Company pension scheme

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Company pension scheme ( bAV ) is the collective term for all financial benefits that an employer promises to an employee on the basis of his employment relationship for retirement provision , provision of entitled surviving dependents in the event of death or for disability benefits in the event of occupational disability.


The law for the improvement of company pension schemes (BetrAVG) grants in § 1a BetrAVG a legal right of the employee against his employer to convert parts of his wages or salaries for use for the company pension scheme. In addition to an additional pension, this also offers tax and social security benefits. More details are primarily regulated in the EStG and the SvEV .

The uniform supply conditions for all employees of a company or company or groups of them are often laid down in a pension scheme.

Implementation methods of the company pension

The following options are available in the company pension scheme:

  • In the case of direct commitments , the employer provides the employee benefits from the company pension scheme. To this end, the employer creates provisions on the balance sheet on the liabilities side and can capitalize these on the balance sheet by means of a reinsurance policy . He is free in the choice and type of financial investment that is intended to finance the direct commitment, with the obligation to contribute to the pension insurance association.
  • The Unterstützungskasse is equipped with special assets unincorporated supply means, the back cover (congruent) or reserve funds pad is. It does not formally give the beneficiary any legal entitlement and is subject to contributions in the pension insurance association.
  • The pension fund is an independent insurance company. The payments are limited for tax purposes in accordance with Section 3 No. 63 EStG .
  • The direct insurance is a product of a life insurance company. Since 2005 there have been many analogies to the pension fund, in particular the tax framework of Section 3 No. 63 EStG; Before 2005, direct insurance was taxed at a flat rate in the expectancy phase in accordance with Section 40b of the Income Tax Act and subject to income share taxation in the pension phase .
  • The pension fund was introduced in 2002 as a means of implementing company pension schemes. It allows for a high equity quota and is also taxed under Section 3 No. 63 EStG. He is (beneficiary) liable to pay contributions to the pension insurance association.

Direct insurance, the pension fund and the pension fund are referred to as indirect ( insurance-like ) implementation channels, since they are financed by a legally independent company.

In addition to the desired amount of the promised benefit, tax and accounting law as well as corporate policy reasons are decisive for the selection of the implementation method.

Beneficiary groups of people

Company pension schemes can be promised to employees - more precisely: employees, workers, trainees and (non-) controlling shareholders - managing directors of a GmbH - as well as members of the board of a stock corporation.

Furthermore, company pension schemes can be promised to non-company employees on the occasion of (exclusive) work for a company.

Reasons for and against the establishment of a company pension scheme

Point of view of the employee

From the employee's point of view, a company pension is primarily worthwhile for reasons of saving tax and social security law components. The subsequent benefits from the supply (capital, pension) are subsequently taxable; As the income in old age is usually lower than in the qualifying phase, the pensioner benefits from the lower tax rate. The deferred compensation primarily serves as a precautionary component alongside and supplements the statutory pension. On the other hand, this means that with deferred compensation, a net wage loss is immediately accepted. At the same time, the statutory pension entitlements and compensation payments in the event of unemployment are reduced. The deferred compensation system intervenes directly in the development of the statutory pension and records those who are excluded from the deferred compensation concept.

The GKV Modernization Act (GMG) , which came into force on January 1, 2004 , introduced the obligation to pay health insurance and care contributions to company pension schemes. The pensioner has to bear the contributions to health insurance for pensioners (KVdR) and long-term care (PVdR) alone. This does not affect those with private health insurance. Company pensioners who have statutory or voluntary health insurance and who, for example, have continued to pay the contributions on their own after leaving a company, do not have to pay any KVdR for benefits resulting therefrom, provided they are registered as policyholders . This has been clarified by the case law of the BVerfG with a resolution of September 28, 2010 (1 BvR 1660/08). If the pension is lower than one twentieth of the reference value (( § 18 SGB ​​IV), § 226 SGB ​​V, so-called minor limit), there is no compulsory health insurance.

View of the employer

The salary components converted for the purpose of company pension schemes are not subject to social security contributions. For the employer, the employer's share of social security is therefore reduced, unless individual or collective bargaining agreements provide for compensation. From a tax point of view, employee pension expenses are business expenses . With the company pension scheme, the employer also has a set of instruments for employee loyalty and motivation. Prestige and the working atmosphere can be positively influenced.

