Mga KaSosyo at KaNegosyo,

Alam n’yo ba, sa dami ng hinaing na naririnig ko tungkol sa SSS, may isa talagang paulit-ulit na bumabalik—ang bigat ng hulog para sa mga nasa informal sector at nanoenterprises. Ako mismo, nakita ko sa SEDPI kung paanong bumagsak ang bilang ng members na nagcocontribute at ang total contributions dahil sa sobrang taas ng hulog.

Paano ba naman kasi, kung noong 2018, ₱110 lang ang minimum na kailangan hulugan kada buwan para makasali sa SSS, ngayon 2025 na, ₱760 na! Aba, 591% na increase ‘yan! Kung ang kita mo ay ₱250 kada araw, tapos halos isang linggo ng sweldo ang kukunin lang ng SSS, naku po—masakit-sakit na ‘yan sa bulsa!

Parang unfair, ‘di ba?

Yung mga employed, hati sila ng employer. Si employee, 5%; si employer, 10%. Pero kapag informal sector ka or nanoentrepreneur, ikaw ang sasalo ng buong 15%. Walang ka-share, walang ka-shoulder. Solo flight. Parang sa love life—ikaw lang ang nagmamahal, ikaw pa ang gumagastos! 😩

Tapos eto pa, simula pa noong 1954—oo, 70 years na—wala ni singkong duling na ambag ang gobyerno para sa hulog ng mga nasa informal sector. Ni rebate, ni subsidy, wala. Samantalang sila rin ang pinaka-vulnerable—yung walang health insurance, walang retirement fund, walang safety net.

Ang panawagan natin

Kaya gumawa kami ng policy paper sa SEDPI (basahin sa baba) para ipakita ang mga konkretong solusyon. Hindi lang tayo reklamo nang reklamo, KaSosyo. May mga action points tayong nilatag para sa gobyerno at Kongreso:

1. Mag-ulat ang SSS ng breakdown kung sino ba talaga ang mga nakaka-hulog at sino ang hindi—para malinaw ang picture.
2. Magsubsidize ang gobyerno ng 10% employer share para sa mga voluntary members na mababa ang kita.
3. Tignan ng Kongreso kung tama pa ba ang patakaran ng SSS—kung sinunod ba nila ang mandato nilang “universal at equitable protection.”

From Ayuda to Asenso

Ang gusto nating mangyari, hindi ayuda na puro pamumulitika lang, tulad ng TUPAD, AICS, AKAP etc., kundi pangmatagalang solusyon—na may dangal. Kasi ang hulog sa SSS, hindi yan limos. Investment yan sa kinabukasan. Kaya dapat, kung magpapakahirap tayo mag-ipon, eh siguraduhin din ng gobyerno na kaya natin, at may kasangga tayo.

Hindi na natin pwedeng ipagkibit-balikat ang isyung ito. Dapat lahat may karapatang protektado sa pagtanda, hindi lang ‘yung may regular na trabaho.

Ako si Sir Vince, financial guro, at your service. Ang pagyaman, napag-aaralan at napagtutulungan!

Strengthening Social Protection for Nanoenterprises or the Informal Sector in the Philippines: A SEDPI Policy Paper

1. Executive Summary

This paper calls for urgent legislative intervention to address the exclusion and inequity of the current SSS contribution structure, particularly for self-employed individuals and nanoenterprise operators. While Republic Acts 1161, 8282, and 11199 mandate the government to provide universal and equitable social protection, implementation remains heavily skewed against the poor. The increase in contribution rates and salary credit floors from 2018 to 2025 has resulted in a 591% spike in actual out-of-pocket monthly contributions for the lowest earners, deterring compliance and threatening long-term fund viability.

Immediate government action is needed to fulfill its legal obligations and prevent systemic pension exclusion.

