The old pension
scheme (OPS) has been a big burden on the union and states’ budget of the
country. In one of the economic reforms, it was shelved for employees joining
government services in 2004 and later. The new scheme was called the National
Pension Scheme (NPS), where the employee had to contribute 10% of the salary
during the entire period of service. Initially, the government too was to make
a matching contribution of 10%, which was later increased to 14%. The corpus
generated for pension this way was invested in government securities, shares
and corporate bonds, which had daily net asset value like mutual funds. At the
time of retirement, at least 40% of the corpus is to be used for purchasing an
annuity. The NPS scheme does not
guarantee a monthly pension equivalent to 50% of the last salary drawn.
This led to
resentment among the government employees and opposition parties especially
Congress saw an opportunity to keep the BJP-led central government in the dock.
Among several freebies, Congress also promised in the election manifesto to
revert to OPS in states they came to power. Montek Singh Ahluwalia has gone on record to bring home the point that
the economy of the country will be ruined if OPS is revived for employees who
joined service in and after 2004. Many experts have also concurred with the
views. Congress won the Himachal Pradesh Assembly election on the promise to
revert to OPS but did not implement it. Subsequently in the Telangana election
and also in the Lok Sabha 2024 election, the revival of OPS was not again
brought up in the manifesto.
BJP having
disappointed with the Lok Sabha results in Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Haryana and
Uttar Pradesh had to make a tightrope walk and find a middle ground between OPS
and NPS. The central
government now proposes a United Pension Scheme (UPS) for employees whose
service lasts for 25 years or more to get a pension of 50% of the average of
the preceding twelve months' salary before the super annulation. The
pension amount will be inflation-adjusted in dearness allowance twice a year.
It has also a provision for a 60% family pension, for all diseased employees.
The scheme does not benefit those who served for less than ten years. However,
a monthly pension of Rs 10,000 has been guaranteed for employees who retired
after serving for at least ten years. An additional sweetener has also been
brought in the provision for the payment of a lump sum amount linking it with
the duration of service in the government.
The scheme will come into effect from 1st April 2025 and
will benefit 23 lakh employees of the central Government if they opt for it. Further, if all states also opt for the scheme, 90 lakh employees will be
benefitted in the country. The Maharashtra government, where the Assembly
election is due shortly, has already opted for the scheme. UPS is also a
contributory scheme like NPS, where employees' contributions remain unchanged
at 10% and the government matching contribution is increased from 14% to 18.5%.
If the monthly
salary of the employee is Rs 50,000, the annual increase in the corpus is 3%,
equivalent to a compound annual growth of 8%. SBI, LIC and UTI ate three managers of corpus for employees’ pensions.
SBI offers 9.75% and LIC 9.56% interest on the fund. Currently, in NPS,
government employee has three options for investment and 95% of subscribers
allow 65% investment in government securities, 15% in equities and the
remaining 20% in corporate debt. Since the corpus is not large enough to earn
50% of the average of the last twelve months' salary, the government’s matching
contribution has been increased from 14% to 18.5%. Cabinet Secretary TV
Somanathan on UPS said, “definitely fiscally more prudent.” “It remains within
the same architecture of contributory funded scheme.
This is the critical difference. The OPS is unfunded,
non-contributory scheme, this is funded, contributory scheme. The only
difference in the changes made is to give an assurance and not leave things to
the vagaries of market forces.
But otherwise
the structure of UPS has best elements of both (OPS and NPS)”, he said.
Economists think that UPS balances the fiscal cost and the aspiration of
the employee. The increased cost of living will be taken care of because the
real pension would not change as it is indexed to inflation. In NPS, if
inflation goes up real pension comes down. Nevertheless, the scheme would put
an extra burden of Rs 6250 crores on the government in the first year.
This has been
done to satisfy 23 lakh beneficiaries, who are vocal political constituencies
and no political party would easily ignore their demand. It is expected
that most states would adopt UPS, without bothering for additional financial
burden.
With the
announcement of UPS, opposition parties are stepping up their demand for
restoration of OPS. Economists have been consistently warning against the
restoration; it has the potential to make the growth sluggish and hamper the
progress of the nation. It also impacts the lives of the poor. Economic Advisory Council to the Prime
Minister has suggested that reverting to OPS will be catastrophic for poor
populations and would crowd out private investments in states that revert to
it. Reserve Bank of India in January 2023 had flagged concerns about the
government finances for states opting to revert to OPS last year. RBI had
already cautioned that the move would lead to accumulation of liabilities,
which can become a major risk in future. RBI had also said that states were
expected to incur a 16% rise in pension expenditure at Rs 4,63,436 Crores as
against Rs 3,99, 813 crores in the previous year. Pension outgo under NPS is Rs
4 lakh crores, which would be Rs 17 lakh crores if OPS is reverted. At present
Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh and Punjab have reverted to OPS. Since then BJP has
come back to power in Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh and it is hoped that both
governments will continue with NPS and opt for UPS with effect from 1st April
2025. Punjab is governed by AAP and their main agenda is to remain in power and
not to be concerned about the state’s finances.
UPS itself is causing a financial
burden on the Central government of Rs 6250 crores in the first year. If all
the states opt for it, the total economic burden on central and all state
governments would be of the order of Rs 25,000 crores in the first year.
Let there be no politics and political parties
be conscious of maintaining fiscal discipline.