Inverse Remittances – Hungarian State Pensioners Abroad

Inverse remittances – Hungarian state pensioners abroad

Sándor ILLÉS1 – Éva GELLÉR-LUKÁCS2 Abstract The international retirement migration and ageing-in-place in the country of immigration have become the global processes, but their scale cannot be compared to the international migration of the active age groups or to the numbers of internal migration fuelled by urbanisation. It is to be stressed that in the case of elderly people receiving Hungarian pension abroad we witness something different as compared to the subject matters referred to above. They dominantly represent a rather special subpopulation and in this study, we analyse the former international emigrants ageing in destination country. They receive Hungarian state pension abroad. The full scope administrative type of data mainly came from National Pension Directorate. The methods are time series analysis and cartographic visualisation. In the presentation, we investigate the volume of Hungarian state pensioner abroad, analyse the demographic and geographic composition of them for the period between 2000 and 2015. Moreover, we compare the amounts of money sent abroad (based the data of National Pension Directorate) to classic remittances to Hungary (data of Hungarian National Bank).

I. Disciplinary context operated by terms in nuts-shell Pensioners abroad is a classic multidisciplinary theme: 1. Demography: - Volume and composition of stock and/or flow - Mortality: ageing – longevity – selection of migrant stock in the past – selection of migrant flow in the present - Migration: Ageing-in-foreign-place (AFP, stock – international retirement migration (IRM), flow - Fertility relevance (maybe in the past, retrospective method) - Nuptiality relevance (maybe in the past, retrospective method) - Migrant cohort effect (maybe in the past, retrospective method) 2. Geography: - Territorial distribution of stock and/or flow - Spatiality of migration – direction, distance, border – utilization of spatial migratory systems – creation of spatial mobility network – AFP fuels urbanisation but IRM counter-urbanisation

1 Director, Active Society Foundation, H-1094 Budapest, Liliom u. 8. HUNGARY, [email protected] 2 Senior Lecturer, Eötvös Loránd University, Faculty of Law, JOTOKI Postgraduate Law Institute, H-1053 Budapest, Egyetem tér 1-3. HUNGARY, E-mail: [email protected] 1

- Space-time interrelation – generational effect 3. Economy: - Volume of inverse remittances (pensions paid abroad) – burden of state pension (pay- as-you-go) budget – private pension (internal and or international companies) - Average amount – comparison to home and host country averages - Classis remittances as basis comparison – direct capital flows (maybe irrelevant) - Macro-, and micro-economic effects 4. Law: - International portability of social security rights – internationalisation of rights gained and paid by national level – limited transferability of social security systems - Pension rights of international migrants (AFP quasi-vulnerable group, IRM quasi- affluent group) - From articular to universal rights Relative importance of this theme is high and it is growing. Pure analytical methods are available, Group of comparisons and/or reference groups can be founded for contextualisation, conceptualisation and application-transformation from science to other spheres (politics…) Style (form): national case study, international comparative study, regional integration study (EU, NAFTA…)?, global study??. Perspective – scale: from subnational (elderly concentration in receiving country), national through international (transnational-translocal continuum?), supranational to global. What is inverse remittance? - From sending country perspective: burden (indirect capital out-flow) utilised abroad. - From the angle of receiving country? indirect capital in-flow (inward developmental source (if direction is from affluent to poor countries. - From pensioner point of view: direct income worked in the past.

II. Theoretical background Elderly international migrants are a very diverse mass (Warnes 2001). Some elements of the classic theories and concepts are useful except for relate strictly to economic actives. - System theory - Network theory - Human capital concept - Life course concept - Capital (cash) flow theory - Transnational-translocal nexus

III. Particular context of presentation Style (form): case study,

Perspective: macro, national, from a semi-rich sending country, Relative importance: moderate but it is increasing, Data: from administrative source Methods: time series analysis, cartographic visualization

IV. The main text IV.1. Legal and administrative background and processes Institutional issues – reform upon 1 January 2017

There have been vast organisational reforms in the Hungarian social security system as of 1 January 2017 that marked changes in the field of old-age benefits as well. The Ministry of Human Capacities remained the competent authority for the management of the entire social protection sector including old-age benefits (plus cash family and sickness benefits, social services). The competences of the Central Administration of National Pension Insurance (Országos Nyugdíjbiztosítási Főigazgatóság, hereinafter: ONYF), the central implementing body in the field of social protection and old-age benefits, has also been tackled by the recent reform, but its functions as the central pension insurance administration body has almost entirely been maintained. This involves the ONYF carrying out its central administrative and registry tasks relating to both national and international pension issues. Coordinative tasks stemming from the European Union (EU) social security coordination regulations are continuously completed by the ONYF being the liaison body and national designated contact point for other EEA member states (European Economic Area is consisted of the 28 EU Member States plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein) and Switzerland. The latter is bound by EU law based on a bilateral agreement concluded between the EU and Switzerland in 2002.3 Additionally, the ONYF remained responsible for coordinating issues arising from the numerous bilateral agreements related to old-age benefits.