1. Policy Context and Legal Mandates

The Social Security System (SSS) is grounded in social justice, equity, and universal coverage:

• RA 1161 (1954) – Declares as policy “to establish… a viable… social security service… to covered employees and their families… with a view to promoting their well-being in the spirit of social justice”.
• RA 8282 (1997) – Affirms that the State “shall endeavor to extend social security protection to workers and their beneficiaries;” establishes that SSS benefits “shall not be diminished,” and that “the government guarantees the solvency of the SSS”..
• RA 11199 (2019) – Emphasizes the responsibility “to ensure meaningful social security protection to members and their beneficiaries… Towards this end, the State shall endeavor to extend social security protection to Filipino workers, local or overseas”.

These provisions affirm the legal obligation of the State to protect even the most economically marginalized sectors from financial insecurity—yet self-employed members remain unsupported and underrepresented.

III. The Problem

While contribution increases were essential to ensure the actuarial sustainability of the Social Security System (SSS), the current policy framework disproportionately burdens the self-employed, particularly those in nanoenterprises and the informal sector.

Unlike formally employed workers who contribute only one-third of the total amount—with the remaining two-thirds covered by their employers—the self-employed are required to shoulder 100% of the contribution cost on their own. This setup exposes a stark imbalance: the private sector subsidizes employee contributions, while low-income earners in the informal economy receive no counterpart support whatsoever.

Worse, despite existing legal provisions mandating government responsibility, the State has not contributed a single peso to subsidize nanoenterprises or the informal sector’s SSS contributions since its inception in 1954. This long-standing neglect effectively shifts the full financial burden onto the country’s most vulnerable workers—those least able to afford it.

Contribution Increases (2018–2025)

Note: Employment Compensation remains ₱10 in both periods.

This 591% increase burdens nano-enterprises or the informal sector, many of whom earn ₱250/day or less. This sharp rise excludes many from coverage, violating the SSS’s universal and equitable mandate.

1. Gaps in Coverage and Government Inaction

• Only a fraction of nanoenterprises or the informal sector are active contributors despite constituting the majority of the labor force.
• The Philippine government has not fulfilled its legal obligation to contribute on behalf of low-income Filipinos, despite clear provisions in the law.
• This results in regressive taxation: the poor pay more (in proportion to their income) than formal employees.
• Fund sustainability is threatened by non-contribution, not just increased benefits.

1. Legislative and Executive Action Points

We urge Congress and the relevant Executive departments to adopt the following actionable measures:

1. Mandate SSS to Report Disaggregated Contribution Data

• Action: Direct the SSS to submit a report to Congress detailing:
  • Number of contributors who are contributing at the 1,000 to 15,000 monthly salary credit, Disaggregated further by voluntary and contributing as employees
  • Average contribution levels vs. minimum threshold.
  • Reasons for non-contribution and drop-outs from the program.

2. Institutionalize Government Subsidy or Set up a Special SSS Contribution Scheme for Nanoenterprises or the Informal Sector

• Action: Amend RA 11199 to mandate a government subsidy equivalent to the employer share (10%) for voluntary members earning below the minimum wage or classified as nanoenterprises or the informal sector.
• This is supported by RA 11199’s Section 4(a)(10), which allows special programs for workers “with unique economic, social, and geographic situations”.

3. Conduct Oversight Hearings on SSS Compliance with Universal Mandate

• Action: The Senate and House Committees on Labor and Social Services must investigate SSS’s alignment with its universal and equitable protection mandate. Assess whether current policies actively marginalize the poor.

1. Conclusion

The current trajectory of SSS reforms inadvertently excludes millions of Filipino workers—particularly the self-employed and nanoenterprises. These sectors embody resilience and entrepreneurship, yet are left to bear full contribution burdens with no counterpart from the State.

To comply with constitutional mandates on social justice and the legal obligations in the SSS Charter, Congress must act now to legislate equity into our pension system. Protecting the poor is not just a moral imperative—it is a constitutional and statutory duty.

Government support for nanoenterprises and the informal sector should prioritize long-term, dignity-affirming measures over short-term, dependency-prone assistance.

Rather than perpetuating ayuda programs that are often vulnerable to patronage politics and accused of rewarding inactivity, subsidizing social protection contributions offers a path to economic inclusion anchored in productivity, savings, and security.

Strengthening SSS coverage for low-income workers through government subsidies reflects a shift in public policy—from reactive aid to proactive empowerment.