CERGE-EI Statement on the Attack against IDEA’s Independent Study on Pension Funds

23 July, 2026

CERGE-EI, a joint workplace of Charles University’s Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education and the Economics Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences, which includes the Institute for Democracy and Economic Analysis (IDEA), rejects the attack by the Czech Association of Pension Companies on the study Pension Fund Clients Trapped by Low Returns and High Fees, which examines the third pillar of the pension system.

The study was prepared using available data and economic methods commonly applied in international research. It also underwent an external peer-review process involving Czech and international experts. It aims to contribute to an expert debate on how to make the Czech pension system more effective, for the benefit of its millions of participants and the efficient use of public funds.

The planned reform of supplementary pension savings, for which the study has served as one of the supporting documents, could fundamentally change the economics of the entire sector to the benefit of clients. This makes the manner in which the Czech Association of Pension Companies is attempting to discredit the study all the more serious.

“We do not regard this approach as a standard academic dispute, but as an unacceptable attempt to exert pressure on an independent research institution and divert attention from the substance of the problem. It is an example of exceptionally poor practice in public debate: instead of engaging in a substantive discussion about the system’s impact on clients, it seeks to discredit the research and undermine its legitimacy,” said Marek Kapička, Director of CERGE-EI.

“The central issue in the current debate is not the existence of a single study. It is whether a more effective system will leave Czech citizens hundreds of thousands or even millions of crowns better off in retirement, or whether a significant portion of their savings will be absorbed by the fees and profits of pension companies,” added Filip Pertold, one of the study’s authors.

“The approach taken by the Czech Association of Pension Companies displays features of a strategy that has been extensively documented in the academic literature in other comparable cases. Its essence is not an open discussion of unwelcome findings, but the systematic questioning of methodology, demands for further analyses, and an emphasis on supposedly unique circumstances that are presented as obstacles to change. The result is often the delay, dilution, or complete obstruction of a policy decision that would affect the economic interests of the sector concerned,” Pertold said.

“The debate should focus on improving the system for its clients, rather than questioning the analysis and attacking its authors in an effort to protect vested economic interests,” added Lukáš Nádvorník, a co-author of the study.

Further information

https://idea.cerge-ei.cz/studies/klienti-penzijnich-fondu-v-pasti-nizkych-vynosu-a-vysokych-poplatku

https://idea.cerge-ei.cz/files/IDEA_Studie_01_2026_Penzijni_fondy_0106.pdf

https://idea.cerge-ei.cz/seznam-publikaci/otazky-argumenty-a-odpovedi

https://idea.cerge-ei.cz/images/studie/2026/Penzijni_fondy_promograf_0106.png

https://idea.cerge-ei.cz/media/media-2026