1. 1 public * * * management mode
This model refers to a social insurance system in which the government directly participates in the management by giving economic compensation to those who have lost their sources of income because of their old age. Internationally, public management mode can be subdivided into completely centralized management mode and loose management mode.
1. 1. 1 complete centralized government management model. This model means that the central government concentrates part of the income of the insured into a central fund managed by the public through compulsory means, and the government social security department is directly responsible for the investment operation of this part of the funds, thus realizing the investment management of the social security fund. An important feature of this model is that the state establishes a special institution to manage the endowment insurance on behalf of the state, and no other institution can participate. Singapore is a typical country that adopts this model. It hands over all the investments and operations of pension funds to the Central Provident Fund Bureau for management.
The first is the Singapore model. The first half of the 1950s. In order to solve these difficulties, the Singapore government chose the central provident fund system, that is, the compulsory savings social security system, which is entirely borne by employees and employers, and the government does not bear it. 1in July, 955, the central provident fund system was formally implemented through legislation. The Singapore government's concept of providing for the aged is "the government does not provide for the aged, and enterprises do not provide for the aged". The endowment insurance fund is entirely borne by employees and employers. Every member of the provident fund has a personal account, and the monthly insurance premium is deposited in the personal account. The investment management of pension funds is directly controlled by the Central Provident Fund Bureau. The advantages of Singapore model are: unified management of funds is conducive to ensuring the safety of investment; Accepting the supervision of the masses is conducive to effectively preventing the fund from being misappropriated and occupied. The disadvantage is that the government implements centralized management of funds and lacks competition mechanism, resulting in low rate of return.
The second is the Japanese model. Japan's old-age insurance mainly consists of three parts: the old-age insurance for enterprise employees plus people; National endowment insurance for self-employed, farmers, fishermen and employees of scattered small enterprises, and mutual endowment insurance for employees of special industries such as civil servants and public enterprises; Unemployed spouses of employees join the national basic old-age insurance. The first two parts are managed by the Ministry of Social Insurance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare, and the third part is managed by the mutual aid society itself. The financial transactions of the three pension insurance systems are settled by the special accounting of the Ministry of Health and Welfare, the special accounting of the national pension insurance and the mutual accounting respectively. The endowment insurance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare and the national endowment insurance are settled by the national special account headed by the Ministry of Health and Welfare, and the overall endowment insurance fund is deposited in the Capital Operation Department of the Ministry of Finance, which has become an important source of financial financing. This basic pension fund in Japan is mainly managed and operated by government departments and brought into the national financial investment and financing system. Its main advantages are: because the endowment insurance fund is uniformly distributed and managed by the government, it can ensure the safety of the fund and help prevent the fund from being dispersed and lost; Since the operation plan of the fund is decided by Congress, it can prevent the fund from being misappropriated and occupied; The unified management of funds makes the fund investment closely linked with the national industrial policy, which can promote the perfection of the capital market and even the economic development. However, this model is not perfect, and its most important shortcoming is that due to excessive government intervention, the government will adjust the rate of return of pension funds according to different stages of economic development, so it is difficult to obtain a stable rate of return of funds under this model.
1. 1.2 loose management mode. This mode refers to the mode that the endowment insurance fund is jointly managed by the government and social organizations. Its important feature is that the state specialized agency is responsible for the overall supervision of the endowment insurance, and the committee composed of the government, employers and employees or employers and employees specifically supervises the endowment insurance fund, and various public * * *, a few private institutions and public * * * private cooperative institutions operate and provide services, with separation of management and management, and separation of fund revenue and expenditure. Such as Germany, France, Spain and some other EU countries have adopted this model.
1.2 private management mode
This model refers to handing over all payments to private institutions recognized by the government for investment and operation. This model is generally used for the management of occupational annuities or some public pension funds. Now internationally, this model is divided into the following two types:
1.2. 1 full privatization mode. The typical representative country that adopts the mode of complete privatization is Chile, in which the individual accounts of endowment insurance are established and managed by private institutions recognized by the government.
1980, Chile began to implement a new fully accumulated fund system, implemented individual responsibility system for the aged and market-oriented fund operation, and forced the establishment of individual accounts for old-age insurance. Chile's Pension Insurance Law stipulates that pension management should be carried out by private institutions, so a new specialized institution-pension fund management company AFP has been established. AFP is a private joint-stock company, and its shareholders can be legal persons or individuals, but they cannot be official institutions. At present, there are 2 1 such companies in Chile, which are owned by enterprises, trade associations, trade unions and banks, and the main shareholders are commercial banks.
