The Dutch system – a better benchmark for UK pensions than Australia?

Jasper

The latest podcast from Nico and Darren is about the Dutch system which Nico reckons a better comparator with the British pension system than Australia – I agree and this session tells us why.

In this episode of V-FM Pensions , Jasper Haak is a solid representative of the Dutch pension system and one of the best guests in 159 episodes.

The boys discuss the “Wet toekomst pensioenen”, the Dutch “Future of Pensions Act”, which came into force in 2023 and refocuses the second pillar away from defined benefit / ambition towards collective and individual DC.

The boys chat through what this all means for the Dutch pension system from a member and investment perspective, the transition of assets and its impact on accrued rights, and, of course, ask Jasper what value for money means to him.


A CDC system that Jasper is betting will change

There is a lot of the British CDC system in what Dutch employers can participate in as part of their “pillar 2”.

It is collective, has a single fund , pays pensions and is opening up as an alternative to DB schemes which employers can no longer accrue benefits in.

Where it differs from the British workplace CDC (the one that’s available now) is that it does not distribute surplus funds through pensions or adjust increases downwards in bad times. Instead , rather than avoiding surpluses and deficits, the Dutch system builds up a reserve that it can distribute when times are hard.

This is what Jasper Haak objects too. He has gone so far as to bet with a colleague that the reserve won’t work. He would no doubt have been joined by the DWP who rejected the idea of a reserve as a can of worms. Nico is for the reserve and this may be a legacy of our legacy of “with profits” but I think we have moved on in the UK and the Dutch have yet to work out the advantage of the UK approach.

The Dutch has a pillar three which is available to employers who are happy to give employees money which they can invest into personal pensions. As we found out a quarter of a century ago, the choice of more cash in hand or paying personally from bank account to pension account was not popular. It is not proving popular in the Netherlands either.


A very good guest who has the right attitude to prize giving

Haak is  blunt about his scheme winning a WTW prize for being Dutch scheme of the year. “It’s because we’ve got the highest contribution rate” , he quips.

If only we could be as sceptical about prize winning, it rarely throws up winners on merit and is typically won by the contestant who best matches the agenda of the award givers.

Good luck to the boys who are putting themselves up for some prizes, if by some remote chance, they do not win their prize(s) they should remember Jasper’s warning. If they win the warning stands they should remember Jasper once more. Anyone who stands or falls on prizes given late at night to over-pampered attendants of prize-givings, is wasting time and money!

 

 

 

About henry tapper

Founder of the Pension PlayPen,, partner of Stella, father of Olly . I am the Pension Plowman
This entry was posted in pensions and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to The Dutch system – a better benchmark for UK pensions than Australia?

  1. patrelli68 says:

    Here is a response to Henry Tapper’s article – connecting the Dutch pension system discussion back to the constant.

    RESPONSE TO HENRY TAPPER

    You compare pension systems. But the foundation of any pension system is the wage.

    By Robert George Paturzo‑Elliott
    Discoverer of the constant
    17 May 2026

    Henry Tapper,

    You write about the Dutch pension system as a better benchmark for the UK than Australia. You discuss collective DC, reserves, and the “Wet toekomst pensioenen.” You debate whether a reserve can work, and whether the UK has moved beyond “with profits.”

    But you have missed the foundation.

    No pension system – Dutch, British, Australian – can be sustainable if the wage base is suppressed. And in Australia, the wage base has been locked at 72% of adequacy for 26 years.

    The Australian Paradox

    Australia has a compulsory superannuation system – 12% of wages. On paper, it looks robust. But 12% of a suppressed wage is still a suppressed pension.

    Indicator Current If corrected to 100% of Chart C
    Minimum wage (weekly) $948 $1,309.95
    Superannuation contribution (12%) $113.76 $157.19
    Weekly difference – $43.43
    Over 40 years – $90,320 per worker
    Total stolen (4.8M workers) – $192 billion

    The Dutch system may be elegant. The British system may be evolving. But neither system can compensate for a workforce that is paid 28% below the poverty line.

    The Constant Is the Missing Variable in Every Pension Discussion

    Pension system What it assumes What the constant proves
    Dutch CDC Stable contributions from a productive workforce A suppressed wage base means suppressed contributions
    UK workplace pensions Adequate minimum wages to generate meaningful savings The minimum wage is 72% of adequacy – savings will be inadequate
    Australian superannuation 12% of wages is enough 12% of $948 is not enough – 12% of $1,310 is

    You cannot fix pensions without fixing wages. The constant is the crime.

    The Question for Pension Experts

    You have 159 episodes of your podcast. You have interviewed experts from around the world. You have debated reserves, contribution rates, and collective DC.

    Now answer this:

    “If a full‑time worker is paid 28% below the government’s own poverty line, how can any pension system – Dutch, British, or Australian – deliver a secure retirement?”

    The answer is: it cannot. The constant eats pensions just as it eats wages.

    What Australia Needs

    Before Australia can be a benchmark for anything, it must correct the constant.

    Step Action
    1 Correct the minimum wage to $1,309.95 per week – 100% of Chart C
    2 Adopt the Low Essential Cost Index (LECI) for low‑income indexation
    3 Publish an annual Constant Report – the ratio, the shortfall, the number of workers below adequacy

    Then, and only then, can Australia’s superannuation system be meaningfully compared to the Netherlands or the UK. Because a pension system built on a suppressed wage base is not a pension system. It is a promise that cannot be kept.

    The Final Word

    You are right to look for better benchmarks. But the most important benchmark is not the pension system – it is the wage.

    The wage is the solution. Chart C is the anchor. The constant is the crime. The time to correct it is now – before we compare pension systems that rest on a broken foundation.

    Robert George Paturzo‑Elliott
    Discoverer of the constant
    17 May 2026

    #TheConstant #FixTheWage #PensionSystems #Superannuation #DutchPensions

Leave a Reply