The employment contract is subject to the service law of the BGB, modified by labor law principles. The employer is obliged to explain the disadvantages and effects of the company pension. For example, the employee waives statutory pension entitlements such as reduced old-age pension and disability entitlements for the converted part of his wages. The continued payment of wages in the event of illness or unemployment benefits are also reduced. The employer runs into liability risks when giving advice. Legal advice in the area of ​​company pension schemes is reserved for approved pension advisors and lawyers.

Labor law basics

Principle of equal treatment

The principle of equal treatment prohibits the employer from putting individual employees in a worse position than other employees without objective reasons and in a comparable situation. The employer may not arbitrarily or for irrelevant reasons exclude individual employees from granting benefits or benefits. In this context, an employee may not be arbitrarily excluded from an established company pension scheme. Likewise, he must not be disadvantaged when setting up a company pension scheme. The principle of equal treatment already applies to the formation of comparison groups. However, the principle of equal treatment is not applicable if individual employees are in a better position regardless of abstract differentiating features (cf. e.g. Federal Labor Court, judgment of September 29, 2004, 5 AZR 43/04).

Relationship of the BetrAVG to the AGG

The General Equal Treatment Act (AGG) specifies the principle of equal treatment. The BetrAVG takes precedence over the AGG as a lex specialis. Insofar as the BetrAVG does not contain any special regulations, there remains scope for the application of the general provisions, i. H. the AGG also applies in this respect to company pension schemes.

Entitlement to deferred compensation

Employees who are compulsorily insured in the statutory pension insurance have a legal right to convert parts of their salaries into a company pension scheme (so-called salary conversion), § 1a i. V. m. Section 17 BetrAVG. The entitlement exists up to an amount of 4% of the BBG (West) in the DRV . In 2017 this is up to € 3,048 per year. It should be noted that collective bargaining law , as collective labor law, generally has priority for collective wages in the case of salary conversion. By means of a collective bargaining clause, the collective agreement gives employees the opportunity to invest part of their collective wages or salaries in a company pension. This does not affect legal claims to conversion of salaries for salary components above and outside the collective bargaining agreement. Employees who are not bound by a trade union have a legal right to a deferred salary from collective wage payments in the absence of a declaration of general liability in accordance with Section 17 (5) of the Company Pension Act .

The opting-out model (or opt-out model ) means automatic salary conversion : if employees do not want to be included in the employee-financed company pension scheme, they must expressly decide against it. Otherwise, this is done with the savings rates and forms of investment proposed by the employer.


Company pension schemes are based on employer's commitments under labor law (Section 1 I BetrAVG). Commitments can be made in individual contracts (individually through a labor law amendment or addition) or as a benefit to certain groups in the company or collectively based on a works agreement or collective bargaining agreement . A salary conversion agreement changes or supplements the employment contract.

Types of commitment

  • Benefit commitment: The employer promises his employee a certain benefit (e.g. € 1,000 pension, € 100,000 lump-sum benefit or € 100,000 in the event of death or disability).
  • Contribution-based performance commitment (BOLZ): This commitment is usually used in the insurance-like implementation channels. The employer promises his employee to pay a certain amount regularly or once to a pension fund and thus promises the resulting benefit (e.g. the guaranteed expiry benefit in the case of direct insurance).
  • Contribution commitment with minimum benefit (BZML): Introduced for the pension fund. Expanded today. The employer is liable for the contributions paid minus the scheduled contributions for biometric risks (old age, disability, death). One advantage of this form of commitment is that the employer does not have to make any adjustment checks in the employee's retirement phase ( Section 16 (3) BetrAVG).
  • Pure defined contribution: This commitment form may from 1 January 2018 the newly created § 1 Paragraph 1 Sentence 3 BetrAVG within the. Company pension Support Act be agreed. So far it has been the case that pure contribution commitments, i.e. promises by the employer to pay a certain contribution into an old-age pension and leave the investment risk to the employee, was not possible in Germany. The employer was always liable for the commitment given (obligation to pay § 1 I 3 BetrAVG). The employer may not refuse the right to a salary conversion within the framework of Section 1a BetrAVG.

