New plan for housing provident fund reform

The retention and abolition of housing provident fund has once again become a hot topic in society. Some people think that the housing provident fund system is unfair, and the housing provident fund has completed its historical mission. In order to reduce the burden on enterprises, it is advocated to cancel the housing provident fund.

In my opinion, the housing provident fund system is still valuable and should be retained.

Institutional Efficiency and Fairness of Housing Provident Fund

From the Annual Report of National Housing Provident Fund 20 18 published by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development in official website, we can have a bird's eye view of the efficiency and fairness of the housing provident fund system and have a general understanding of the system. According to the "annual report" of provident fund, the institutional efficiency of provident fund can be summarized into four characteristics, and the institutional fairness can be summarized into four characteristics. Four institutional efficiency characteristics of housing accumulation fund.

First, the benefit rate is relatively high. Since the establishment of the provident fund system, 33.35 million individual housing loans have been issued, of which one third are dual employees, benefiting about 55 million people. /kloc-0.44 billion paid-in employees, 38% successfully became housing lenders. The essence of housing accumulation fund system is a mutual aid system. As a mutual aid system, 38% members can benefit, which is not low.

Second, the mortgage level is appropriate and effective. In 2065438+2008, 2.53 million individual housing loans were granted, amounting to 1.02 trillion yuan. The average mortgage is about 400 thousand. In second-and third-tier cities, the down payment is enough to basically solve the loan, and it is not necessary to combine other commercial loans.

Third, reduce the heavy interest burden for employees. The interest rate of provident fund loans is low, 3.25% for more than five years, which is lower than the benchmark interest rate of commercial individual housing loans by 1.65-2 percentage points. The mortgage granted on 20 18 can save 202 billion yuan in interest expenses for the loan employees. The general loan is calculated as 10 year, which can save 80,000 yuan in interest expenses. For more than 20 years, the provident fund system has reduced the interest burden of one trillion yuan for employees, which is the vitality of the provident fund system.

Fourth, the administrative cost comes entirely from the extracted management fee. There are 342 provident fund management centers and 3439 service outlets in China. The National Reserve Fund has 44,000 employees, 40% of whom are non-employees. 2011700 million yuan is withdrawn as management fee, and the comprehensive asset management fee is 2 10/0,000 yuan per 100 million yuan, including the salary and bonus of all employees, office premises, office equipment and official expenses. The whole provident fund system is a self-supporting system. In the national contributory welfare system, such as the social insurance system and even the National Social Security Fund Council, the operation and management costs all come from financial funds, while the management costs of the housing provident fund system are completely self-absorbed, which is very rare in China's current contributory welfare system.

Starting with "Annual Report of National Housing Provident Fund 20 18", let's examine the four institutional fairness characteristics of housing provident fund.

First, the coverage has gradually expanded. By the end of 20 18, there were 654.38+44 million employees who had paid the provident fund. In China's contributory welfare system, the coverage is relatively large. For example, in a comparable social insurance system, unemployment insurance covers 654.38+96 million people, and maternity insurance covers 204 million people, excluding medical care and old-age care. Their compulsory coverage is greater than the housing provident fund. Other payment systems only cover a small number of people. For example, the enterprise annuity covers less than 24 million people.

Second, the structure of salaried employees is mainly based on formal sector employment. Of the 654.38+0.44 billion paid-in employees, 365.438+0% are employees of government institutions, 20% are state-owned enterprises, 365.438+0% are private enterprises, collective enterprises and other types of units. China's formal sector employment can be divided into narrow sense and broad sense. In a narrow sense, it refers to urban legal person institutions and urban collective units, with 65.438+0.7 billion employees; In a broad sense, there are 65.438+0.4 billion employees in urban private units, that is, employees in private enterprises with business addresses above the county level. Unemployment insurance, industrial injury insurance and provident fund mainly cover

