Introduction:
The introduction of the Unified Pension Scheme (UPS) has sparked debate among government employees regarding whether to remain in the New Pension Scheme (NPS) or switch to the newly introduced UPS. With its launch on August 24, the UPS blends aspects of the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) and the NPS. The decision for employees hinges on their retirement goals—whether they prefer equity market returns or a guaranteed pension.
Key Differences Between UPS and NPS
| Aspect | UPS (Unified Pension Scheme) | NPS (National Pension System) |
| Employer’s Contribution | Under UPS, employers contribute 18.5% of an employee’s basic salary to the pension fund. | Employers contribute 14% of an employee’s basic salary to the pension pool under NPS. |
| Retirement Pension | Retirees receive 50% of their average basic salary from the last 12 months if they have 25 years of service. | Pension under NPS varies and depends on the investment returns and the total accumulated pension corpus. |
| Family Benefit | In the event of a retiree’s passing, 60% of the pension will be allocated to their family members. | Family pension depends on the amount saved and the selected annuity plan under NPS. |
| Guaranteed Minimum Pension | Employees with at least 10 years of service are entitled to a minimum pension of ₹10,000 per month. | The minimum pension amount depends on the market performance of the selected investment options. |
| One-Time Lump Sum | Upon retirement, a lump sum is provided, calculated as 1/10th of the last monthly salary for every six months of service. | Employees can withdraw up to 60% of their accumulated corpus as a lump sum upon superannuation. |
| Protection Against Inflation | UPS ensures pension adjustments in line with inflation, based on the All-India Consumer Price Index (AICPI-IW). | NPS does not offer automatic inflation protection or adjustments in line with inflation rates. |
Nature of Contributions and Benefits
The NPS operates as a defined contribution scheme. This means that both the employee and the government contribute to the fund, with the final pension determined by how the investments perform. Employees contribute 10% of their basic salary and dearness allowance, while the government contributes 14%. Upon retirement, employees receive 60% of the accumulated corpus as a lump sum (tax-free) and invest the remaining 40% in an annuity to generate a pension, which is subject to tax.
The UPS, on the other hand, is a mix of defined benefit and contribution schemes. Employees still contribute 10%, but the government’s contribution has been raised to 18.5%, up from 14%. While the UPS does not offer the open-ended growth potential of NPS investments in equity, it provides a guaranteed pension—50% of the average basic pay drawn over the last 12 months before retirement. This guaranteed income is appealing, especially for employees nearing retirement who may value security over market-driven growth.
Guaranteed Income vs. Equity Returns
One of the central differences between the two pension schemes is the type of income employees can expect post-retirement. Under the NPS, returns are market-driven, and employees with a long time horizon can benefit from the equity component. Employees who believe in India’s growth story and have at least 10-20 years until retirement might want to stick with the NPS, as its equity exposure can lead to significant corpus growth over time.
However, the guaranteed income offered by the UPS can be a major advantage for employees seeking stability. Since the UPS guarantees 50% of the average salary over the last year of employment, it ensures a predictable post-retirement lifestyle. For those approaching retirement, this assurance could outweigh the potential returns from the NPS.
Management and Sustainability of UPS
Although the UPS offers a guaranteed pension, experts emphasize that its success depends on effective management. The UPS is expected to be fully funded, meaning that contributions from both employees and the government will go into a corpus. The government’s 18.5% contribution includes an 8.5% allocation to a guarantee reserve fund, designed to cover any potential shortfalls in the pension payments.
The scheme’s long-term sustainability will require strong governance and careful management of the corpus. Given the long-term nature of pension liabilities and increasing longevity, the UPS must be closely monitored to avoid placing additional financial burdens on the government.
Flexibility and Mobility Concerns
The UPS may not offer the same flexibility as the NPS. While younger employees may benefit from the long-term growth potential of equities under the NPS, they also have more mobility in their careers. If a young government employee wishes to move to the private sector, the UPS may not be the ideal option, as it lacks the portability that many modern workers desire.
For employees with less than 10 years of service, the NPS offers greater flexibility. However, the UPS mandates a minimum of 10 years of government employment, which could be a disadvantage for those who may want to switch sectors in the future.
Taxation Considerations
Currently, clarity on the taxation of the UPS is still awaited. Under the NPS, the lump sum received at retirement is tax-free, but the pension received from the annuity is taxed. Experts believe that the pension income under the UPS will likely be taxed at regular income-tax rates, but the specifics are yet to be confirmed by the government.
What Should You Choose?
Choosing between the NPS and UPS depends on various factors, such as your proximity to retirement, investment preferences, and need for guaranteed income. Younger employees with more time before retirement may benefit from staying in the NPS, leveraging the growth potential of equities. On the other hand, senior employees nearing retirement may find the UPS more attractive due to its guaranteed income and inflation-adjusted pension.
Ultimately, the decision rests on whether employees prioritize potential market returns or a stable, guaranteed pension after retirement. The government is expected to provide more detailed guidance in the near future to help employees make an informed decision. However, once a choice is made, it will be final. Hence, careful consideration of long-term goals is essential before opting between the two schemes.
Disclaimer:
This article should not be construed as investment advice, please consult your Investment Adviser before making any sound investment decision.
If you do not have one visit mymoneysage.in
