Angelina Shpilevaya, Researcher of the Laboratory for Mathematical Modeling of Economic Processes at the Gaidar Institute, explained in a comment for “Rossiyskaya Gazeta”, explained why, when discussing the universal pension product (UPP), it is important to correctly assess the replacement rate and take into account who ultimately pays for pension savings.
The expert drew attention to the confusion between two different indicators. The ratio of the average pension paid to the average gross salary compares the actual incomes of two different groups—current retirees and current workers. In July 2026, the average old-age pension was ₽27,200, while the average gross salary in May was ₽110,200. Thus, their ratio was approximately 24.7%.
At the same time, model calculations by the Gaidar Institute show that, against the backdrop of an aging population, the ratio of the average pension to the average salary could decline to 20–23% by 2044, depending on the scenario.
According to Angelina Shpilevaya, economists use another indicator to assess the pension system—the individual replacement rate. It shows what proportion of pre-retirement earnings the first pension of a hypothetical worker with a specific career path represents.
The expert also emphasized that the average figure may mask significant differences among population groups. For low-wage workers, the replacement rate may be higher due to the fixed portion of the pension and social supplements, whereas for high-wage workers, it may be lower despite a significantly higher absolute amount of pension income.
A separate issue is the funding mechanism for the Universal Pension Program (UPP). If employer contributions qualify for tax breaks, such a scheme could become a cheaper way for large companies to retain employees compared to raising salaries. At the same time, small businesses may find it harder to compete for workers.
“The effectiveness of the UPP must be assessed not only by the average replacement rate but also by the individual indicator for the median worker, as well as separately by income groups. Otherwise, the program may raise the average figure at the expense of the high-income group, while leaving the situation of the majority virtually unchanged. It is equally important to understand who actually finances the program—the employer, the employee, or the government through tax breaks—as well as to what extent the accumulated funds will be transferable when changing jobs and accessible to employees of small businesses,” noted Angelina Shpilevaya.