PRPP: Ottawa Launches New Pooled Registered Pension Plans To Boost Retirement Savings

Prpp Pooled Registered Pension Plans

First Posted: 11/17/11 11:17 AM ET Updated: 11/17/11 06:05 PM ET

OTTAWA - The federal government's bill to create pooled registered pension plans will likely boost savings for retirement, but not enough to fully address the needs of Canadians and may have precluded a better option, critics say.

With more than 60 per cent of Canadian workers currently without any company pension plan, the government on Thursday tabled legislation to create a new savings vehicle aimed at that large segment of the population.

The idea, hammered out with the provinces last December, is aimed at small firms that can't afford to go it alone in offering workers a pension plan.

Soon they will be able to "pool" resources with others, along with the self-employed, to create voluntary, defined-contribution pension plans that would be managed by private sector financial institutions.

The new PRPPs are similar in approach to personalized registered retirement savings plans, but the government believes more workers will save if contributions are automatically deducted from paycheques — rather than if they have to be set aside from disposable income as in an RRSP.

As well, pooling will create large, diversified funds less prone to investment errors and with lower management fees than many RRSPs.

"Basically, Canadians will be able to buy in bulk, buying in bulk means lower prices ... lower prices means Canadians will get greater returns on their savings and more money will be left in their pockets when they retire," said Ted Menzies, minister of state for finance, in making the announcement in Toronto.

But experts doubted the new plans would make a big dent into the coverage deficit among Canadians.

"It's a good first step, but the fact is less and less Canadians are covered by pension arrangements and this will not do much for the coverage issue," said Ian Markham, a senior actuary with Towers Watson in Toronto.

The coverage may be greater if provinces mandate that all firms must offer the plans to employees, although it is not clear Ottawa would agree to the option.

Among the drawbacks, according to critics, are that the proposed plans will be voluntary, they do not require employers to contribute and they fail to offer defined benefits upon retirement. Instead, the size of benefits will depend on the size of individual contributions and the earnings by a particular PRPP.

The NDP and labour groups said Ottawa erred in not using the opportunity to expand the Canada Pension Plan.

A six per cent hike in premiums to the CPP phased in over seven years would result in a doubling of benefits in 35 years, according to the Canadian Labour Congress.

"CPP is a defined pension plan; people will know what they will have at the end of the day," said NDP critic Wayne Marston.

Meanwhile, the PRPPs backed by the government promise a windfall for financial institutions, which will profit from fees for managing the new pools of money.

Liberal critic Scott Brison said his party favours the creation of the PRPP funds, but also wants to government to allow Canadians to participate in a voluntary, supplemental CPP add-on that would pay off in defined benefits.

Given the current high unemployment rate of 7.3 per cent and weakness in the economy, now is not the time to increase payroll taxes that discourage hiring, Brison said, using much the same argument as the government.

One key element of the new plans that may increase participation is that employees will automatically be enrolled in any PRPP offered by the employer unless they choose to opt out. The ease of entry will likely cause more workers to participate, said CLC chief economist Andrew Jackson.

And that is the problem, he added. Once the new savings vehicles are established, there will be less pressure on government to expand the CPP.

"I think it's an either or choice and I think they are making the wrong choice," he said.

In negotiations with the provinces in December, Ottawa backed away from expanding CPP after a few provinces, most vocally Alberta, rejected the proposal. Since then federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has suggested the option could be revived in the future.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper appeared to downplay the likelihood the government would move in that direction soon, however.

"Canadians are looking for options," he said in response to an opposition question. "Canadians are not looking for a hike in their CPP premiums."

The pooled pension plan was widely supported by industry groups, including the banks and businesses.

The Canadian Federation of Independent Business praised the Harper government for making the PRPPs voluntary and called on provinces to follow Ottawa's lead.

The Canadian Bankers Association, whose members already manage hundreds of billions of dollars of investment assets for Canadians and businesses, said the PRPPs will allow self-employed individuals to participate in private sector pension plans for the first time.

The Ontario Medical Association, which represents the province's mostly self-employed doctors, also issued a statement in support of the pooled pensions.

However, two of Canada's largest organizations for unionized workers — the CLC and the Canadian Union of Public Employees — were critical. Both favour an expansion of the CPP.

"Polls have shown that 74 per cent of Canadians don't make contributions to RRSP and other private pension vehicles because they can't afford it. This new PRPP legislation does nothing to address this simple fact," said CUPE national president Paul Moist.

Moist called on provincial and territorial finance ministers to pressure the federal government to move ahead with CPP reforms when they meet with Flaherty next month.

