Mandatory and non-mandatory on changing 2nd pillar pension fund

Banks, Insurances & Third Pillar
1

I have some questions, I can’t find the answer, and some of you might know more.

  1. How is mandatory and are non-mandatory 2nd pillar capital according to BVG/LPP kept track of when you change your pension fund?

  2. Does it make a difference if you directly transfer the capital between pension funds vs. first transferring it to a vested benefits account?

  3. Let’s say you take some time to travel. You split 2nd pillar capital into mandatory and non-mandatory at two different vested benefits accounts (which according to e.g. finpension is possible). After some time, you start working part time for two employers (A and B), who each put you in a different pension fund. You send the mandatory part to pension fund A and the non-mandatory part to pension fund B. A few years after, you retire. You take the money out of B and have A pay you a pension. Will A pay pensions at the full mandatory conversion rate? (Nearly full, because working some more added a bit of non-mandatory capital).

Feel free to answer parts you know something about, have tested yourself, or found relevant documents for. I know the mechanism in question 3 is at least questionable from some points of view. Also feel free to point out if something is illegal and therefore against forum policy. I mainly want to understand how this works.

Something I observed myself:
My pension fund calculates which part of my funds are mandatory according to BVG/LPP and which are non-mandatory. I assume and their documents also indicate, that this is necessary so they can ensure the minimum interest and conversion rate of the mandatory part according to BVG/LPP. Later I transferred some more funds directly from another pension fund (I had two employers for some time). The current pension fund added everything exactly as the old one stated.

2
  1. The money reaches the new place including the information “X% mandatory, Y% non-mandatory.”
  2. I would say no.
    I split the PK into 2, one half to Viac, one half to Finpension.
    For example, when transferred to Viac, they split it into 2 “portfolios”, labelled mandatory and non-mandatory.
    Viac fund investment was delayed a week because my PF forgot to inform the split values, and they had to follow-up on that.
    Finpension went into 1 portfolio, and (I assume) the split values are “stored” for later.

It’s a bit strange, that now mandatory and non-mandatory can change quite differently at Viac, so the split will not remain constant over time. Or maybe it would come back into one pot on withdrawal with the original % information (?)

  1. Splitting into mandatory and non-mandatory as you describe is not possible in my experience. I could split, but each pot had mandatory and non-mandatory % acc. to the total pot. Maybe depends on Pension Fund.
2 Likes
3

Literally what’s just discussed in the other thread here.

And yes, you just laid down the ultimate way of flexing the system (albeit probably illegally).

The only superfluous thing I can’t quite get is that part-time work for two employers (why - when you can just leave the funds with your vested benefits foundation?).

4

I was motivated by the comments in that thread. But I didn’t want to threadjack, so I made a new one.

The two companies (of which maybe one is your own, with a pension fund chosen by you) are there exactly to prevent doing anything even potentially illegal. You mention it often.

In the mentioned thread there was the Descartes article from @markus654 :

But it names no source for their opinion. On the contrary, I think they don’t actually say anything about not having such obligation. They (Descartes) are cleverly using language to say something they didn’t. Later on they say:

Eine Variante ist die Aufteilung in den obligatorischen und den überobligatorischen Teil. Dies ist sinnvoll, wenn das Überobligatorium nicht in die neue Pensionskasse eingebracht wird oder eingebracht werden muss. […]

So they only say: If you split, you don’t have to send the non-mandatory part. Different from not splitting, which can’t give you a choice when you need to send the mandatory part. Sending the split-off non-mandatory part then depends on if you must or will. By “will” they, of course, mean: If the pension fund gives you the choice to and if you then chose not to.

5

Finpension and others claim it works. So did you just ask for a split or did you ask for a split into mandatory and non-mandatory?

6

OK, got it. :slightly_smiling_face:

PS: Still seems kind of complicated and an overhead, operating your own company and starting to pay yourself at the exact same time you enter another pension fund.

1 Like
7

It may be employer Pension Fund/Stiftung specific. In my case I asked how can I split, and the answer in 2 parts, however you like, but man./non-man. will be the same in both parts. No 1 part man. and 1 part non-man. split possible.

Here’s my notes from the meeting with my work pension fund at the time:

  • PF = 1 Stiftung (Topf). Bei Austritt Splitting in bis zu 2 Töpfe pro Stiftung möglich.
  • Wie Splitting deklarieren? - auf Austritts Formular, mehrere Stiftungen auflisten, bis max. 2, mit “%” Zahlen pro neue Stiftung oder 1x Betrag Stiftung 1 + Reste Stiftung 2.
    Splitting - Alles erlaubt? Obligatorium / Über-Obligatorium? - Ja, 2 Teile erlaubt, % egal, jedoch in jedem PF Topf wird der Anteil gesetzl. BVG-Guthaben (“Obligatorisch”) gleich sein (ca. 40/100 = ~40%).
4 Likes
8

Yes, I’m getting similar answers from my company pension foundation. It seems there is some flexibility how the pension foundations can implement the laws about handling and transfering pensions. So some of the articles from finpension or descartes on splitting are not always valid for every case.

  • Allowing or disallowing to specify the distribution of the mandatory part of your pension to your two vested benefits accounts, additionally to the applied distribution for the total pension amount. E.g. 100% of mandatory part in one account, but 50/50 in two accounts for the total amount.

  • Allowing or disallowing to provide two vested benefits accounts per company pension fund. Some companies have two pension funds, the second one usually for investments which the employee can manage. E.g. Novartis employees can provide up to four vested benefits accounts.

1 Like