The internal market for supplementary pensions: A long and winding road

J. Gruyters
{"title":"The internal market for supplementary pensions: A long and winding road","authors":"J. Gruyters","doi":"10.1177/1023263X221096027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the beginning of the 1990s, EU initiatives have sought to gradually harmonize the activities of institutions for retirement provisions (‘IORPs’). However, thirty years later, multiple barriers to entry remain. This article will identify the current state of play, by adopting a twofold approach towards supplementary pensions in a context of EU internal market law. First, we will assess the process of negative integration of several pension policy tools in light of the free movement case law (in particular, the free provision of services). During this study, the focus will be on mechanisms of compulsory membership and collective bargaining in the field of occupational pensions. Second, we will analyse the most important legislative constraints of supplementary pension services at EU level, with an emphasis on secondary internal market law. We argue that, despite the effort of respecting national autonomy in social policy, positive integration has led to several spillovers. Finally, the article will highlight the most significant obstacles, and conclude by discussing the general attitude of EU internal market law towards supplementary pensions and social policy in general.","PeriodicalId":39672,"journal":{"name":"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law","volume":"29 1","pages":"375 - 398"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X221096027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since the beginning of the 1990s, EU initiatives have sought to gradually harmonize the activities of institutions for retirement provisions (‘IORPs’). However, thirty years later, multiple barriers to entry remain. This article will identify the current state of play, by adopting a twofold approach towards supplementary pensions in a context of EU internal market law. First, we will assess the process of negative integration of several pension policy tools in light of the free movement case law (in particular, the free provision of services). During this study, the focus will be on mechanisms of compulsory membership and collective bargaining in the field of occupational pensions. Second, we will analyse the most important legislative constraints of supplementary pension services at EU level, with an emphasis on secondary internal market law. We argue that, despite the effort of respecting national autonomy in social policy, positive integration has led to several spillovers. Finally, the article will highlight the most significant obstacles, and conclude by discussing the general attitude of EU internal market law towards supplementary pensions and social policy in general.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
补充养老金的内部市场:一条漫长而曲折的道路
自20世纪90年代初以来,欧盟的举措一直寻求逐步协调退休保障机构的活动。然而,三十年后,进入的多重障碍依然存在。本文将通过在欧盟内部市场法的背景下对补充养老金采取双重方法来确定目前的情况。首先,我们将根据自由流动判例法(特别是免费提供服务)评估几种养老金政策工具的负整合过程。在这项研究中,重点将放在职业养老金领域的强制性成员资格和集体谈判机制上。其次,我们将分析欧盟层面补充养老金服务最重要的立法约束,重点是二级内部市场法。我们认为,尽管在社会政策中努力尊重民族自治,但积极的融合已经产生了一些溢出效应。最后,文章将强调最显著的障碍,并通过讨论欧盟内部市场法对补充养老金和一般社会政策的总体态度来结束。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊最新文献
Non-contractual liability of the EU: Need for a ‘diligent’ administrator test The European Arrest Warrant and the protection of the best interests of the child: The Court's last word on the limits of mutual recognition and the evolving obligations of national judicial authorities OP v. Commune d’Ans: When equality, intersectionality and state neutrality collide DPA independence and ‘indirect’ access – illusory in Belgium, France and Germany? Chilling effect: Turning the poison into an antidote for fundamental rights in Europe
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1