Third, the transparency of the system is very good. The information disclosure and transparency of the housing provident fund system have always been relatively good. 20 15 The Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, the Ministry of Finance and the People's Bank of China jointly issued the Notice on Improving the Information Disclosure System of Housing Provident Funds. In addition, the Annual Report of the National Housing Provident Fund jointly issued by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank to the whole society every year has complete information and is very transparent. For example, in China's contributory welfare system, the transparency of the provident fund is the highest, such as the proportion of employees' contributions, the withdrawal of provident fund by type, various loans, pilot loans to support the construction of affordable housing, business income and expenditure and value-added income, housing loans and value-added income distribution in various provinces, and asset risks.

Fourth, housing accumulation fund, as a mutual fund, has had three spillover effects on housing construction in China. First, occupy a place in the housing market. For example, in 20 18, the housing provident fund was used to withdraw and distribute personal housing loans and public welfare loans totaling 2.2 trillion yuan, accounting for 17% of the national commercial housing sales and 16% of the personal housing loan market. Another example is to support loan workers to purchase and build 287 million square meters of housing, accounting for 19% of the national commercial housing sales area. Second, it plays an obvious role in the rental market and the housing repair market. The provident fund has given support to employees who have no housing needs for the time being in renting houses and repairing houses. The 7.66 million employees who rented houses withdrew 73 billion yuan, and the annual withdrawal amount per capita was 65.438+0 million yuan. The third is to play an important role in the construction of affordable housing. Housing provident fund provides loan support for affordable housing construction projects. By the end of 20 18, * * * had issued loans of 8721500 million yuan to 373 pilot projects of affordable housing construction. In addition, the value-added income of some housing accumulation funds also provides supplementary funds for the construction of urban public rental housing, and * * * arranges 336.5 billion yuan for the construction of public rental housing. For example, the Beijing Housing Provident Fund has so far issued 36 project loans with a loan amount of 20,654.38 billion yuan and a construction area of 940,000 square meters, which has potentially solved the housing difficulties of more than 90,000 low-and middle-income workers' families.

The mission of housing provident fund is not completely over.

Judging from the efficiency and fairness of the above-mentioned provident fund system, it has performed well in many contributory welfare systems, at least not bad, and played a role in the transformation of housing system and solving the housing difficulties of employees. In the future, the historical mission of housing provident fund has not been completed, mainly in the following aspects.

First, from the demand side, housing provident fund can also play a certain role. In third-and fourth-tier cities, the role of working-class people in alleviating housing difficulties is very obvious. The most convincing is the mortgage rate, that is, the ratio of the balance of personal housing loans to the balance of housing provident fund deposits at the end of the year. For example, the mortgage rate in most provinces in the central and western regions is 70% to 80%, and only in the west is below 70%.

Tibet, Qinghai and Xinjiang Construction Corps. Almost all first-and second-tier cities are above 85%, such as Beijing 95%, Shanghai 96%, Tianjin almost 100%, and Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Anhui, Fujian and Guizhou are above 95%. What is important is that housing prices in first-and second-tier cities are high, and the employees employed by government agencies and institutions are under too much pressure to buy houses every year. These groups are admitted through the "national examination", and they undertake the function of running the state machine. In the front line of scientific research and teaching, the marginal utility of housing provident fund is the highest. In second-and third-tier cities, you can completely rely on the provident fund to solve the problem of buying a house. If the provident fund is abolished, it means that there are great obstacles for the central ministries or some departments to recruit outstanding talents.

Second, judging from the pattern of initial income distribution in China, retaining the provident fund can increase the share of labor income. As we all know, the proportion of labor income in China's primary income distribution pattern is too low. Since the reform and opening up, the labor income share index has fluctuated, from more than 60% in the 1990s to less than 50% before the international financial crisis in 2008, and then rebounded. This has improved in the past 10 years, but it is lower than developed countries 15 to 20 percentage points, and even lower than some developing countries.

