IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Streitfall Bewertung des Riester-Sparens

Listed author(s):
  • Kornelia Hagen

This article examines the calculation of Riester pension products and their returns, highlights the price increase caused by an assumed life expectancy and the selection bias. It states that changes to the profit participation components at Riester savers' and insurees' charge-applied in 2008-could neither be justified by adverse loan market trends nor by the level of the profit shares. Instead, this is solely due to the allocation of surpluses, which shortchanged savers and insurees by policy. Further, there is a discussion of several issues regarding the concept of a target-age-related return. The paper argues that an analysis of the yield is not supposed to merely consider actuarial views, but rather to incorporate aspects of pension-policy and socio-political features of the products. Moreover, it is argued that focusing only on the yield during the saving period does not give savers a complete picture of their expected Riester pension benefits. Therefore, charges which accrue during the retirement phase should be taken into account. It is also established that government aid-bonuses granted-should be regarded as savers' equity in order to comply with both individual and societal considerations regarding the return. It is deemed necessary to subject Riester saving to a scientifically independent evaluation. This evaluation should be guided by aspects of targets of pension, welfare, and consumer policy issues; while, at the same time, it should reflect returns accrued during both saving and retirement periods. Im Mittelpunkt des Beitrags steht eine Auseinandersetzung mit der Kalkulation von Riester-Rentenversicherungen und der Berechnung der Renditekennziffer Zielalter für diese Produkte. Eingegangen wird auf die Verteuerung durch die unterstellte hohe Lebenserwartung und die Selektionseffekte. Ausgeführt wird, dass eine 2008 erfolgte Veränderung der Überschussanteile zulasten der Riester-Sparer und -Versicherten allein eine Frage der Verteilung ist, die von der Politik zuungunsten der Sparer und Versicherten entschieden wurde. Argumentiert wird, dass für eine Renditeanalyse nicht nur eine versicherungsmathematische Sicht eingenommen werden dürfe, sondern auch die sozial- und rentenpolitischen Besonderheiten des Produktes berücksichtigt werden müssten. Zudem wird vertreten, dass eine Rendite, die sich nur auf die Sparphase bezieht, Sparer nur unzureichend informiert. Daher müssten in der Rendite auch die Kosten, die in der Rentenphase anfallen, berechnet werden. Begründet wird auch, dass die staatliche Förderung - die Zulagen - sowohl bei individuellen als auch bei gesellschaftlichen Erwägungen über die Rendite als Eigenkapital des Sparers zu betrachten sind. Für das Riester-Sparen wird eine wissenschaftlich unabhängige Evaluierung für erforderlich gehalten. Diese müsste sich an den sozial- , renten- und verbraucherpolitischen Zielen orientieren und dabei auch eine Renditebetrachtung, die sich auf die Spar- und Rentenphase bezieht, einschließen.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research in its journal Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung.

Volume (Year): 81 (2012)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Pages: 133-163

in new window

Handle: RePEc:diw:diwvjh:81-2-10
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Mohrenstraße 58, D-10117 Berlin

Phone: xx49-30-89789-0
Fax: xx49-30-89789-200
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

in new window

  1. Kornelia Hagen & Lucia A. Reisch, 2010. "Riesterrente: Politik ohne Marktbeobachtung," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 77(8), pages 2-14.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwvjh:81-2-10. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bibliothek)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.