The proximity of the end of the year puts Retirement Savings Plans (PPR) at the center of campaigns by banks and insurance companies, with messages that call for immediate reinforcement to guarantee a discount on the IRS. The central issue, however, is not new: the benefit exists, but it does not compensate for choices that result in financial losses. The warning is highlighted by information aggregated over recent years and released by platforms specializing in personal finance.
According to the specialized economics portal, Contas Poupança, the tax deduction corresponds to 20% of the amount applied, within limits defined by the taxpayer’s age. These values may represent a relief in the tax payable, but the source itself emphasizes that the advantage may be nullified if the chosen product presents insufficient or negative returns. Many investors end up valuing the tax incentive without evaluating the real performance of their PPR.
Profitability that falls short of expectations
The publication writes that a study developed by Casa de Investimentos, based on more than 7,000 PPR transfers, shows that the average profitability of the products analyzed was lower than inflation. The data also reveals that a significant proportion of investors had losses at the time of transfer, including cases of products with guaranteed capital. It adds that some guarantees are only valid at retirement age, which means that an early withdrawal may result in amounts lower than invested.
It should be noted that the commissions applied by various institutions also affect client results. In many cases, the costs outweigh the gains, reducing the effectiveness of the investment. This reality is not limited to isolated situations and tends to be repeated in several products available on the market.
Costs, deadlines and expectations to evaluate before deciding
The website explains that the cost structure must be analyzed before any subscription. Among the main points to confirm are management, performance, custody, deposit and audit fees. According to the same source, these factors often determine whether or not the product will be advantageous in the long term. The recommendation involves comparing options in official simulators, such as those made available by ASF, APFIPP or DECO, observing accumulated returns over different time horizons.
The choice between PPR insurance and PPR funds must take into account the investor’s time horizon. For shorter maturities, products with a greater weight in bonds may be more suitable. For investments lasting two or three decades, funds with a larger shareholder component historically present superior results.
What to do to confirm whether you are winning or losing
It highlights that any holder can request from the financial institution all the data on their PPR, including values delivered, annualized profitability, accumulated income and current charges rate. The source reminds us that these elements must be provided whenever the product is transferred, so the customer has the right to demand the same information. If the results do not meet expectations, it is possible to transfer the PPR without tax penalties.
The final decision must be supported by objective information and not just tax benefits. This is why the portal warns of the need to think twice before adhering to any bank proposal, as “you could lose more than you gain”. The general guidance points to regular analysis of results and comparison with alternatives available on the market.
Also read:
