OpenLobby.EU
Explore

PensioPlus

PensioPlus

PensioPlus, previously called The Belgian Association of Pension Institutions (BAPI), is a non-profit organisation established in 1975 to unite Belgian IORPs (Institutions for Occupational Retirement Provision) and organizors of sector pension plans.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Damian Boeselager (Member of the European Parliament)

24 Nov 2025 · IORP

Meeting with Marco La Marca (Cabinet of Commissioner Dubravka Šuica) and Microsoft Corporation and

6 May 2025 · Demographic Policy

Response to Rationalisation of reporting requirements

1 Dec 2023

PensioPlus welcomes the European Commissions initiative to ease burdensome reporting requirements. Administrative burden is identified by Belgian IORPs as greatest threat to their survival. In the past years, the regulatory burden on IORPs has increased significantly due to the 2016 review of the IORP Directive, the introduction of additional EIOPA reporting requirements and applicable horizontal legislation such as sustainable finance legislation and Digital Operational Resiliance Act (DORA). After the introduction of IORPII the number of IORPs decreased already by 25%. This administrative burden also has detrimental effects resulting in additional financial burdens on the Pension Funds members and beneficiaries, ultimately diminishing pension benefits. Legislation should much more acknowledge that IORPs should not be treated as purely financial service providers as highlighted in recital 32 of the IORP II directive. We support the alignment of reporting requirements for pension funds, maintaining minimum harmonization as a guiding principle (as being highlighted in the IORP II directive). Striking the right balance between regulatory oversight and the operational needs of pension funds is essential to ensure the long-term financial well-being of pension funds and pension beneficiaries. PensioPlus advocates for the stabilisation of regulations. The continual evolution of reporting requirements necessitates the adjustment of systems of and national procedures, leading to unwarranted and counterproductive complexity. As a guiding principle future changes to the IORP II directive should primarily aim to reduce costs and reduce reporting requirements.
Read full response

Response to Open finance framework

24 Oct 2023

Occupational pension funds (IORPs) are included in the scope of this proposal. PensioPlus stresses that second pillar pension funds are inherently different from other financial market entities. IORPs are not-for-profit, they operate in a triangular relationship with social partners and do not have any shareholders and, most importantly, they do not sell any products, since employees mainly benefit from mandatory affiliation to the occupational pension scheme based on their employment relationship, and as such these employees are not consumers pure sang. Second pillars pensions are supplementary to first pillar pensions. Combining financial information on second pillar pension plans with other financial products, without including information on 1st pillar pension plans and only partial information on 2nd and 3rd pillar plans (and by excluding life insurance products other than insurance-based investment products) gives individuals a misleading picture on their financial situation. Open finance should build on existing pension tracking services Pension data sharing already exists in national and EU pension tracking services, which give an overview of pension entitlements for different pension pillars. Belgium has already developed pension tracking tools that enable beneficiaries to get a comprehensive overview of future financial needs. The Belgian tracking tool www.mypension.be allow pension participants to check their pension record and how their pension grows. Pension data in the open finance framework should build on these pension tracking services and use the information that is already available in these systems. The pension sector should be able to use a stakeholder driver approach to developing data standards, to ensure that it considers the specificities of the pension funds sector and differences between Member States. Also, the open finance framework should complement the existing practices in the market. Importantly, the open finance framework should recognize national approaches and procedures and should not create an additional layer of regulation which might lead to excessive administrative costs for pension funds or statutory pension providers. Sharing data through pension tracking services makes it possible for pension funds to pool costs for setting up and maintaining data sharing infrastructure. Many European pension funds are very small and would not be able to carry such costs independently. Pension tracking services make it possible for them to participate in data sharing, so that a more complete pension overview can be provided. The open finance framework should therefore allow pension funds to share data through a third party. It should allow for such a third party, the pension tracking service, to be organized as a private entity, public-private partnership or a public entity. The open finance framework should further respect national differences in ways to share and allow for pension data to be updated periodically. Member States should be able to choose between a live access or central data storage model. Pension transactions are infrequent and highly expectable. A delay in updating pension data should therefore be acceptable. In Belgium the pension tracking services uses a central data storage model, in which data are updated annually, or more often if specific events occur. In the Impact Assessment the EC only looks at the cost to develop an API. The Impact Assessment does not look at the cost to provide real time data. Moreover many IORPs use salary information and other employee data that is provided by the sponsors and collected through the Social Security system. To provide real time data these Social Security systems and data collection processes would require redesigning as well. It is clear that the cost of both redesign of pension administration systems and Social Security information collection is tens of magnitudes higher than the cost of developing an API.
Read full response

Meeting with Stefaan Hermans (Cabinet of Commissioner Marianne Thyssen), Vasiliki Kokkori (Cabinet of Commissioner Marianne Thyssen)

14 Apr 2016 · Pensions

Meeting with Mette Toftdal Grolleman (Cabinet of Commissioner Jonathan Hill)

6 Apr 2016 · IOPS

Meeting with Vasiliki Kokkori (Cabinet of Commissioner Marianne Thyssen)

18 Feb 2016 · Preparations for the conference at which Commissioner Thyssen will deliver the opening address, March 1st

Meeting with Marianne Thyssen (Commissioner) and

16 Jun 2015 · Priorities on pensions