Διεθνή, λογιστικά πρότυπα και αποτύπωση υποχρέωσεων συντάξεων του Β΄ Πυλώνα
SubjectΛογιστική -- Πρότυπα
KeywordsΔιεθνή λογιστικά πρότυπα ; Πυλώνες ασφάλισης ; Επικουρικές συντάξεις ; Κεφαλαιοποιητικό σύστημα ; Διανεμητικό σύστημα ; Πρόγραμμα καθορισμένων παροχών ; Πρόγραμμα καθορισμένων εισφορών
Without doubt, globalization has set a high standard of competitiveness among listed companies worldwide. Taking this into consideration, the European Union decided that there is an urgent need for adopting appropriate measures, which would eventually lead to resolving any financial problem encountered by enterprises based in Europe. These measures would help Europe's economy to become a computable global force, through modernisation and enhancement. One of these measures was the adoption along with the application of the International Accounting Standards, which would improve the transparency as well as the comparability of the companies’ financial results, making any financial decision grounded, since it would based on reliable data. E. U. Member-States’ harmonisation with the International Accounting Standards was certainly not easy and differed per case. Focusing on Greece and especially on the I.A.S. 19, "Employee Benefits", implementation, of the companies were obliged to automatically display the actuarial gains and losses in the "Other Comprehensive Income" field. Under other circumstances, this would not be a problem, but the application of I.A.S. 19 presupposed a strict distinction between the private and public sectors, making Greek companies face difficulties due to the construction of the insurance system. Depending on the country’s financial model the insurance system is divided into pay-as-you go and funded system. This distinction, combined with the identity of system’s guarantor, leads to three types of categorization of insurance schemes, the so-called “Pillars of Security”. At the present time, the social security system in most Member States of E.U., is based on all three Pillars with the concurrent coexistence of both funded and pay-as-you-go systems. As a matter of fact, in Greece the PAYG and the first pillar prevail, while the second pillar is considered to be the Occupational Insurance Funds. However, there is no clear and exact distinction as far as the pillars of security are concerned. So this makes it difficult to identify the guarantor. This very point was the main problem encountered by the application of I.A.S. 19, since this was not foreseen by the pay-as-you-go system. So, companies that were categorized as First pillar were treated as Second and consequently had to apply I.A.S. 19. The first results stemming from specific economic studies conducted due to the forthcoming implementation of the Standard, were unexpectedly bad. A few companies saw a reduction in their Net Worth and some were even threatened with withdrawal of their authorization. The integration of the Bank’s Supplementary Pension Funds in Greece was an attempt to delimit between the public and private sectors. This almost ended in failure since it was accused of involving state aid. The European Commission not only rejected this characterization but also used this decision as a model in subsequent relevant cases, always monitoring closely and judging harshly, so that the State administration would not interfere at all in the competitiveness among companies and would avoid in the long run potentially becoming a panacea.