(de-news.net) – Twenty-one eminent economists and academics from diverse fields have urged the German government to abandon its proposed pension package, according to reports in the Handelsblatt. They maintained that stability, dependability, and fiscal sustainability required pension policies designed with a long-term horizon. In their view, the current reform plan—comprising early retirement options, an extended maternity benefit, a pension level safeguard, and the so‑called ‘active pension’ — did not meet these essential requirements.
Michael Eilfort of the Stiftung Marktwirtschaft, Clemens Fuest of the Ifo Institute, and Jörg Rocholl, chair of the Scientific Advisory Board of the Federal Finance Ministry, presented their arguments in a joint opinion article. They asserted that the government’s proposals contradicted fundamental principles of sound pension policy. In particular, they emphasized that the extension of the maternity benefit and the pension level safeguard would impose significant burdens on public finances.
The authors warned that decisions taken in haste, which could lead to serious financial repercussions within only a few years, risked undermining public trust in political institutions. Instead, they advocated for a more deliberate approach, recommending that the statutory status quo be preserved until a convincing reform concept and a sustainable balance were achieved. They noted that the pension commission offered an appropriate framework for initiating such reforms.
The CDU/CSU parliamentary group rejected the economists’ demand to halt the package. Parliamentary manager Thorsten Frei acknowledged that the pension system could not remain unchanged, but he insisted that the package was necessary to introduce the “active pension.” This measure would allow retirees to earn up to 2,000 euros per month tax‑free, thereby helping to alleviate labor shortages and strengthen workforce participation among older citizens.
Younger members of the Union voiced opposition to using the pension level reached in 2031 as the baseline for future development. They argued that maintaining a level one percentage point higher than it would be without reform would cost up to 15 billion euros annually, a figure they considered unsustainable in the long run. Chancellor Friedrich Merz, however, aligned himself with the SPD and rejected any alterations to the original bill, thereby reinforcing the coalition’s position.
Dagmar Schmidt, deputy parliamentary leader of the SPD, cautioned against overlooking the concrete consequences for current and future pensioners. She stressed that statutory pensions represented the sole source of income for the majority of retirees. Consequently, the debate was not an abstract dispute over percentages but a matter of whether individuals could afford rent, food, and other necessities. Schmidt underscored that those who had contributed for decades must be able to rely on the promises embedded in the pension system.
An expert document was cited by the Funke Media group indicating that the safeguard line envisioned until 2031 would indeed have tangible effects. For example, by July 2031, a monthly pension of 1,500 euros would be approximately 33 euros higher than it would be without the safeguard, amounting to nearly 400 euros more annually. According to the report, pensions with the safeguard would generally be two percent higher. Government projections further suggested that the stabilization achieved in 2031 would serve as the foundation for subsequent pension development, with levels continuing to remain one percentage point above what they would have been in the absence of reform. This provision, however, remained contentious within the Union, where debate over its long‑term affordability persisted.
