have to inform their pen­si­on insti­tu­ti­on to which new pen­si­on or vested bene­fits insti­tu­ti­on they should trans­fer their ter­mi­na­ti­on bene­fit. This noti­fi­ca­ti­on obli­ga­ti­on is a pre­re­qui­si­te for the pen­si­on insti­tu­ti­ons invol­ved to be able to exch­an­ge the infor­ma­ti­on requi­red for the pro­ce­s­sing of vested bene­fits cases at all, becau­se only the insu­red per­sons have this know­ledge. The­r­e­fo­re, the report­ing obli­ga­ti­on of the insu­red per­sons can­not be wai­ved. Howe­ver, the cur­rent pro­vi­si­ons do not stand in the way of an elec­tro­nic exch­an­ge of infor­ma­ti­on. The Fede­ral Coun­cil would also wel­co­me increa­sed digi­tizati­on efforts in this area as well. All other infor­ma­ti­on obli­ga­ti­ons in the case of vested bene­fits, such as the noti­fi­ca­ti­on of the man­da­to­ry reti­re­ment assets, rela­te exclu­si­ve­ly to the insti­tu­ti­ons invol­ved. This exch­an­ge of data bet­ween the insti­tu­ti­ons, which is requi­red for ent­ries and with­dra­wals, is alre­a­dy car­ri­ed out digi­tal­ly in many cases (see ans­wer a). This is alre­a­dy pos­si­ble under cur­rent law in accordance with exi­sting data pro­tec­tion requi­re­ments and does not requi­re any addi­tio­nal chan­ges to ordi­nan­ces or legislation.

Aut­ho­ri­ty

Area

Topics

Rela­ted articles

Sub­scri­be