45 years of insurance coverage?

Two-thirds of retirees are not yet eligible for retirement

How can our pension system be financed in the long term? Tyrolean Governor Anton Mattle had a proposal...(Bild: Evelyn Hronek)

The debate over Austria’s pensions is intensifying: While Junge Industrie and Junge Wirtschaft warn of skyrocketing costs, the Pensioners’ Association accuses them of “questionable calculations.” A new analysis now shows just how drastic the proposal by Tyrol’s Governor Anton Mattle would be if Austrians were only allowed to retire after 45 years of insurance contributions.

For tens of thousands of Austrians, last year would have meant “keep working!” instead of retirement. If 45 years of insurance contributions had been a mandatory requirement for retirement, two-thirds of the 2025 retirement cohort would not have met that threshold.

This is the finding of an analysis by the Momentum Institute of the model that Tyrol’s Governor Anton Mattle (ÖVP) has introduced into the political debate. Specifically, 44,037 people—19,620 men and 24,417 women—would not have been able to retire last year as planned.

(Bild: Krone KREATIV)

More than four out of five women would have to work longer
Among men, 46 percent would have reached the required 45 years of insurance coverage. However, more than half would have had to remain in the workforce longer. One-fifth of men would have needed at least 11 additional years, and for 8 percent, the shortfall would have been more than 20 years.

The situation is even more drastic for women: Only 18 percent would have met the 45-year requirement. More than four out of five female retirees—specifically 82 percent—would have had to accumulate additional years of insurance coverage. Nearly one in three women would have needed at least eleven more years, and 12 percent would have needed more than two decades.

Working until the advanced age of 85 is unrealistic

Nicolas Prinz, Ökonom beim Momentum Institut

For Momentum economist Nicolas Prinz, linking retirement eligibility to 45 years of insurance contributions would be “de facto a backdoor increase in the retirement age.” In his view, “a working life lasting until the age of 85 is simply utopian.”

The problem: People nearing retirement already have the highest unemployment rate of all age groups. Without additional jobs and age-appropriate workplaces, a higher retirement age could therefore lead not to longer employment but to more long-term unemployment.

Renate Anderl, President of the Chamber of Labor, makes a similar argument. She told the “Krone” that the labor market must first be “fixed” before any discussion of working longer can take place. Nearly one in three women does not retire directly from employment. Furthermore, more than half of companies with at least 20 employees do not employ a single woman over the age of 60. The Momentum Institute is therefore calling for a bonus-malus system: Companies that hire older employees and retain them until retirement should be rewarded. Companies that let older employees go prematurely, on the other hand, would have to pay a penalty.

Junge Wirtschaft gegen Pensionisten

Jetzt eskaliert der Generationenstreit

Parallel dazu liefern sich Junge Industrie und Junge Wirtschaft mit dem Pensionistenverband Österreichs einen heftigen Schlagabtausch.

Anlässlich des „Pension Overshoot Day“ am 10. August – das ist jener Tag, an dem sämtliche laufende Beitragseinnahmen des Pensionssystems rechnerisch aufgebraucht sind – forderten die Jungen Wirtschaftsorganisationen ein höheres faktisches Pensionsantrittsalter, weniger Frühpensionsanreize und eine stärkere private sowie betriebliche Altersvorsorge. Denn nach ihrer Berechnung reichen die laufenden Beitragseinnahmen heuer nur für 222 der 365 Tage. Den Pensionsausgaben von rund 87,7 Milliarden Euro stünden lediglich 53,5 Milliarden Euro an Beiträgen gegenüber.

Die Differenz von rund 34 Milliarden Euro müsse aus Steuermitteln finanziert werden – rechnerisch 240 Millionen Euro pro Tag. „Dieses Geld fehlt dort, wo Zukunft entsteht: bei Bildung, Digitalisierung, Kinderbetreuung und Investitionen in den Standort“, sagt Eduard Fröschl, Bundesvorsitzender der Jungen Industrie. Brisant: Der Stichtag liegt erstmals vor dem Internationalen Tag der Jugend. Das sei ein Symbol dafür, dass immer weniger Junge immer höhere Pensionskosten tragen müssten, sagen die Junge Industrie und die Junge Wirtschaft.

Scharfe Reaktion der Pensionistenvertreter
Beim Pensionistenverband sorgt diese Rechnung für Empörung. Präsidentin Birgit Gerstorfer wirft den Wirtschaftsvertretern vor, „Äpfel und Birnen“ zu vermischen. In den 34 Milliarden Euro seien neben der gesetzlichen Pensionsversicherung auch Beamtenpensionen sowie staatlich finanzierte Leistungen wie Kindererziehungszeiten und Maßnahmen gegen Altersarmut enthalten. Die Bundesmittel seien daher kein plötzlich entstandenes Finanzierungsloch, sondern ein gesetzlich vorgesehener Teil des österreichischen Umlagesystems. Junge Menschen gegen Pensionisten auszuspielen, sei „verantwortungslos“. Für die langfristige Finanzierung müssten auch große Vermögen, Erbschaften sowie Gewinne aus Digitalisierung und künstlicher Intelligenz herangezogen werden.