English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The amendment to the pension scheme that remains a part of the third pillar of the pension system even after its reform, valid since 2013, has brought many serious changes. Except for the alteration of the state contribution, there is in particular the fact that the newly established so-called participation funds do not guarantee a non-negative evaluation of the paid funds which allows choosing a more dynamic strategy with the hope of a higher yield under higher risks. At the same time an opportunity to continue in the so-called transformed funds (previous pension funds) and continue having a guarantee of a non-negative yield has been preserved. An analysis of development of the pension scheme and an additional private pension scheme after reform shows that these products have not fulfilled their primary function, i.e. to strengthen the role of the third pillar at the system of creation of the total savings for the period of old age, and they are not even able to compete with share funds or with other substitutes offered at the financial market without significant state support.

The development of an employer's pension scheme and additional private pension scheme in the Czech Republic (after 2012) and its problems