The report of the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China clearly pointed out that "we should persist in realizing the synchronous growth of residents' income while increasing economic growth, and realize the synchronous growth of labor remuneration while improving labor productivity". The Opinions of the Central Committee of the State Council on Accelerating the Improvement of the Socialist Market Economic System in the New Era, which was just released on May 18, 2020, once again pointed out that "the labor remuneration of workers, especially front-line workers, should be increased, and the proportion of labor remuneration in the initial distribution should be increased, so as to realize the simultaneous growth of residents' income and the simultaneous increase of labor productivity."

From the perspective of implementing the central spirit, the provident fund system is a good thing. The idea of canceling the provident fund is mainly to reduce the burden on enterprises, and the starting point is also good, but the key to the problem is that the focus should be on tax reduction and social security premiums. China's tax revenue mainly comes from indirect taxes, and direct taxes only account for about 10%. In the long run, we should gradually focus on direct taxes, but if the share of labor income is always too low, it will always be empty talk.

Third, from the perspective of employees' sense of acquisition, the effect of provident fund is very obvious. When they paid the provident fund, the people never complained that the base was too high and the proportion was too high. They complain that the social security rate and base are too high. The phenomenon that ordinary people and enterprises "escape" social security is very serious, and almost no one and enterprises "escape" provident fund! Why? Because the "tax wedge" of provident fund is "zero", 100% becomes the disposable income of employees and their families, and its private attribute is very obvious. Excluding the provident fund, the tax wedge of social security contributions in China is as high as 30.8 1%, which is just equal to the average level of OECD countries. In contrast, the tax wedge of the Nordic welfare country Denmark is only 30.99%, which is only a little higher than that of China. There are many developed countries whose tax wedge is lower than ours, such as Japan, Australia, Britain, Luxembourg, Ireland, Canada, the United States, New Zealand, Israel, Switzerland and so on.

Importantly, in the social security contributions of individuals and enterprises, the tax wedge of enterprise contributions is as high as 19.22%, and the tax wedges of individual contributions and individual taxes are 6.4 1% and 5. 19% respectively. That is to say, in the structure of tax wedge, the social security contribution of enterprises accounts for as high as 62.36%, and such a large tax wedge is divorced from the interests of employees. Employees don't get benefits, they don't have a sense of gain, and of course they are willing to "cooperate" with enterprises to evade expenses. Therefore, it is a hidden rule for employees and enterprises to "escape" social security fees together, and it is the social security system that ultimately "suffers". This is the main reason why paying provident fund is more popular than paying social security fees.

Fourth, low-income borrowers in the provident fund account for 95%, which is especially popular in poor areas. One of the main reasons for advocating the abolition of provident fund is that the system is unfair and the poor subsidize the rich. Of the 1 trillion 2.53 million mortgage loans issued in 2065,438+08, 95% of the borrowers are low-and middle-income people, and only 5% are high-income people. According to the 20 18 annual report of the national housing provident fund, the low-middle income here means that the income is less than three times the average wage of the local society in the previous year, and the high income means that the income is more than three times the average wage of the local society in the previous year. Look at the age and the purchase situation. Borrowers under the age of 40 account for 76%, construction area below 144 square meters accounts for 89%, and the first set accounts for 85%. Obviously, the above data shows that buyers are basically just in need, and the provident fund system really provides protection and support for low-and middle-income groups to buy houses.

Then use the deposit base of 20 17 in several typical poverty-stricken areas to see their attitude and behavior towards provident fund. The deposit base of Dingxi in Gansu is 10 1% of its social wage, while that of Baise in Guangxi is 1 10% of its social wage. The actual deposit base of Zhangye in Gansu is the highest, with 168. This shows that the deposit base of employees in poor areas is "real" and even exceeds the local social wages, because they have benefited.

