Universal pension advances at a rapid pace, but with conditions – Publimetro Chile

December 23, 2021 at 07:33 hrs.

An important step was taken yesterday by the Government project that creates a Universal Guaranteed Pension, after the House Finance Committee approved the measure and dispatched it to the Sala.

The initiative seeks to increase the current Basic Solidarity Pension from $ 176,000 to $ 185,000 and expand the benefit to 90% of the Social Registry of Households for people over 65, with payments decreasing between 80% and 90% of the range.

And although at the beginning it was stipulated that payments would begin 3 and 7 months after the law was published, in the middle of the debate the indication was approved that will allow the beneficiaries of the Solidarity Pillar that the “increased” amount is delivered one month after published the standard.

As the project is under immediate discussion, the Chamber will analyze the measure on January 3 and, therefore, the call of the Government has been not to put obstacles, so that this initiative is analyzed by the Senate as quickly as possible.

“If Congress passes quickly, the faster we are going to pay people. If we can dispatch in January, it means that the following month, in February, we will be paying this Guaranteed Pension. Today Congress has the floor, “said the Minister of Social Development, Karla Rubilar.

That spirit of dispatching the measure as soon as possible crosses from the ruling party to the opposition, which in general terms says they have no qualms with the formula. This is because the idea of ​​a guaranteed pension arose previously from the presidential candidates and both those who supported José Antonio Kast and Gabriel Boric are about to advance in it, regardless of the amount that is on the table today.

“We all share that it is important to improve pensions, especially the lower ones. It is in line with what our candidate proposed. We are available and the truth is that the Government has put all its foot on the accelerator ”, said Deputy Marcelo Díaz (Unir) in this regard.

But since things are not that easy in Congress, there is a but. The problem that they warn in the opposition is that it would not be clear that the financing of the measure is assured. It is a permanent expense and, therefore, they ask that there be permanent income to pay it.

This, in addition, is discussed in a project other than the one that contains the main idea and will only be voted on in the Finance Commission on Tuesday, January 4.

As it is months away from the change of Government, and the incoming administration proposes an important tax reform, from the left it is asked not to accelerate the norm regarding funds and to discuss it in agreement with the authorities that will arrive.

It would not make sense, they emphasize, to discuss twice, for example, the capital gains tax on stock market transactions, which today are subject to exemptions and which are intended to be modified to finance the PGU.

For the same reason, from the sector they assert that if there is a compromise agreement, they will not put up obstacles.

That the second project is delayed, they warn, does not influence the benefit payments, since the first year is charged to resources that are already in the 2022 Budget.

Deputy PS

How optimistic are you about a PGU payment in February? We approved the project, including that indication to begin the payment the first month for those of the Solidarity Pillar. We agree on the parent idea. It is a high coverage and in some cases increases the income substantially. In the design we do not have great differences. The discussion is on how it is financed.

What makes them noise? The financing mechanism is discussed separately. Which is very strange and this implies a very important tax burden. We propose that if there is going to be a permanent expense, there must be permanent income for it to be financed and that is not clear.

The new government proposes starting a tax reform. Shouldn’t it be analyzed together? This is very important. Instead of hastily legislating funding, you could wait for the process to be handled by the incoming government. Out of prudence, due to fiscal burden, and due to republican commitment, the outgoing government should agree with the incoming one.

– .