BETTER FINANCE Corrects PensionsEurope’s Mudslinging Allegations On Bulgarian Pension Returns

BETTER FINANCE released the eighth edition of its research report on the Real Return of Long-Term and Pension Savings. More than a month later, on 5 November, PensionsEurope (PE), the lobbyist for the European Pensions Industry, issued a press release levelling unwarranted and unsubstantiated criticism against the findings in the Bulgarian Country Case of the report.

PE and the Bulgarian Association of Supplementary Pension Security Companies (BASPSC) pretended to “correct” the pension returns presented in the Bulgarian country case of the 2020 BETTER FINANCE Research Report on the real returns of long-term and pension savings, and accused the author[1] of the case of “skilfully work(ing) with statistics, creating manipulatively his thesis based on some facts, half-truths, wrong calculations and open speculative statements”. However, whereas neither the author of the Bulgarian country case, nor BETTER FINANCE “manipulate figures and statements”, PE, on the contrary, did just that in its 5 November press release, as the table below clearly shows.

PE disclosed different figures in their PR published two days after the BASPSC member had already publicly validated BETTER FINANCE’s results:

Sources: PensionsEurope Press Release, BASPSC Presentation (public event), BETTER FINANCE 2020 Pensions Report

The returns published by BETTER FINANCE in the Bulgarian country case are actually correct according to a public document from PE’s Bulgarian affiliate itself. Yet, the industry lobby chose to publish entirely different and far higher Bulgarian returns in their PR.  

In addition, the incorrect figures used by PE in its press release supposedly come from undisclosed, non-public data.

BETTER FINANCE’s research uses only publicly available data, including data from national pension industry organisations when available, and all these sources are clearly disclosed.

As if this was not enough, PE misrepresented the functioning of the Bulgarian and Estonian pension systems by alleging that BETTER FINANCE contradicted the policy recommendations of the author of the Bulgarian country case with a BETTER FINANCE Press Release regarding a pensions reform in Estonia.

More detailed responses to PE’s unwarranted allegations are attached in the Annex.

BETTER FINANCE enjoys a constructive and positive dialogue with the other financial industry organisations. This slanderous press release from the pension industry lobby is all the more unfortunate as it comes more than a month after the release of the report without any attempt at dialogue or prior interaction with the European Federation of Investors and Financial Services Users. Moreover, the lobby group challenges the correctness of publicly available data based - supposedly - on their own, undisclosed data. This is not the first time this lobby makes accusations against BETTER FINANCE. Those were also repudiated by BETTER FINANCE back then.

In the past BETTER FINANCE has repeatedly asked for help from, and cooperation with, the pensions industry lobby to enhance the transparency on long-term real returns for European pension savers. It is disappointing to see that, instead of constructive cooperation, unwarranted criticism is the only response that the representatives of European pension savers have received so far.

The offer to help - already publicised years ago by PE - never materialised. BETTER FINANCE will try one more time, and therefore kindly requests PE to follow up on its offer to provide us with its detailed excel file: “Please note all data and calculations provided in the tables are included in a detailed excel file, generated by the Pension Companies and can be provided upon request for reconciliation". The author will carefully examine it. In the meantime, a public apology and the withdrawal of PE’s mudslinging press release are in order.

As Guillaume Prache, Managing Director of BETTER FINANCE points out, “this tactic from the industry lobby seems to be inspired from Francis Bacon’s “Hurl your calumnies boldly; something is sure to stick”. When deciding to try to discredit independent research, it should at the very least do it on less shaky grounds. Quite unusual and sad vis-à-vis representatives of one’s own end clients.” This is all the more worrying, since the person responsible for this mudslinging press release has been selected as a top pension advisor by the European Commission[3] and by the EU supervisor, EIOPA[4].

More generally, this lobby expressed its “frustration” at “low” - but correct - numbers. If it does not like reports on the real net returns for pension savers produced by independent researchers, why doesn’t it disclose this key information itself (and with the same full transparency on its sources and methods), including to the Public Supervisor, instead of letting an NGO do it all on its own and then attempt to discredit it afterwards?

Finally, PE writes that “ensuring quality is crucial” in its recent press release. It is indeed, as the requirement to provide fair, clear, and not misleading information to pension savers. And it is even more crucial for the pension industry since it is – like BETTER FINANCE - 100% funded by EU citizens as its end-clients.