Executive Summary

On April 1, 2026, the Federal Council adopted an evaluation report on the structural reform of occupational pensions. Since 2011, the reform has strengthened supervision of the second pillar, improved governance and transparency of pension institutions. The independent evaluation draws an overall positive conclusion but also identifies improvement needs in coordination between direct supervision and higher-level supervision, as well as risks in collective and joint institutions.

People

  • Melanie Mettler (National Councillor)

Topics

  • Occupational pensions (second pillar)
  • Governance and transparency
  • Supervisory reforms
  • Financial stability

Clarus Lead

The evaluation responds to parliamentary demands and current market developments: concentration among pension institutions and growing assets under management require regulatory adjustments. The Higher-Level Supervisory Commission for Occupational Pensions (OAK BV) and supervisory authorities have already initiated coordination measures, but structural weaknesses remain in smaller institutions and commission structures. The report signals that reform objectives have been achieved, but targeted adjustments are necessary.

Detailed Summary

The structural reform was implemented with two core measures: stricter governance regulations since August 2011 and the establishment of OAK BV in January 2012. This division of supervision strengthened the system but led to coordination problems that a 2023 evaluation uncovered. Since then, authorities have established bilateral annual meetings and improved dialogue for better risk assessment in the second pillar.

At the pension institutions themselves, the reform increased awareness of good governance practices. However, risks remain, particularly in collective and joint institutions regarding financial stability and conflicts of interest. In the area of transparency, the reform achieved measurable success: asset management costs were systematically disclosed for the first time, including for complex investments such as funds. The report identifies optimization potential in broker compensation models to prevent perverse incentives that could endanger employer and insured member interests.

Key Findings

  • The structural reform successfully strengthened supervision, governance, and transparency of occupational pensions
  • Coordination deficiencies between direct supervision and higher-level supervision were identified and partially resolved through bilateral meetings
  • Collective and joint institutions remain a risk area; commission structures require regulatory adjustments

Critical Questions

  1. Data Quality: What quantitative indicators support the "positive assessment" – damage ratios, insolvency rates, or governance compliance scores before and after 2011?

  2. Conflicts of Interest: Who conducted the independent evaluation, and how was independence from industry actors ensured?

  3. Causality: Can improved governance demonstrably be attributed to the structural reform, or did market conditions and self-regulation play a role?

  4. Implementation Risk: What specific deadlines and resources are provided for the recommended adjustments to broker commissions?

  5. Collective Institutions: Why do these institutions remain a risk area despite the reform – are the governance rules too weak or their enforcement insufficient?

  6. Concentration: How is the increasing concentration among pension institutions addressed regulatively – is systemic risk a threat?

Sources

Primary Source: Federal Council (2026): Evaluation Report on the Structural Reform of Occupational Pensions – https://www.news.admin.ch/de/newnsb/-PyADFB0yjQiVlbL9CP_z

Supplementary Sources:

  1. Postulate 21.3877 (Melanie Mettler): Evaluation of the BVG Structural Reform
  2. Postulate 21.3968 (Commission for Social Security and Health, National Council): Evaluate Achievement of BVG Structural Reform Objectives
  3. Federal Office of Social Insurance (BSV): Evaluation Projects on Governance, Supervision, Transparency

Verification Status: ✓ 01.04.2026

This text was created with the support of an AI model. Editorial responsibility: clarus.news | Fact-check: 01.04.2026