The social security file is witnessing extensive discussion in light of the proposed amendments and the results of the actuarial study that point to an expected breakeven point in the coming years.
Apart from preconceived support or opposition, any amendment affecting contributions or retirement age must be considered from three fundamental perspectives:
First: The actual financial sustainability of the fund over the long term, and the adequacy of available investment and administrative alternatives before resorting to imposing additional burdens on subscribers.
Second: The economic impact on the labor market and the competitiveness of companies, especially in the face of employment and growth challenges.
Third: Justice between generations, so that no single generation bears the cost of cumulative imbalances without balanced structural reform.
In European and Canadian experiences, social security system reforms tend to follow a gradual approach in arranging the tools.
As any social security system approaches the breakeven point, prudent economic management usually follows a logical progression in the available tools.
Reform begins with improving the efficiency of investment management and maximizing returns, as it is the socially least costly path and most aligned with the principles of sound governance.
This is followed by efforts to expand the base of subscribers and enhance compliance, which raises revenue through growth and employment rather than increasing direct burdens.
If the actuarial gap persists, some of the eligibility conditions or retirement criteria can be reviewed in a considered and gradual manner.
As for adjusting contribution rates, it's viewed as an economically and socially sensitive tool, and is often seen as a last resort used within a comprehensive package that balances financial sustainability and labor market stability.
This gradual approach reflects not so much a political preference as it does a management of economic and social risks, and a strive to maintain a balance between financial sustainability and community stability.
It should be noted that an increase in the returns of the social security investment fund and an increase in its assets does not necessarily eliminate the need for some structural measures, such as reviewing the retirement age or conditions of entitlement, as even with improved investment performance, the fund's future obligations remain linked to the flow of contributions, the number of subscribers, their ages, and expected retirement expenses. Therefore, adjusting the retirement age is considered a last tool within a graduated reform approach aimed at ensuring long-term financial sustainability, while considering justice between generations, after exhausting less socially impactful options.
Social security is a pillar of economic and social stability, and any reform in it must be gradual, well-considered, and transparent, in a way that maintains public trust in the system and enhances its sustainability in the long run.
The discussion around the bill remains a legislative matter built on technical data and responsible institutional dialogue.
