A group of Dutch pension funds has submitted a ‘critical response’ to the amendment of the Future Pensions Act (Wtp) submitted earlier in February by the political parties New Social Contract (NSC) and Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB).

PFZW, together with ABP, Bouw, PME, and PMT, said the proposal to amend the law “removes the foundation of our pension system” and will lead to an additional €18bn in costs (based on a calculation by PwC) if the two systems continue side by side.

NSC and BBB have proposed introducing a mandatory referendum for schemes, which would mean schemes could only transfer to the new system if there is enough support from members.

Specifically, they have proposed that a majority of 50 per cent is required with a turnout of at least 30 per cent for schemes to be able to transfer to the new system.

However, the group of pension funds has highlighted that this would lead to two pension systems operating side by side.

“The strength of our collectivity and solidarity will be broken if, as a result of the amendment, two systems are kept going side by side. This affects all working people and pensioners who are accruing pension entitlements,” the group said in a joint statement.

The group argued that as more schemes move across to the new system, the group left in the old system will become smaller, allowing them to take less risk with investments, and in turn, lead to lower investment yields – and the inability to increase pensions as often.

The group continued: “For participants who do not switch to the new pension system, this means that the old rules will continue to apply. The suggestion is being made that there was a guarantee of a pension that would keep pace with prosperity. These rules prevented pension funds from increasing pensions for years. That is why we want to get rid of them, in the interest of the participants. Because whatever NSC and BBB may say about it, the fact is that a lot of money is currently sitting in the pension funds' buffers.

“With the new pension system, the money will end up where it belongs more quickly: with our participants. Keeping two systems side by side is undesirable and unnecessarily expensive. PwC has calculated that not merging the pension sectors will lead to €18bn in additional costs. And the bill for this will unexpectedly end up with the participants.”

However, NSC MP, Agnes Joseph, who tabled the proposal together with NSC leader, Pieter Omtzigt, and BBB member, Henk Vermeer, believes that the introduction of the referendum can tie in with the procedures already underway and the information to members, former members and pensioners that is necessary anyway. It expects no delay and no significant costs from the referendum.

NSC and BBB feel that citizens have been sidelined by this new pension law. By introducing a collective referendum, they expect to maintain and increase citizens' trust in the pension system and prevent a rush of objectors to the courts.

Several court cases relating to the transition have already been raised. Stichting Beroepspensioenfonds Loodsen (BPL), the Dutch pension fund for pilots, which became the first scheme to transition at the start of 2025 faced a setback when a member raised a legal challenge.

Members were informed of the transition one month before the date. However, the member in question felt that one month was too short to complete calculations for the new scheme.

Although the court ruled that the time was short, it noted that the pension statement showed that the member's pension would increase by 8 per cent. Therefore, it concluded that no time was needed to adjust expenses for a reduced pension.

In addition, earlier this month legal experts filed a complaint with BPL arguing that the board committed embezzlement when switching to the new pension system. The experts involved suggested that pension funds from the scheme were transferred outside of the reach of participants, "deliberately, unlawfully and without the consent of the participants".

In addition, it pointed out that these funds will be used, in whole or in part, for purposes other than participants' pensions.

The complaint also suggested that the issue could become bigger in future as the transition to the new pension system continues, warning that the approximately 1,000 directors of the 150 other pension funds will also be guilty of embezzling pension funds when they enter.

---