Empty state guarantee: Why the Riester pension is not safe

    On Sunday, 05.10.2008, the Chancellor said “We tell savers that their deposits are safe. The federal government is also responsible for this.” – For lack of a legal basis, this is not a declaration of guarantee but, correctly understood, a political declaration of intent.

    On Sunday, 24.04.2016, a Labour Minister will be quoted as saying “The state guarantees that all Riester holders will get their money paid out. – also without a legal basis.

    Pension Contract Certification Act

    In § 1 of the Old-Age Provision Contract Certification Act (AltZertG) you can read: “An old-age provision contract within the meaning of this Act is deemed to exist if an agreement in German language is concluded between the provider and a natural person (contractual partner), … in which the provider promises that at the beginning of the payout phase at least the paid-in old-age provision contributions will be available for the payout phase …”.

    Legally, it is the provider, i.e. the insurance company or credit institution, that guarantees the Riester savers – and not the state. Just like the rent-a-thug is the guarantor when he says “Tomorrow I’ll pay the rent – guaranteed.”

    Secure earnings only for the name donor

    In 2008, the daily press reported that the Minister of Labour had earned €284,000 from advertising lectures. This seems to be assured. On the other hand, for about 17 million Riester savers, the amount of the contributions to the state which will ultimately be due upon payout is not secured. On average it also seems certain that Riester savers will depend on the guarantee, because the hope of a positive return on investment with the insurer is dwindling due to the decades of low interest rates. After 40 years of the savings phase and perhaps 20 years of the payout phase, one in four providers could cease to be a guarantor of the Riester saver, assuming an average annual insolvency frequency of 0.5% in accordance with Solvency II requirements. An at least equally large share could be “voluntarily” liquidated – in order to avoid an insolvency application by BaFin. At the latest when the state would then actually guarantee on the basis of a law, everyone will ask themselves what the point of capital cover was – in contrast to the pay-as-you-go system of the statutory pension?

    Growing risk of insurer insolvencies

    In April 2016, the Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin) admitted to observe a double-digit number of life insurers more closely “I cannot rule out the possibility that individual life insurers will leave the market,” said a BaFin employee. Alternatively, this means either a cessation of business or insolvency – leaving only liquidation.

    No Riester saver today has to wait for insolvency or liquidation

    If the insurer is in difficulties, the continuation of the contract will become unreasonable. The Federal Court of Justice allows extraordinary termination without notice – despite contractual ordinary non-terminability “if the fulfilment of the insurance contract by the insurer has become uncertain” (Federal Court of Justice, ruling of 4 April 1951, file no. II ZR 32/50). However, Riester contracts can be terminated in any case. In any event, the allowances must then be repaid.

    It is preferable to switch to the “Wohnriester”, e.g. a corresponding building society contract or directly to a home of one’s own or the repayment of housing loans. Then the previous allowances and tax advantages will be retained and can continue to be granted in the future. In contrast to a Riester pension, the property can already be used in the savings phase and the Riester assets thus accumulated are even inheritable.

    by Dr. Johannes Fiala, and Dipl.-Math. Peter A. Schramm

    by courtesy of

    www.experten.de (published on 09.06.2017)

    Link: https://www.experten.de/2017/06/09/leere-staatsgarantie-warum-die-riesterrente-nicht-sicher-ist/

    and

    www.Tabakzeitung.de (published in issue no. 26 of 30.06.2017, page 8 under the heading: Empty State Guarantee)

    and

    www.innovationundtechnik.de (published in issue 11/2017, pages 38-39 under the heading: Empty state guarantee: Along with the life insurers, the Riester pension also tips over)

    Videoberatung

    Sollten Sie ein zur Beratung ein Gesicht wünschen, können wir Ihnen auch eine Videoberatung anbieten.

    Persönlicher Termin

    Vereinbaren Sie Ihren persönlichen Termin bei uns.

    Juristische Zweit­meinung einholen

    Sie werden bereits juristisch beraten und wünschen eine Zweit­meinung? Nehmen Sie in diesem Fall über nach­stehenden Link direkt Kontakt mit Herrn Dr. Fiala auf.

      veröffentlicht am

        Empty state guarantee: Why the Riester pension is not safe

        Über den Autor

        Dr. Johannes Fiala PhD, MBA, MM

        Dr. Johannes Fiala ist seit mehr als 25 Jahren als Jurist und Rechts­anwalt mit eigener Kanzlei in München tätig. Er beschäftigt sich unter anderem intensiv mit den Themen Immobilien­wirtschaft, Finanz­recht sowie Steuer- und Versicherungs­recht. Die zahl­reichen Stationen seines beruf­lichen Werde­gangs ermöglichen es ihm, für seine Mandanten ganz­heitlich beratend und im Streit­fall juristisch tätig zu werden.
        » Mehr zu Dr. Johannes Fiala

        Auf diesen Seiten informiert Dr. Fiala zu aktuellen Themen aus Recht- und Wirt­schaft sowie zu aktuellen politischen Ver­änderungen, die eine gesell­schaftliche und / oder unter­nehmerische Relevanz haben.

        Videoberatung

        Vereinbaren Sie Ihren persönlichen Termin bei uns.

        Sie werden bereits juristisch beraten und wünschen eine Zweit­meinung? Nehmen Sie in diesem Fall über nach­stehenden Link direkt Kontakt mit Herrn Dr. Fiala auf.

        Das erste Telefonat ist ein kostenfreies Kennenlerngespräch; ohne Beratung.
        Sie erfahren was wir für Sie tun können und was wir von Ihnen an Informationen und
        Unterlagen für eine qualifizierte Beratung benötigen.

          Cookie Consent with Real Cookie Banner n/a