According to the relevant laws and regulations in Chile, every employee must pay 65,438+00% of the after-tax monthly salary. Depositors can set up individual capital accumulation accounts, but they can freely choose an AFP to manage and invest their individual capital accounts according to their personal preferences, and their membership will not be terminated due to job transfer, unemployment or retirement. The state guarantees the minimum investment income and guarantee, and requires the minimum income to reach 50% of the average income of all pension funds. In addition, AFP's own assets are operated separately from pension funds and are legally and financially independent from the company; The investment income of pension funds belongs to pension funds completely, and it is not taxed, but the business activities of AFP are taxed. 198 1- 1995, the average annual return on investment of AFP in Chile reached 13.5%, five times that under the national management system.
The advantages of the Chilean model are: because many private pension fund management companies participate in investment management, each company will attract customers by providing higher returns for its own survival; Because the existence of many private fund management companies is conducive to promoting these funds to choose a good investment direction, each fund management company chooses a different investment portfolio, which is conducive to reducing investment risks. The main disadvantage is that many private fund management companies have increased their operating costs and raised the management fees paid by individuals for private fund management companies in order to attract customers.
1.2.2 partial privatization model. One of the representative countries adopting this model is Kazakhstan. On June 5438+099865438+1 October1,Kazakhstan formally implemented the pension reform plan, which changed from the previous pay-as-you-go system to the individual accumulated old-age insurance system. China has established pension fund asset management companies AFP and AMC, which are managed by the central government. Pension funds are responsible for managing members' personal accounts, and asset management companies are responsible for investing accumulated funds in various securities to maintain and increase the value of pension funds. Among the Qiao family pension funds, one is a state-owned pension fund, and the other 14 is a private pension fund. The national pension fund is directly managed by the Central Bank of Kazakhstan, and direct investment does not require the investment and operation of asset management companies. Employees can choose one of the Qiaojia pension funds to join. If employees decide which pension fund to join, they will be automatically assigned to the national pension fund. In addition, after joining any pension fund, employees can freely switch between state pension funds and private pension funds. Since the reform of the new pension system in Kazakhstan, the total rate of return on pensions is still quite satisfactory. In the first year of the pension reform, its rate of return was as high as 32.93%, and the rate of return in the following years also showed a gradual upward trend.
The main advantages of this model are that the pension fund investment can obtain a higher rate of return, and the security of the fund has been well guaranteed, such as the establishment of the national pension fund; Like the Chilean model, this model has also played a certain role in optimizing the investment direction of the fund and promoting the perfection of the capital market. The disadvantage is that the fund company increases the publicity and marketing expenses to attract customers, which leads to the increase of management costs.
1.3 cost-benefit comparison between public management mode and private management mode
Cost comparison of 1.3. 1 Because there are many private pension fund management companies in countries that adopt private management mode, in order to attract more customers, the companies have increased publicity and marketing expenses, and increased marketing costs and management expenses. Moreover, in these countries, the government generally stipulates the minimum investment income and supervises the private pension fund management companies, which also increases the investment management cost. However, under the public management mode, the government has formed economies of scale in investment management through centralized financing, thus reducing the cost of investment management. The insured only needs to hand over the pension fund to the government for management, and does not need to find a fund management company, which also increases the income of the insured relatively.
1.3.2 Income comparison. Generally speaking, the rate of return of private management mode is higher than that of public management mode. In countries with private management mode, many private pension fund management companies have been established, and the insured can choose insurance according to the performance of each company, which makes each company attract customers and improve the investment income. It is the competition in private management that makes this model get high profits.
2. Experience of pension fund management modes in different countries.
2. 1 In order to ensure the safety of the fund and the return on investment, the government must correctly position itself.
Because of its particularity in protecting people's basic life, the endowment insurance fund objectively requires safety first. However, because the fund is a long-term fund, its preservation and appreciation is also an important issue that all countries must face, which requires the government to manage the fund in areas where it should play a role. For example, in the Chilean model, although the government does not directly participate in the investment operation of the fund, it plays the role of rulemaker and supervisor. In order to standardize the operation of pension fund management companies, the Chilean government has set up the office of the general manager of pension fund management, which is completely independent of the government and directly supervises and coordinates the management and operation of pension funds. Each pension fund management company must announce the profitability of the last 36 months to the General Administration and the whole society every month. According to the historical records of various pension funds, the General Administration has formulated the minimum income standard. If it fails to meet the standards within the time limit, the right to operate the pension fund management company shall be cancelled. This measure can not only effectively supervise fund management companies, but also help to protect the income of the insured from damage.
2.2 The endowment insurance fund must follow the principle of legal management.
In order to standardize the operation of the endowment insurance fund, ensure that the interests of the insured are not harmed, and gradually improve their welfare level, there is no doubt that the endowment insurance fund is legally managed. Many countries that have established social security have successively established the legal status of social security by enacting relevant laws. The United States first promulgated the social security law in 1935, and established the social security agency, which was directly managed by the federal government. At present, American medical insurance for retirement, survivors, disability and old age plays an important role in the American social security system, and its expenditure accounts for about 80% of the total expenditure of the American social security system. With legal constraints, the security of social security funds will be guaranteed, the investment of funds will be gradually standardized, and people's income and welfare will be guaranteed according to law.