Fifth, the number of paid employees is increasing, especially in private enterprises. Let's look at the fairness of "within the system" and "outside the system". In real life, this pair of concepts can be understood in two ways. One is to regard public institutions and state-owned enterprises as "within the system", and the other is to regard them as "outside the system". Among the 65.438+0.44 billion paid-in employees, there are 44.52 million in government institutions and 29.28 million in state-owned enterprises, totaling 73.8 million. It can be seen that the number of paid-in employees in the "system" is basically in a "saturated" state; Another understanding is that "within the system" refers to the formal employment sector, "outside the system" refers to the informal employment sector, and the formal employment sector has broad and narrow meanings. In the case that government agencies, institutions and state-owned enterprises are basically saturated, private enterprises will become the main force to participate in the provident fund at present and in the future. For example, in 20 18, the provident fund opened1990,000 new accounts, of which private enterprises accounted for 50%. It can be seen that the proportion of private enterprises will gradually increase in the process of expanding coverage in the future. In the formal employment group, it is unfair to employees who have not participated in the provident fund, but the expansion of coverage needs a process. The state has issued many documents on expanding the coverage of provident fund, which requires the joint efforts of employers, employees and the whole society, and the coverage of social insurance has also gone through such a process. For example, the basic old-age insurance for employees in urban enterprises covered only 654.38+3.6 billion people 20 years ago, and reached 967 million in 2065.438+09. However, if the provident fund is cancelled, the employees who have not joined and those who have joined will lose the opportunity forever. As long as this system exists, opportunities exist.

Main problems existing in housing accumulation fund system and reform suggestions

The Opinions of the Central Committee of the State Council on Accelerating the Improvement of the Socialist Market Economic System in the New Era, which was just released on March 18, 2020, pointed out that "the housing provident fund system should be reformed".

The author believes that this is the most authoritative and up-to-date tone of the central government on housing provident fund, and its attitude is very clear, that is, "reform" rather than "cancellation", and I fully agree with it. Since the central government's attitude is still very clear, if we want to reform, we should first find out what is wrong with the provident fund, and then discuss the solution, not whether to cancel it, but whether to reform it. There may be many problems in the provident fund, such as whether older employees who have no demand for housing have the right to withdraw, and whether individual employees have the right to choose the proportion of contributions within the upper limit.

However, there have always been two biggest problems in housing provident fund. First, the investment method is single and the rate of return is too low. For example, the 20 18 annual value-added rate of return is only1.56%; The direct result of the low value-added rate of return is that the deposit interest paid by employees is too low, and the interest is only calculated at 1.5%. If calculated according to the market-oriented investment rate of return, the loss is huge. Take the balance of 2065438+2008 as an example. If the investment is entrusted to the National Social Security Fund Council, assuming the rate of return is 6%, the interest income this year will be as high as 28 billion. So after more than 20 years, the interest loss will be hundreds of billions. For individual employees, the interest rate of 1.5% is far from outperforming the inflation rate, and the risk of depreciation is very obvious. The funds deposited in the account are shrinking every year; The interest rate of 1.5% is at least 10 percentage point lower than the social average wage growth rate, resulting in the "welfare loss" doubling every few years. In the past 22 years, the unit proportional payment is almost equivalent to "nothing". In the past 22 years, the wage growth rate and the population growth rate exceeded 14%, which is the so-called "biological rate of return", also known as "internal rate of return". If the interest level of 1.5% is deducted, the annual "welfare loss" is at least 12%. In the next 22 years, the welfare loss of employees will be astronomical. From the perspective of the whole society, this is a huge loss of social welfare and a "transfer" of social wealth. The second problem is that the level of overall planning is too low, and the remaining funds cannot be used nationwide between high-loan ratio areas and low-loan ratio areas. From the perspective of the whole society, the low level of fund management and regional separatism have reduced the efficiency of "mutual assistance" of surplus funds.