Company pension schemes are not possible for entrepreneurs (legally: self-employed).

Consequences of leaving direct insurance, pension funds and pension funds

The type of commitment has effects on portability , the calculation of the non-forfeitable entitlement upon departure and the resulting liability consequences for the employer.

  • With the benefit commitment, it is not possible to transfer the credit to a new employer. If the employee leaves the company, their vested entitlement is calculated according to the so-called rateable or pro-rata-temporis method. This applies to all implementation routes. Mathematically, the promised benefit is taken (e.g. 1000 € monthly pension at the age of 65) and compared with the possible and actual employment time (entry with 35 = 30 possible years of service at 65): leaving with 45 (= 10 years Seniority) divided by 30 years of possible seniority results in 1/3 of € 1000 (promised pension), i.e. € 333 monthly pension.
  • The advantage of the contribution-based benefit commitment is that, according to Section 2, Paragraph 2, Clauses 1–3 of the BetrAVG, the “insurance contract procedure” can be used. If the employer fulfills the requirements according to Section 2 (2) sentence 2 BetrAVG, the insurance contract - relieving the employer of liability - is transferred to the employee. With the insurance contract procedure, the insurance contract with the share credit on the departure date is transferred to the employee with the old employer by changing the policyholder. They can then continue the contract with their own contributions or have it transferred to a new employer ( Section 4 (2) BetrAVG) or to another insurance company (Section 4 (3) BetrAVG) by changing the policyholder.
  • The contribution commitment with minimum benefit was introduced for the pension fund. Since the insurance contract procedure cannot be used here, the employer is generally liable for the entire contract (including for privately paid contributions) after the employee leaves the company, until the contract has been transferred to a new employer by changing the policyholder after a change of employer. However, this liability can be nullified by an insurance contract limitation of claims . Insofar as this type of commitment was introduced for the pension fund, it can nonetheless be used for direct insurance and pension funds (facts of Section 3.63 EStG).
  • On January 1, 2018 has been with the company pension law to strengthen the Pure defined contribution 63 Income Tax Act for the means of implementation of § 3 no. Introduced. It is subject to implementation by the collective bargaining parties . The employee is granted the right vis-à-vis the pension institution to transfer the pension to another pension institution within one year after termination of the employment relationship. The prerequisite will be that the new employer continues to pay contributions as part of a “pure contribution commitment” (new Section 22 (3) No. 1 b BetrAVG).


If an employee leaves the company before the insured event occurs (reaching the age limit, death or disability), he or she will receive an entitlement if the statutory vesting periods have been met. The employer can deviate from these limits in whole or in part to the benefit of the employee (contractual non-forfeiture).

Statutory vesting

Commitments that have been made since January 1, 2018 are legally vested if they have been in place for at least three years at the time the employee leaves the company and the employee has also reached the age of 21.


  • From December 21, 1974 to December 31, 2000, a ten-year commitment period and the completion of the 35th year of life were necessary for vesting. There was also the rule that the commitment existed for at least three years with a minimum of 12 years of service and the completion of the 35th year of life.
  • From January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2008, the commitment period was five years and the employee had reached the age of 30.

Before the Company Pension Act came into force on December 21, 1974, there were no statutory provisions on vesting.

Immediate vesting

Deferred compensation has been vested immediately since 2001. Commitments are therefore non-forfeitable from the employee's first contribution payment. In the case of employer-financed company pension schemes, too, claims can be subject to immediate vesting, provided this is agreed in the contract.

Compensation for claims

Vested claims can be settled in accordance with § 3 BetrAVG if an employee leaves. The employer has a unilateral right to severance pay if the employee has acquired minor entitlements. These entitlements must not exceed 1% or 12/10 of the monthly reference value according to Section 18 (1), fourth book of the Social Security Code (SGB IV). For 2017 this means: 29.75 € monthly pension or 3570 € capital (West). If the employee makes use of his or her right to portability because of a change of employer , a severance payment will not be granted.

This regulation does not apply to transfers of business according to § 613a BGB.

