INPS, the time has come to separate assistance from social security. Appeal to politicians

7 February 20243 months ago babelfish

The separation, in INPS budgets, between social security and welfare benefits can and must be done and to this end it is necessary, in addition to a revival of dignity and political honesty, to increase the efficiency of the organizational machine. The speech by Michele Poerio, general secretary of Confedir and president of Federspev

The data reported below and partially explained in a previous article of mine , derive from the Center for Studies and Research in Social Security Routes , chaired by Prof. Alberto Brambilla.

It appears, therefore, that, in 2022, spending on welfare (pensions, healthcare and assistance) absorbed more than half of the total public expenditure, i.e. 51.65%.

Of the expenditure generally attributable to the "pensions" chapter, 157 billion were assigned to welfare costs in 2022 (with growth of 126% compared to the previous 10 years), while social security expenditure including IVS benefits (disability, old age, survivors) in 2022 it was equal to 247.58 billion (with growth of 17% compared to the previous 10 years), with an impact on the 2022 GDP of 12.97%. However, if we subtract the welfare costs for social increases, the minimum supplements, and the GIAS (Management for Welfare Interventions of public employees), equal in total to 23.79 billion, the impact on GDP drops to 11.72% , a figure absolutely in line with the Eurostat average (which is 12.6%). If we were to exclude, in addition to the minimum integrations and the GIAS, also the 59 billion. of IRPEF taxes as a "revolving tax" (taxes which on average in the countries of the European Union and the OECD area are much lower), the impact on GDP would still fall to 8.64%.

And yet our institutions transmit data on pensions to the European Union in an indistinct and cumulative manner, so that their impact on GDP is erroneously 16.7%.

This explains the reason that leads the EU, the OECD, the International Monetary Fund and so on to insist on social security reforms in Italy, focusing above all on advances on old-age pensions, disability pensions and reversibility pensions. , the usual so-called “golden” pensions, etc.

Despite the aforementioned alarming data, which are also reflected in the number of 6,551,533 pensioners wholly or partially assisted in 2022, i.e. 40.61% of the total (16,131,414, official INPS data), the Technical Commission established to study the problem , who worked only for one semester of 2021 through restricted technical committees and avoiding plenary meetings, the reigning Minister of Labor Andrea Orlando, who moved casually from the PCI to the PD, concluded that "a clear separation of social security from assistance does not appear practicable even due to the often hybrid nature of the service which makes a distinction between the sources of financing complicated": minimum supplement, 14th salary, social increases, severance pay quotas, social unemployment allowance, citizen's income, etc., are, in fact, all considered interventions of a hybrid nature which combine characteristics of both assistance and social security.

These conclusions, not even made official, may have satisfied Minister Orlando but they received the "no" from the CGIL and the "no" from CISL and UIL and from all autonomous trade unionism, certainly the most representative of the middle class and the ruling classes and important institutions such as the World Bank and others.

In this confusion, political discretion rages, opening the doors to abuses by legislators of all kinds, against which and against bad legislation even the Constitutional Court has not placed any limits in recent years.

And instead, to dispel the confusion it would be enough to go back to the art. 38 of our Constitution, which clearly distinguishes actual assistance (paragraph 1) from social security (paragraph 2), but also to law 88/1989, ex art.37, which has never been applied until now.

The assistance has the precise objective of protecting those in need; it is implemented directly by the State, Regions and Local Authorities through economic disbursements or through specific social benefits, in any case with resources deriving from general taxation.

Social security has a different origin and objective: it is fueled through the contributions paid by workers and employers during work to accrue the right, at the end of the work performance, to a "deferred salary", on which pages have been spent , arguments and sentences by the Constitutional Court.

From 1988-1989 attempts were made to separate the two services in the INPS budgets and for this purpose a special management of welfare treatments (GIAS) was also established, to be financed from general taxation, but the system immediately confusing because this management is also used for some social security benefits, which are not totally covered by the contributions paid.

All this was wanted by irresponsible political classes, regardless of the economic collapse of the social security funds, as well as of the state budget, for pure electoral purposes, that is, to "buy" an undeserved consensus through unsustainable, as well as immoral, welfare donations (retiring with 14 years 6 months and one day of working activity).

Precisely for these reasons, the separation, in INPS budgets, between social security and welfare benefits can and must be done and to this end it is necessary, in addition to a revival of dignity and political honesty, also to increase the efficiency of the organizational machine through a database of assistance and a centralized register of active workers, together with careful monitoring between the various providers of welfare services and the use of secure verification tools for the certification of "real" needs, without which the welfare costs in particular they cannot be stabilized. The Draghi Government gave impetus to this political-organizational orientation, perhaps also for this reason it did not last long.

But even the actual social security system is suffering, in particular due to the demographic crisis and the late entry of the young generations into the world of work, so that the parameter of 1.5 active workers for 1 pensioner (considered sufficient to maintain equilibrium the system) fell, albeit slightly (1.444), below this threshold. So what remedies should be prepared?

Form a competent and expert political class to be subjected to the judgment of the voters, because it is not true that "1 is worth 1", in fact those who know and are experts are worth much more than the ignorant "run away from home".
Fighting the birth rate with suitable incentives and services: less than 400,000 births per year are really too few for a country like ours, with almost 59 million residents, in constant decline.
Intervene on the labor market by better calibrating training in relation to future work, strengthening active policies and tools for matching supply and demand.
Identify safe tools to ascertain the economic situation of individuals and families, carry out tighter tax and contribution controls, resolutely and finally fight the cancer of tax evasion and avoidance.
Make sure that technology applied to work paths and green fashion, or artificial intelligence, do not massacre employment levels, especially among young people.
Do not follow the "bad teachers" in incurring debts or in giving away "rights" to those who have not accrued them and have not deserved them: a country with 3,000 billion. of debt, which must pay at least 80 billion. of interest on the debt every year, can't afford it!
Limit the too numerous forms of pension advances, which impoverish the system, and in any case limit them to a modest number of years (maximum 3-5).
Freeze the contributory seniority at the current 42 years and 10 months for men and 41 years and 10 months for women for the advance, with reductions only for mothers and early workers, with incentives for those who choose to stay beyond the limits of old age, maximum up to 70 years.
Improve the replacement rate of so-called "pure contributory workers", because the current rules are too disharmonious compared to those of other workers (so-called paid or mixed workers).
Stop attacking the holders of medium-high pensions, supported by adequate contributions, so as to deny them a dignified indexation of their pension allowance, effectively burdening them with improper double taxation: it is in fact a tax category that represents 5% of the total taxpayers and already pays 40% of the IRPEF burden of the whole of Italy.

We therefore hope that the current political class will cease to give a bad impression and image of itself, will raise its gaze beyond the first electoral appointment and instead think about the common good and the interests of the entire country, in the awareness that their irresponsible behavior (chickens reminiscent of Manzoni), at least in the last 15-20 years, has already kept 40-45% of citizens away from the polls. There is no shortage of real topics on which to engage: serious implementation of the Pnrr, "last resort for us"; climate emergency; defuse the multiple outbreaks of war, etc.; etc.; other than being interested in gossip or Sanremo!

I realize that the decalogue above (certainly to be expanded) is not quick and easy to implement but hope is still the last goddess!

And then all that remains is to hope in God: if he made the world in a week, perhaps he will be able to perform the miracle of saving Italy, let's say in the next three years.

This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/economia/inps-separare-assistenza-previdenza/ on Wed, 07 Feb 2024 06:47:28 +0000.