In view of the above analysis, there are problems in the provident fund system, but we should not give up eating because of choking. Problems in provident fund should be solved as soon as possible, and we can't turn a blind eye. Otherwise, it is irresponsible to the paid employees. From a certain point of view, the state-owned banks are "fattened" with low-priced and high-quality assets. Since some scholars have put forward a motion to cancel the provident fund, policy makers should act as soon as possible with a sense of urgency and a high sense of responsibility for people's interests, so as not to let a good livelihood system become a "soft rib" for a long time. In order to get rid of the above two main disadvantages, the author puts forward four reform ideas or four reform schemes.

First, expand the functions and optimize the structure without changing the nature of the existing administrative institutions of the housing provident fund center. This is an improved scheme, the simplest and most convenient scheme, and the existing system and mechanism will not change. The areas of "improvement" include the investment system, which can adopt the mode that the basic old-age insurance fund for urban workers entrusts the National Social Security Fund Council to invest, and the provinces sign contracts with the National Social Security Fund Council respectively and agree on specific matters such as the return on investment, and all the real investment income is distributed to the paying employees as interest. In terms of business scope, provident fund centers in first-and second-tier cities are allowed to use value-added income and other funds to directly invest in and hold rental housing, and support paid employees to solve housing problems through leasing; Expand the coverage of deposits to cover urban migrant workers and even freelancers; At the level of overall planning, it will be upgraded to national overall planning and strengthen the mutual integration of funds between cities. Deposited employees can continue to deposit in different places, withdraw and use in different places, and make loans; Establish a new loan allocation mechanism in the use of extraction, tilt to low-and middle-income groups, and increase support for rental housing; Improve the efficiency of the operation mechanism and simplify the extraction and use procedures; Strengthen the publicity according to law in supervision and regularly disclose information.

The second is to reorganize and establish the National Housing Provident Fund Management Company, a policy non-bank financial institution with independent legal personality. The national housing provident fund management company issues bonds and securities in the capital market with national credit, expands the pool of funds, and provides liquidity support and policy guarantee for ordinary people to use housing provident fund; In terms of the use of funds, the National Housing Provident Fund Management Company does not directly issue loans, but supports the basic housing needs of paid employees by providing low-interest and long-term credit guarantees. After being guaranteed by the provident fund management company, the paid employees can choose any provident fund center and commercial bank to obtain loans. This way can promote the competition between provident fund centers and commercial banks, and improve the efficiency and service level of paying employee housing loans. At the same time, the National Housing Provident Fund Management Company provides funds for provident fund centers and commercial banks by purchasing mortgage assets in bulk. In the first-and second-tier cities with high housing prices, we will support the construction and operation of rental housing through loans or direct investment, and implement "both rent and purchase". Establish a national overall planning mechanism and a national housing provident fund fund fund management platform to realize national deposit and withdrawal and interbank lending; In the operation mechanism and supervision mechanism, it operates in the way of corporate governance structure of financial institutions and accepts supervision.

Third, reorganize and establish a policy-oriented national housing bank. Drawing lessons from the model of housing savings banks in developed countries, the national provident fund center will be reorganized into a unified national independent legal person financial institution, and provincial and municipal provident fund centers will be reorganized into branches of the national housing bank, and bonds and securities will be issued in the capital market with national credit; Carry out policy-based housing savings business, establish differentiated credit mechanism, and provide more favorable housing financial support to low-and middle-income groups, which can be deposited in different places and used for loans in different places; Loans for rental housing construction projects are issued. In terms of operating mechanism, it operates according to the corporate governance structure of modern financial institutions, establishes an incentive mechanism, and promotes efficiency and risk control; According to the regulatory mechanism of policy finance, the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development is responsible for the formulation and supervision of housing policy rules, while the central bank and the China Banking Regulatory Commission are responsible for the formulation and supervision of banking regulatory rules.