Transfer of existing entitlements (portability)

Section 4 BetrAVG regulates the transfer of existing (non-forfeitable) entitlements of an employee to a company pension from the old to the new employer after a change of company. Section 4 BetrAVG also regulates the transfer of current services.

The so-called amicable transfer is regulated for all implementation methods of operational supply . This takes place either through the acceptance of the commitment by the new employer or through the transfer of the transfer value. In the second case, the employer must grant a pension equal to the transfer value. There is no entitlement to the previous implementation route plus additional risk protection (s). There is also no entitlement to insurance coverage from a specific insurer.

In order not to suffer any tax disadvantages within the meaning of Section 3 No. 55 EStG, the benefits must be transferred within the tax system. A pension commitment according to § 6b EStG, for example, cannot be transferred tax-free to a pension fund according to § 3.63 EStG, just as a direct company insurance according to § 40b EStG cannot be transferred to a support fund according to § 4a EStG.

In addition to the amicable transfer, according to Section 4 (3) BetrAVG a legal right to transfer in the cases of Section 3.63 EStG provision via the implementation channels: direct insurance, pension fund or pension fund. The legal entitlement takes effect within one year of the old employer's leaving the company and only applies to commitments made after January 1, 2005. The amount of legal entitlements is limited to entitlements whose values ​​do not exceed the BBG / DRV limits applicable in the respective year (2017: € 76,200 / west and € 68,400 / east).

Information and notification obligations

Section 4a of the BetrAVG regulates the employee's right to information from the employer. This requires a legitimate interest, for example the question of the advisability of supplementary pension provision, of the employee. In the event of a change of company, information must be provided, for example, on the amount of vested benefits acquired upon reaching the age limit and the amount of the transfer value of an entitlement in the event of portability implementation. The new employer has to explain, for example, whether biometric risks, such as occupational disability insurance or survivors protection, are granted.

There are notification obligations to the social security agencies and tax offices involved.

Consumption and credit prohibition

Section 5 BetrAVG regulates that current benefits from a company pension scheme may not be reduced by increasing other pension payments. It is also legally stipulated that further retirement provisions of the employee may not be taken into account when determining the pension benefits from the company pension scheme. This entitlement is particularly important for overall commitments for company pension schemes. According to Section 5 (2) BetrAVG, the offsetting prohibition does not apply to pensions from the statutory pension insurance , insofar as they are based on mandatory contributions , as well as to other pension payments , at least half of which are based on contributions or grants from the employer .

Adaptation review obligation

According to Section 16 of the BetrAVG, the employer is obliged " to check an adjustment of the current benefits of the company pension scheme every three years and to decide on this at its reasonable discretion (...) ". In this check, the employer may also take the company's economic situation into account. The examination does not have to lead to the result that the benefits will be increased after three years.

If the economic situation of the company allows an increase, the employer has to orientate himself on the consumer price index for Germany or on the net wage development of comparable employee groups of the company in the examination period (§ 16 Abs. 2 BetrAVG).

Since this procedure is very time-consuming, the legislature has created options to dispense with the obligation to adapt or to have the obligation to adapt to be considered fulfilled (Section 16 (3) BetrAVG). The facts are:

  • The current benefits are increased annually by at least 1% (Section 16 (3) No. 1 BetrAVG).
  • The company pension scheme is carried out through a direct insurance company or a pension fund and it is provided that all surpluses are used to increase the current benefits (Section 16 (3) No. 2 BetrAVG).
  • A contribution commitment with a minimum benefit has been issued (Section 16 (3) No. 3 BetrAVG).

If the employer has checked the adjustment and comes to the conclusion that the benefits do not have to or cannot be adjusted, this omitted adjustment does not have to be made up (Section 16 (4) BetrAVG).

In the case of deferred compensation, the pension must either be increased by 1% per year or the surpluses are used in full to increase benefits.

From 1 January 2018 as part of the occupational pension law to strengthen a new Zusageart introduced the so-called pure defined contribution . In addition, § 1 para. 2a, 2nd sub-clause BetrAVG clarifies that " the employer's obligations according to paragraph 1 sentence 3, § 1a paragraph 4 sentence 2, §§ 1b to 6 and 16 as well as the insolvency insurance obligation according to the fourth section ... (pure contribution commitment) "does not exist. For pure contribution commitments, there is therefore no obligation to check for adjustments.