— With files from David Paddon

FOLLOW HUFFPOST CANADA POLITICS

Filed by Michael Bolen  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 24
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
gwinegarden
She's an Arctic Wolf
10:44 AM on 11/18/2011
It is very difficult to find a firm that offers a defined-benefit plan any more. If they offer anything, it will be a defined-contribution plan. Then, it is up to the employee to make or lose money.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
piceaglauca
The picture says it all....
05:38 PM on 11/17/2011
This is nothing more than what one could do privately without the label. Maybe people think that by using this program they are imagining a secure future but it is contributory and that is no different than having a savings account and investing the money in the market. The big problem really is debt and ability to contribute. By companies having plans the contributions are forced by automatic deduction. These voluntary contributions will be no more affective then for those who already can commit to savings and I don't believe that to be the target audience. The CLC is more to the point. Expanding the CPP is the better approach and something needs to be done for those caught in the void and it is that group in the 55-65 age group. With interest rates so low and markets so volitile any surplus money won't grow. RBC's recent comments on paying out mortgages will add a group of people short of cash. Let's also be realistic with mean Canadian salaries being in the $40 000 range who if any will benefit from cost managed retirement? I think a lot of people are in trouble. We just haven't seen it yet.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gravescanada
03:59 PM on 11/17/2011
Does everyone remember what happened to pension funds in the 2008 crash? How about we make CPP more liveable? How about we increase the CPP payout per month for retirees and make it a means tested program, meaning if you retire with a private RRSP with millions of dollars, you dont qualify for CPP...oh how they would howl!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
05:36 PM on 11/17/2011
So you want to reward failure and punish success even more?
Why should the pension be means tested?
If I work and save and build for my future, and you don't, why should you get a pension and not me?
God you liberals are greedy and stupid.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gravescanada
07:52 AM on 11/20/2011
So the Janitor that makes minimum wage and works hard his whole life is a failure because he cannot build up a substantial RRSP? No one gets rich by themselves. It is a collection of infrastructure, labor and land. Did you know that roughly one third of all the new wealth created in Canada over the past two decades has gone to the top 1 per cent of the population? I am sure you are just okay with that, but in reality it means the death of the middle class and a growing population living in poverty.

Read more: http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110913/income-gap-conference-board-110913/#ixzz1eFX1oc3f
georgee2
My Canada Includes Everyone
03:41 PM on 11/17/2011
This is just another sell out to the Canadian financial sector. They we profit while the contributors will pay the fat fees that will be attached to these plans. Changing CPP was a much better plan and was endorsed by the government until the banking lobby put the boots to that idea. Any wonder there is an "occupy" movement??
03:25 PM on 11/17/2011
People can do the same thing for themselves any time they want. RRSP's have always made sense, but, they are an under used tool. RRSP's also allow you to pass any unused funds, to the beneficiary of your choice, upon death. Perhaps if there is a different label attached to it PRPP's can be more popular. Expanding, enhancing or otherwise changing the CPP leads to increased premiums, increased payroll deduction, increased cost to doing business and LOST JOBS !!! The increases imposed by Paul Martin are enough to last a life time.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Moriyama
03:16 PM on 11/17/2011
As with most things Harper does, those that have (the "2%", if not just the "1%") will get to have more and keep more. Those that have not will end up with less, as they have nothing left to save or invest after paying for oil and bank company profits and executive compensation. Harper and his cabinet ministers probably have a list of Boards of Directors on which they have been promised seats after they leave office... so their retirements are taken care of.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
05:38 PM on 11/17/2011
Want a pension or an income to retire on?
Get a job, quit buying every shiny trinket that comes along,. and save a few bucks towards retirement.
Live within your means, it's not that hard.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gx5000
Life's too short, be happy..
02:57 PM on 11/17/2011
"welcomed Thursday by groups representing Canada's banking industry"

Ut oh...another fund they can pilfer from both ends, private and public sectors....
I guess the greed will never end.
photo
Jay from Ottawa
sovereignty sale, 1.3T OBO
02:56 PM on 11/17/2011
Invest in RSPs ? Why, so you can get taxed when you take the money out, and then get taxed on it again as income ? Not to mention that canb buy anything without paying taxes on it.

RSP withholding taxes:
$0 - $5,000 = 10% (Canada) or 21% (Quebec)
$5,001 - $15,000 = 20% (Canada) or 26% (Quebec)
$15,000+ = 30% (Canada) or 31% (Quebec)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:49 PM on 11/17/2011
how are you saving for your retirement if not RSPs?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
05:38 PM on 11/17/2011
TFSA.
photo
Jay from Ottawa
sovereignty sale, 1.3T OBO
09:26 AM on 11/18/2011
While not a fan of RSPs my employer (financial institution) offers a wonderful program where they match my RSP contributions up to 7% of my salary, so while I'm not a big fan of the program, I've been contribution 14% (my 7% and my employers 7%) of my salary into RSPs. It's easy to ignore the tax portion of RSP withdrawls when your RSPs are doubled, but other than that my wife and I have funneled our savings into our TFSA. We might only be allowed 5k a year each, but that's 30k between the both of us now, and if we can keep up with 5k a year for life, that's 115k each by the time we're ready for early retirement.

When it comes to RSPs, I'd like to see no withholding taxes for retired people over a certain age (say, 65). I don't want to rely on CPP because I'm under the assumption that it won't really be there for me when I retire.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
piceaglauca
The picture says it all....
05:40 PM on 11/17/2011
Obviously, when retiring move out of Quebec.
photo
Jay from Ottawa
sovereignty sale, 1.3T OBO
09:27 AM on 11/18/2011
lol - love it :) I always found it cruel that Quebec residents suffer such a high withholding tax, but seeing as it's a highly socialized province; provincial car insurance, free water, subsidized daycare and tuition.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
piceaglauca
The picture says it all....
12:59 PM on 11/17/2011
Let's look also at under funded pensions. Le't look at provincial governments who legislate cost of living adjustments. Let's look at goverenments who don't provide matched funding. All of these people affected will only draw more on the social rolls later and as their funds decline they will compromise their standard of living to survive resulting in more stress placed on the aging population both in health care and social services.
11:53 AM on 11/17/2011
This is a smokescreen to keep the critics of government defined plans at bay. it basically is a response that sais take care of yourselves as you have been while still contributing to our wonderful government defined benefit pension plans.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gx5000
Life's too short, be happy..
02:58 PM on 11/17/2011
A half step as opposed to W's keep it and invest it yourself !