2.3 The investment and operation of pension funds are supervised by the masses.
Power without restraint is terrible. So is the social security fund. Lack of supervision will only lead to the scattered loss and misappropriation of pension funds. In the Singapore model, the Central Provident Fund Bureau is composed of government, employers, employees and experts, and it strictly supervises the investment and operation of pension funds so as not to make the pension funds fail to function normally.
2.4 The endowment insurance fund is mainly managed by the market.
The purpose of government management is to ensure the safety of funds, but it still needs to be handed over to the market to ensure the preservation and appreciation of funds. The main goal of market-oriented management is to optimize pension allocation. Implementing the market-oriented operation of the pension fund and obtaining a higher rate of return through the investment in the capital market by the pension insurance fund institutions not only ensures the preservation and appreciation of the fund, accelerates the accumulation of the pension fund, improves the welfare of the people, but also helps to improve the capital market.
3. Choice of the management mode of the endowment insurance fund in China.
At present, the management mode of endowment insurance fund adopted in China is the combination of social pooling fund and individual account fund, and hybrid management is implemented. With the coming of the aging population, the current pension fund management model needs to be changed urgently. This paper holds that two different types of funds should be managed separately.
3. 1 Reasons for separate management of collective funds and individual account funds
3. 1. 1 The two funds have different functions and need to be managed separately. The function of the overall fund is to redistribute income and pay attention to fairness; Personal account funds, on the other hand, emphasize the preservation and appreciation of value and efficiency. As the first pillar of China's old-age insurance system, social pooling fund is the pension capital of workers. Although it is necessary to preserve and increase the value, it is necessary to take safety as the primary principle and mix the two funds rigidly. In fact, two different financial management mechanisms, namely fixed income and fixed income, are mixed together. If there is a gap in the pension fund, it cannot be clearly determined whether the gap is due to the gap in the overall fund or the gap in the individual account fund.
3. 1.2 The two funds operate separately, which helps to prevent misappropriation of funds. Since the implementation of the old-age insurance system in China, it has provided better treatment for the elderly and basically guaranteed their old-age life. However, this is achieved by increasing the pension fund gap and misappropriating personal account funds to fill the overall fund gap. The original intention of setting up individual accounts in the old-age insurance system is to accumulate and preserve and increase the value of employees' future pensions. However, in the actual operation process, the government misappropriated personal account funds, resulting in the so-called "empty account problem." Separate management of the two funds and transparent management of the personal account fund can effectively avoid misappropriation of the personal account fund and give full play to its role in national savings and economic development.
3. 1.3 The two funds have different requirements for investment income and need to be managed separately. Compared with social insurance funds, individual account funds pay more attention to investment and its income. In the actual investment operation, the public management mode is usually adopted, and government departments operate institutional investment funds, which are mostly non-profit and backed by government finance, resulting in their lack of internal and external motivation for good profit. Furthermore, with the safety of funds as the primary principle, the government usually imposes strict restrictions on the investment targets of social security funds. However, this does not mean that the security of personal account capital investment is not important. In terms of individual account funds, the government should strengthen supervision and adopt an investment management model different from the overall fund.
3.2 Choice of two fund management modes
To sum up, this paper suggests that the two funds be managed separately.
3.2. 1 Implement a complete centralized government management model for social pooling funds, and hand over the administrative management of pensions to the Ministry of Labor and Social Security and the relatively independent social security fund management institutions; Each provincial fund management center can set up a special institution to manage the government's centralized investment, and of course it is necessary to stipulate the types and limits of investment; It can also be operated according to the current investment operation management mode of the National Social Security Fund and managed by the China Social Security Fund Council. At this stage, we can consider gradually establishing a number of state-owned pension fund management companies with legal personality to jointly manage the national social security pooling fund to ensure the preservation and appreciation of the pooling fund.
3.2.2 Individual account funds shall be partially privatized. When the management right of individual account fund is handed over to the fund management company, several private pension fund management companies and one or several state-owned pension fund management companies can be established according to the Kazakhstan model to manage the investment of individual account fund. The insured can choose between private pension fund management companies and state-owned pension fund management companies and implement market-oriented operation management, so as to realize the full play of competition mechanism in the management of individual account pension fund, which is also conducive to realizing the requirements of individual account fund for investment income. However, when establishing these private fund management companies, strict examination and approval procedures are needed. The state should formulate minimum income standards to effectively protect the interests of policyholders, and the government should also strengthen supervision over private pension fund management companies.