Forms of financing

Depending on who pays the contributions, one speaks of employer-financed or employee-financed pension. Mixed forms are possible and common in today's business traffic.

Operational supply of shareholder managers (GGF)


The partner-managing director (GGF) has a double function. In terms of status, he is employer and employee in one person. In most cases, GGFs have high incomes, which is why their provision in the context of company pension schemes is of particular importance. The GGF's pension gaps are regularly high, as the claims from the statutory pension insurance are relatively shortened by the contribution cap of the BBG / DRV and can even be almost canceled with (dominant) GGF due to their freedom from social insurance.

Special features of the GGF

This dual function of the GGF has an impact on its treatment under social security law as well as its employment and tax law status.

Effects on social security law

A GGF's freedom from social insurance depends on how many capital shares it holds in the company and how much voting rights are exercised in relation to other shareholders. Social security exemption results when it can prevent decisions. There is also an argument in favor of domination of the company under social security law if there are indications such as sole power of representation , freedom of instruction or own entrepreneurial risk at GGF.

According to Section 7a of the fourth book of the Social Code (SGB IV), the social security status of the GGF is compulsorily checked at the request of the collection agency . After forwarding the information, the clearing house of the German Pension Insurance Federation checks the factual requirements. By way of its own application process, the GGF can arrange for a retrospective review of its status, with the possibility of reimbursement of social security contributions that have been wrongly paid . The reimbursement period is limited by law to four years. Previous contributions are regarded as mandatory contributions . The decision of the clearing house is binding on the Federal Employment Agency if the GGF does not oppose the exemption through compulsory insurance on application or voluntary insurance .

Labor law implications

As with independent entrepreneurs the provisions of the find operation Pensions Act concerning dominant GGF not apply. It follows that, for example, there is no insolvency protection and no statutory regulation on the non-forfeiture of claims. A GGF exercises control over the company under insolvency law if it alone has ≥ 50% capital shares or voting rights, or several GGFs with ≤ 50% company shares control the company and none of the GGF has a majority stake.

A GGF that is not subject to the BetrAVG must be granted an unconditional, irrevocable subscription right in its favor in order to protect its claims against third parties in the event of insolvency. Provisions through the pension commitment or the provident fund only enjoy insolvency protection if the GGF has the claims contractually pledged . A shareholder resolution is necessary for the pledge of claims. In the case of lien maturity , the pledge results in deposit rights, transfer or payment claims .

Tax implications

The tax law recognition of a pension commitment to a GGF is subject to a set of requirements. The GGF must be in an employment relationship that exempts from the prohibition of self-contracting . The fact that you are allowed to conclude legal transactions with yourself for the company in your own name must also be entered in the commercial register. By means of a shareholders' resolution, a written, unconditional pension agreement must be made that grants legal claims to a capital or pension.

The GGF is controlled under tax law if it has ≥ 50% capital shares / voting rights in the company, or if several shareholders have the same interests (no one may be solely controlling), ≤ 50% shares are sufficient by virtue of the attribution of shares.

Special features of the pension commitment and benefit fund

For pension commitments, provisions can be made on the liabilities side in the tax balance sheet . These pension provisions may only be effectively formed if a commitment under civil law has been issued that meets the formal requirements of Section 6a of the Income Tax Act and the commitment does not lead to an oversupply in an overall view. There is no oversupply if the GGF pension does not exceed 75% of the last active remuneration (= all income relevant to labor law) on the respective balance sheet date . Commitments financed through salary conversion are not taken into account in this context.

For provident funds applies that benefits only as operating expenses are recognized when an effective civil commitment was granted analogous to the pension plan that does not cause oversupply. A requirement corresponding to § 6a EStG is not contained in the taxable event § 4d EStG for the relief fund .

The tax authorities and the law call for a more specific prerequisites for a pension commitment not tax the principle of hidden profit distribution fails (VGA). Criteria that have to be fulfilled are: Erdienbarkeit the commitment, recognition legal trial , adequacy of remuneration , affordability , financing age (focus solely on the old-age pension ), customary and special vesting requirements . The aim is to prevent the appropriation of profits and the company's pecuniary advantages from being inappropriately transferred to tax-effective operating expenses (vGA). In particular, a vGA is indicated if an orderly and conscientious manager would not have granted the benefits to a manager who is not also a partner (so-called "third-party settlement").

