The system had become a savings account people raided at retirement
Peru ha cerrado hoy una puerta que, durante casi una década, permitió a millones de trabajadores retirar sus fondos de pensiones como si fueran ahorros personales, vaciando silenciosamente el propósito del sistema. La reforma que entra en vigor restringe ese retiro masivo para los menores de 40 años —unos cuatro millones de afiliados— mientras introduce cuentas de pensión basadas en el consumo y extiende la obligatoriedad a trabajadores independientes. Es un intento del Estado peruano de recuperar la lógica original de la previsión social: no acumular para gastar, sino acumular para vivir.
- La caída del 96.5% en la compra de rentas vitalicias entre 2015 y 2024 revela que el sistema AFP se había convertido, en la práctica, en una alcancía que se rompía al jubilarse.
- Cuatro millones de trabajadores menores de 40 años pierden hoy la opción de retirar el 95.5% de sus fondos acumulados, una flexibilidad que muchos consideraban un derecho adquirido.
- Las nuevas cuentas de pensión por consumo, que aportarán el 1% del gasto anual financiado por el Estado, son vistas por expertos como un gesto insuficiente sin incentivos adicionales al ahorro.
- La apertura del sistema a bancos, cooperativas y gestoras de inversión busca romper el oligopolio de las cuatro AFP tradicionales e introducir competencia que baje costos y mejore rendimientos.
- Desde enero de 2028, los trabajadores independientes con ingresos de cuarta categoría deberán cotizar obligatoriamente, expandiendo el sistema pero generando dudas sobre fiscalización y financiamiento.
El sistema de pensiones peruano amaneció hoy con nuevas reglas que cierran una válvula de escape abierta en 2016: la posibilidad de retirar casi la totalidad de los fondos acumulados en las AFP al momento de jubilarse. La medida afecta a unos cuatro millones de afiliados menores de 40 años, quienes a partir de ahora deberán destinar esos recursos a una pensión mensual en lugar de recibirlos como suma alzada. Los mayores de 40 conservan la opción anterior.
La urgencia de la reforma queda ilustrada por una cifra contundente: en 2015, casi 12,000 nuevos jubilados adquirieron rentas vitalicias; en 2024, apenas 1,274 lo hicieron. La ley de retiros convirtió el sistema privado de pensiones en una cuenta de ahorros que se vaciaba al llegar la vejez, erosionando su razón de ser. Diego Marrero, gestor de portafolios en Bloom, calificó el cambio de necesario pero insuficiente, señalando que el verdadero problema —pocos cotizantes y beneficios inadecuados— no se resuelve solo con restricciones.
La reforma introduce además las cuentas de pensión por consumo, que entrarán en operación en diciembre de 2026. El Estado depositará el equivalente al 1% del gasto anual de cada trabajador, con un tope de 8 UIT (aproximadamente 42,800 soles), financiado con recursos públicos. Para Marrero, es un avance marginal que solo cobrará sentido si se acompaña de incentivos reales al ahorro voluntario.
Otro cambio estructural abre la administración de fondos a bancos, cooperativas y gestoras de inversión, rompiendo el monopolio histórico de las cuatro AFP. La Superintendencia de Banca y Seguros fijará los estándares de acceso, y los expertos advierten que la competencia debe ir acompañada de exigencias rigurosas para proteger a los afiliados.
Finalmente, desde enero de 2028, los trabajadores independientes con ingresos de cuarta categoría —abogados, docentes, técnicos y otros profesionales que emiten recibos por honorarios— quedarán obligados a cotizar al sistema. El reto pendiente es cómo el Estado garantizará el cumplimiento y sostendrá los compromisos financieros que ha asumido con esta expansión.
Peru's pension system overhaul took effect today, closing off a financial escape hatch that has drained the country's private retirement scheme for nearly a decade. Starting now, any worker under 40 enrolled in the AFP—the private pension fund system—can no longer withdraw their entire accumulated balance as a lump sum when they retire. The restriction applies to roughly four million people, plus anyone who joins the system from this point forward. Those already 40 or older keep the old option: take the money and run, or accept a monthly pension instead.
This reversal addresses what officials describe as a slow-motion collapse of the pension system's core purpose. In 2016, lawmakers opened the door to lump-sum withdrawals, betting it would give workers more choice. What happened instead was a near-total abandonment of annuities—the insurance products that guarantee income for life. The numbers tell the story starkly: in 2015, before the withdrawal law took effect, nearly 12,000 new retirees bought lifetime pensions. By 2024, that figure had plummeted to 1,274. Annual annuity sales dropped 96.5% over the same span. The system had become, in effect, a savings account people raided at retirement rather than a pension system at all.
Diego Marrero, a portfolio manager at Bloom, called the change necessary but incomplete. "One percent is too small to build a real pension," he said, referring to a separate innovation in the reform. "It won't solve the core problem—too few people contribute, and those who do often end up with inadequate benefits." He was speaking about the consumption-based pension accounts launching in December 2026, a novel approach where the state will deposit money into workers' retirement accounts based on their spending. The formula is simple: one percent of annual expenses, capped at 8 UIT (roughly 42,800 soles). The government covers the cost from general revenue. It's a small gesture, Marrero suggested, but only if paired with stronger incentives to save.
The reform also expands who can administer these accounts. No longer will the four traditional AFP firms monopolize the system. Banks, credit unions, and investment firms can now manage pension funds if they meet regulatory standards set by the SBS, Peru's financial supervisor. This opens the door to competition, though Marrero cautioned that regulators must maintain high bars for entry. "You need to lower barriers to bring costs down and improve returns," he said, "but the SBS has to demand credentials and a track record from new administrators."
Perhaps the most immediate impact falls on independent workers. Starting January 2028, self-employed professionals earning fourth-category income—those who issue receipts for services in law, education, industrial work, and similar fields—must enroll in mandatory pension contributions. Many of these workers have informal relationships with regular employers, Daniel Paniura, a labor law associate, noted. The new rule means they can no longer opt out. The reform is designed to expand the system's reach and shore up its finances, but questions linger about how the government will enforce compliance and fund the growing obligations it has assumed. For now, Peru has chosen to tighten the rules for younger workers while opening new doors to both funding and competition.
Citas Notables
One percent is too small to build a real pension; it won't solve the core problem of too few contributors and inadequate benefits for those who do contribute.— Diego Marrero, portfolio manager at Bloom
The system had stopped being a pension system and become a fund for retirement withdrawals; this reform returns it to its proper purpose.— Diego Marrero, portfolio manager at Bloom
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why did Peru's government decide to block younger workers from taking their pension money as a lump sum? It seems like it removes choice.
It does remove one choice, but the government saw the old system failing. When they allowed lump-sum withdrawals in 2016, almost nobody bought annuities anymore. The pension system stopped being a pension system.
So the 96.5% drop in annuity sales—that was the real problem they were trying to fix?
Exactly. By 2024, only 1,274 retirees were buying lifetime pensions compared to 12,000 before the law. Workers were treating their pension accounts like savings accounts, not insurance against living too long.
But doesn't that mean workers wanted the flexibility more than security?
Maybe in the moment. But the reform assumes that without that option, people will be forced to think about actual retirement income. The consumption-based accounts and state contributions are meant to sweeten the deal.
Is one percent of spending really enough to make that work?
No, according to the experts. It's marginal. But it's something, and it's funded by the state rather than workers' own money. The real test is whether it encourages people to save more on their own.
What about the independent workers being forced into the system in 2028?
That's the other side of the reform—expanding who has to contribute. It brings more money in, but it also means the government has to enforce it and figure out how to collect from people who don't have traditional employers.