Fourth, merge with enterprise annuity and bring it into the comprehensive provident fund system. Considering the aging trend, following the principle of life cycle, taking into account the capital needs of urban residents for housing and pension, a unified individual provident fund account will be established throughout the country. According to housing and pension, two sub-accounts are set up. The housing account implements "low deposit and low loan", and the funds in the housing account can be extracted for renting or buying a house. When employees have no provident fund loans or housing consumption needs, the funds in the housing account will be transferred to the pension account. Set up a policy-based non-bank financial institution to be responsible for the investment and operation of the comprehensive provident fund fund pool, and play the dual role of the existing housing provident fund and enterprise annuity.

Quality content recommendation

Related Q&A: Related Q&A: What are the disadvantages and differences when housing mortgage loans are converted into operating loans and the interest rate is changed from 5.6 to 3.8? Any fool knows that 3.8% interest rate is more cost-effective than 5.6%. Moreover, the interest rate of 5.6% is the mortgage interest rate-average capital or equivalent principal and interest, and the actual annual interest rate has reached about 8%! So many bosses converted 5.6% loans into 3.8% loans.

Feidao has been a small bank loan for more than 20 years. Let me tell you these questions.

1, 5.6% is mortgage and 3.8% is commercial loan-different in nature.

Mortgage is a consumer loan to buy a house. As long as you have the repayment ability, you can buy a house as collateral-note that the borrowers here can be office workers, migrant workers, bosses and so on.

Commercial loans are commercial loans-the identity of the borrower must be the boss, or the shareholder, legal representative, etc. -Wage earners and office workers cannot apply for commercial loans.

Note-some banks are lax in auditing and temporarily hold shares, so they can apply for a 3.8% operating loan-once the policy is tightened or checked, it is possible to recover the operating loan immediately!

2. The materials provided are different

Mortgage loan-provide personal data, income proof, running water and other materials.

Commercial loan-in addition to personal materials, you should also provide commercial materials (business license, office lease, upstream and downstream contracts, enterprise running water, etc.). )

3. The mortgage order of real estate is different.

Mortgage loan-the collateral is the purchased house, and the developer of the first-hand house undertakes the phased guarantee. Generally, the loan will be put first, and then the house will be mortgaged. Second-hand housing transactions are, first down payment, transfer, mortgage and then loan to the seller.

Business loan-it must be mortgaged before lending.

Therefore, buying a first-hand house cannot be directly made into a commercial loan.

4. Different deadlines

Mortgages are usually repaid within 20 or 30 years.

3.8% of operating loans are repaid once a year-note that many banks have introduced "non-repayment loans"-for example, the 5 million operating loan line with a term of 10 will expire in one year. After the expiration, the formalities will be directly extended for another year until the 10 line expires.

Although operating loans can be renewed without repayment, there will be a brief review every year. If it fails, it must be repaid.

5. Different payment methods

Mortgage loans, banks lend money directly to developers or sellers.

3.8% of operating loans can only be lent to corporate counterparties. If it is really used to buy a house, it must be a fake contract, and the counterparty needs to cooperate with the collection, so there must be risks in the middle.

6, suitable for 5.6% to 3.8%.

Originally, the borrower was the boss and had a company. It could have been a commercial loan.

The boss can repay 5.6% of the loan, and then use this house as a mortgage to make a 3.8% commercial loan to the bank.

Someone asked? -What if the loan of 3.8% cannot be approved? It's simple. Banks may be required to approve operating loans with an interest rate of 3.8% first. After the loan is approved, you can repay the mortgage at 5.6%, which is foolproof.

Finally, Feidao works in a bank in Beijing. Beijing's supervision on the use of commercial loans to purchase houses is relatively strict. Newly purchased houses cannot be mortgaged for operating loans. Moreover, big data will be used to compare the information of commercial loans and buyers, and the success of the comparison will be traceable.

As for the loan interest rate of 3.8%, it is not the lowest-Beijing's "business guarantee loan" is 202 1 year, with no collateral, the annual interest rate is only 2.35%, and the maximum amount is 3 million-and the government has indeed given strong support to small and micro enterprises.