Special questions about GGF care (overview)

severance pay

  • The non-controlling GGF is subject to Section 3 of the Company Pension Act and is on an equal footing with ordinary employees (see above).
  • The following applies to the controlling GGF: Non-forfeitable pension entitlements can be settled, but must be recorded in a written severance agreement. If the severance payment is lower than the entitlement, there is a tax-relevant partial waiver at present value .


  • The non-controlling GGF can always waive forfeitable entitlements. In addition, the BetrAVG does not provide for a right of waiver in addition to the possible limited severance payment right.
  • The controlling GGF can waive non-forfeitable entitlements upon leaving the company. When leaving the company, however, the GGF does not regularly waive its vested claims, but "freezes" them ( past service ), which the tax authorities regularly do not regard as a tax-relevant partial waiver of the future service .

Statutory insolvency insurance

Legally non-forfeitable entitlements as well as ongoing benefits in favor of employees are insolvency- protected in the case of the direct commitment , the benevolent fund and the pension fund via the pension protection association . The protection exists within certain performance limits ( Section 7 (3) BetrAVG). In the event of liquidation without bankruptcy , however, this security does not apply.

For holders of forfeitable pension entitlements or for non-employees (e.g. members of the executive bodies of corporations , e.g. members of the management board of stock corporations ), instead or in addition, insolvency protection options are available through the pledging of reinsurance contracts or the so-called contractual trust arrangements , or CTA for short . Pension entitlements for controlling shareholder-managing directors (GGF) (GmbH) are not subject to the obligation to contribute to the pension insurance association, as they are not subject to the Company Pension Act (BetrAVG).

Company pension schemes within the framework of collective agreements

Collective bargaining agreements are often made in order to bring about industry solutions. The treatment of the tax and social security contributions also correspond to the chosen implementation method . In many cases, contributions from deferred compensation are topped up by the employer with grants. In other cases, employer-financed pension systems are designed independently of deferred compensation. In practice, combinations of employer-financed contributions, which are also subsidized with additional salary conversion, are common. The collective agreement for medical assistants and the collective agreement for pharmacies that came into force in January 2012 are clear examples of this.

As a rule, in the case of collective bargaining agreements, an immediate non-forfeiture of the employer's benefits is agreed. In principle, most collective agreements are freely structured with regard to the provider to cover the company pension scheme.

Important collective agreements with a high level of penetration among the workforce are, for example, TV Metall or TV DeHoga .

Employer benefits mostly consist of pure employer contributions to provide for the employee or employer's allowances, which are either fixed as a percentage of a salary conversion or linked to the amount of the social security contributions saved. Taking into account the collective bargaining clause, salary conversions, salaries, annual special payments, capital-forming benefits or vacation pay can be regulated by collective agreements.

Effects for the employer

Depending on the implementation method, there are different effects:

