Is the current method of calculating pensions still fair? Does it continue to make women financially dependent on their husbands and lack egalitarianism? Pierre Devolder admits that this method may be old-fashioned but claims that it benefits both partners. He argues that the primary aim of household pensions is to distribute income to couples, rather than to single individuals. Therefore, even though the man may receive the money, the woman will also benefit.
However, economist and KULeuven researcher, Laurène Thil, points out that redistributing the money within the couple remains a challenge since it belongs to the private circle. With the household rate, the man earns more thanks to his wife, but this does not necessarily mean that the woman receives less wealth in the end. The crucial factor is how the couple redistributes their resources. If they share equally, that’s a good sign for gender equality. If not, women become losers.
The household rate creates financial dependency on the husband, making globalization of income a threat if the woman earns less. President of the Social Security Commission of the Federal Council for Equal Opportunities for Men and Women, Dominique De Vos agrees that the household rate solidifies such dependence. Even if the couple separates, the pension still depends on the husband’s income.
De Vos recommends the solution of “splitting” the pension. This would combine the pension of both partners and divide it equally amongst them. The split pension raises many other questions though, including whether to include legal or additional pension amounts and whether it would impoverish households. The government agreement promises to study this alternative.
But is this way of calculating still valid? Doesn’t it make the woman still financially dependent on her husband? In short, is this method of calculation egalitarian?
For Pierre Devolder, this is a calculation method that clearly dates from the past but which benefits both members of the couple. “Even if the amount is paid to the man, the woman will also benefit from this revaluation. The idea of household pension is to redistribute to the couple, not to the single man. And so, the woman also benefits.“
The question is therefore how the money is redistributed within the couple once it is paid to the man. “And this information is very difficult to obtain because it is the private circle“, answers Laurène Thil, economist and researcher at KULeuven.
“It is clear that with the household rate, the man earns more thanks to his wife. However, this does not necessarily mean that the woman receives less wealth in the end. From the moment the resources available to the couple are increased and returned to the man, the important thing for gender equality is to see how they are then redistributed. If they are shared, that’s fine, if not, it’s clear that women are losers… Yes, it’s regarding getting along!“
This means that the woman is financially dependent on her husband. “There is a globalization of income which means that you no longer have your own rights if you are the one, the one in this case, who earns the least“, reacts Dominique De Vos, president of the Social Security Commission of the Federal Council for Equal Opportunities for Men and Women. “It cements the dependence on the husband. Even if, it should be emphasized, they can separate and receive a divorced pension which, once more, depends on the husband’s income.“
One of the solutions studied by these three experts would be the “splitting“Remember, this is one of the solutions that must be studied according to the government agreement.”The basic idea of splitting is to combine the pension of the two people and we divide in two“, explains Dominique de Vos who specifies that this raises a lot of other questions. “What do we put in this common pot? Legal pension? Additoinal ? Doesn’t this risk impoverishing households?“
In conclusion, the household rate remains a controversial method for calculating pensions. While it benefits both members of the couple, it does raise questions regarding financial dependence and gender equality. Ultimately, the key issue is how the money is redistributed within the couple once it is paid to the man. Experts suggest that splitting the pension might be a solution, but it also raises concerns regarding potential poverty and other unanswered questions. As the government continues to study the issue, it is important to consider all perspectives and find a solution that is fair and equitable for everyone.