  • In principle, the employer alone is entitled to choose the provider of the company pension scheme. This results in general notification and information obligations.
  • The employer is liable for the pension commitment made. He has a liability obligation by way of subsidiary liability. As a result, the employer may be required to make additional contributions in the event of a benefit. In the case of direct insurance and pension funds, the question of liability is almost irrelevant, since, like life insurance companies, these are currently (2019) 0.90% p. a. Guarantee interest (before costs). In the case of pension funds, this liability can become relevant in practice. Therefore, he is also subject to the obligation to contribute to the pension insurance association .
  • For employers, it is essential to deal with the legal background of company pension solutions in order to provide employees with comprehensive information.
  • The Federal Association of Legal Advisers for Company Pension Plans and Working Time Accounts derives from this and underpinned by an expert opinion from 2011 by the labor law processor and then President of the German Legal Association Martin Henssler :
    • In the absence of information, however, employers often underestimate the fact that the advisory process is mostly in the area of ​​legal advice that is subject to authorization under the Legal Services Act (RDG), which in principle can only be provided by authorized legal advisors.
    • In the case of incorrect employee advice, the employer would be liable in the first step as if it were his own fault. This results from the legal constellation of the advisory process, in which the commissioned advisors assume the position of vicarious agents within the meaning of § 278 BGB.
    • The employer can only obtain outsourcing of liability by engaging a legal advisor who is authorized to provide legal advice in the area of ​​company pension schemes. These are never insurance brokers and financial service providers, but only lawyers and court-approved pension advisors.
  • In the case of salary conversion, social security contributions including contributions to the professional association are saved on the converted contributions, but only up to an annual contribution amount of 4% of the contribution assessment ceiling to the DRV.
  • In the case of a direct commitment, the employer must show pension provisions in his balance sheet. This can also be the case with other implementation methods. A direct impact / disclosure in the company's balance sheet is only found in the case of implementation routes in which a provision must be made, i.e. in particular in the case of direct commitments.
  • In the case of indirect pension commitments, only the expenses that are necessary for future service provision are to be taken into account. Similar to the determination of taxable profits, the expenses for contributions to relief funds, contributions and insurance premiums to be paid are recorded as expenses for the financial year in which they are incurred.

See also


  • Andreas Buttler, Markus Keller: Introduction to company pension schemes , 8th edition, VVW , Karlsruhe 2017, ISBN 978-3-89952-979-1 .
  • Kurt Kemper, Margret Kisters-Kölkes: Labor Law Fundamentals of Company Pensions , 9th, revised edition, Luchterhand, Cologne 2017, ISBN 978-3-472-08992-6 .
  • Reinhold Höfer: Company pension law (BetrAVG): Comment. Law for the Improvement of Company Pension Plans (Company Pension Act - BetrAVG) , Franz Vahlen, Munich [2016], ISBN 3-8006-1644-0 .
  • Birgit Uebelhack, Sabine Drochner: Die Betriebsrente: Textsammlung 2016 , 14th, revised and expanded edition, published by the aba , Working Group for Company Pensions eV, Berlin, CF Müller, Heidelberg [2016], ISBN 978-3-8114-3862 -0 .
  • Peter A. Doetsch, Arne E. Lenz: Pension commitments to shareholders, managing directors and board members: tax recognition - insolvency protection - design - sample texts . 10th edition. VVW, Karlsruhe 2017, ISBN 978-3-89952-958-6 .

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. Federal Constitutional Court, 1st Senate: Federal Constitutional Court - Decisions - Violation of Article 3 Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law by stating an obligation to contribute to statutory health insurance for capital benefits from life insurances taken out as direct insurance, the contributions of which are paid by an employee after the end of his employment under the position of the policyholder were. September 28, 2010, accessed June 17, 2018 .
  2. cf. Cisch in Förster / Cisch / Karst, Company Pension Act, 14th edition, Munich 2014
  3. Christian Rolfs: 3 x company pension scheme , published on April 9, 2018 on Beck blog
  4. Draft of a law to strengthen company pension schemes and to amend other laws (company pension strengthening law); P. 7
  5. ^ Judgments of the BGH of July 10, 1997 and confirming April 7, 2005
  6. Ministry of Finance of North Rhine-Westphalia: Tax effects of a shareholder-manager's waiver of a pension entitlement ( Memento from February 2, 2014 in the Internet Archive )
  7. Freezing of pension commitments on the past service / waiver of the future service; Order of the OFD Hanover of August 11, 2009 (S 2742 - 202 - StO 241)  ( page no longer available , search in web archivesInfo: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link /  
  8. ^ Franz-Alois Fischer: The enforcement of the company pension claim against a liquidated GmbH . In: NJOZ 2014, 1601–1606.
  9. Klaus Dernedde: Company pensions and wage reservation . 2nd edition, p. 16 ff.
  10. Collective agreement on company pension schemes for employees and trainees for pharmaceutical and commercial clerks in pharmacies (PDF; 41 kB)
  11. Super User: Expert opinion. Retrieved June 17, 2018 (German).
  12. Wolfgang Förster, The operational supply in Cramer / Förster / Ruland, Handbook for Pensions, Frankfurt am Main 1998, ISBN 3 7819 0626 4 , pp. 201 ff., 210-211