Amongst the changes it is to be highlighted that the former task of the ONYF, namely being empowered to act as second instance authority for appeals has been diminished with effect from 1 January 2017. The Municipal Government Office of Budapest has been designated as the new second instance authority having accorded nationwide competence. Usually, in the Hungarian administrative system, first instance bodies are the district offices of government offices, this is valid for applications for individual Hungarian pension claims. However, in international pension-related cases the reform has introduced exclusive competence for a designated district office, namely the 8th District Office of the Municipal Government Office of Budapest. It means that all international pension claims shall be proceeded by this institution including the establishment of the pension, issuance of certain documents and forms required by international cooperation, both with EU member states and other countries (these other foreign countries outside the EU are usually called ’third-countries’, however, in fact a better title would be ‘countries outside the EEA’). Also pension insurance-related cases of those people, who obtained pensions from Hungary but live elsewhere, is handled by the 8th District Office. These together all called international pension issues.

3 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:22002A0430(01) Downloaded 28 September 2017. 3

General description of the Hungarian pension system

Pursuant to the Act LXXXI of 1997 on social security pension benefits (hereinafter Pensions Insurance Act) there is a pay-as-you-go-financed, defined benefit (DB) scheme in Hungary with full coverage of those working as employees or pursuing any kind of gainful activity. The retirement age is 62 years, and since 2010 for those who were born in 1952 or later the retirement age increases and will reach 65 by 2022 for both sexes. In order to qualify for a minimum pension, beneficiaries must have a contribution history of at least 20 years; a partial pension is paid after 15 contribution years. Those who can’t meet this requirement, can apply for benefit from the social assistance scheme, called non-contributory old-age allowance.4

In international comparison, the minimum qualifying period of 15 years is long. If the person has not accrued at least 15 years of service period, the social security contributions are lost, there is no pay-back mechanisms in place. Amongst the distinct social security contributions the highest scale has been set for pension entitlement. Employees pay 10% of their gross wage to the Pension Insurance Fund5 while employers pay a lump-sum of 22% of the gross wage as social insurance tax, 71,4 % of which is absorbed by the Pension Insurance Fund.6 In 2015 the pension costs amounted to 3500 billion HUF – 10,4% of the GDP – which comprised benefits for 27% of the Hungarian population.7 In comparison, the health care costs amounted to only 4,8% of the GDP in 2015, so the average spending of the Pension Fund always considerably higher than that of the Health Insurance Fund.

General process of international pension claims, administering international pension issues

There are fundamentally two possible scenarios regarding transfer. On the one hand, persons who obtained an individual Hungarian pension change their place of living and wish to have their pension upgraded and exported. On the other hand, persons who worked in more countries obtain from Hungary a partial pension (so-called pro rata pension) but live already at the moment of submitting the application in another country (abroad). The two cases are to be distinguished from an administrative point of view. The application has to be lodged to different bodies, there are additional guarantees built-in in the process for international claims, e.g. if the applicant does not show up personally, the applicant’s identity and signature must be duly certified by a public notary. Also the rules of awarding the pension are different. In case of pensions having an international element, not only Hungarian pension laws but also several international norms shall be applied – e.g. EU social security coordination rules on pension and/or bilateral agreements resulting in calculation of pensions by taking into account service periods obtained elsewhere. Clearly, for individual Hungarian pension, only the service time accrued in Hungary are taken into account when investing the entitlement. In both scenarios, however, hence the residence of the beneficiary lays outside the territory of Hungary, it is common ground that the transfer of the pension becomes necessary.

The firs issue is thereby, who can be considered living outside Hungary? Pursuant to the Pensions Insurance Act8 a person is considered to be living outside Hungary from a legal point of view, if s/he lives outside the EEA (including Hungary) or Switzerland, and lives outside the territory of a country with which Hungary has concluded a bilateral social security agreement

4 Act III of 1993 on the Social Act. 5 https://en.nav.gov.hu/taxation/taxinfo/social_security_contributions.html downloaded: 29 September 2017. 6 Act XC of 2016 on the budget of Hungary for 2017, paragraph 33. 7 http://www.ksh.hu/docs/hun/xftp/idoszaki/regiok/orsz/nyugdij/nyugdij16.pdf Downloaded 10 September 2017. 8 Act LXXXI of 1997 on social security pension benefits, Article 79. 4 containing rules on pensions. This is called ‘living in a third country’. Consequently, if the person lives outside of Hungary (in a foreign country) s/he could not receive the pension personally or via cheque which is sent by post to his/her address. Other ways of receiving the pension should have been elaborated.

Legal rules on transfer

The basic rule is that pensions are only transferred to those countries that are EEA countries, countries which did conclude a bilateral social security agreement on pensions with Hungary and Switzerland. In this regard the residence of the person presents the dividing line, not his/her nationality. Taking an example, if a Hungarian pensioner lives in a country outside Europe with which there is no bilateral agreement (e.g. China), the transfer will not be effectuated. However, if a Chinese national is receiving Hungarian pension who lives in Germany, pension transfer will be possible. The issue of bank transaction costs is an additional issue.

According to the Pension Insurance Act9 and its implementing governmental decree 168/1997. (X.6.) pension beneficiaries living outside of Hungary are given the following three choices to obtain their pension benefit abroad.

- The first option is to duly authorize a legal representative who is resident in Hungary to receive the benefit on the beneficiary’s behalf. The benefit can be sent to the legal representative via post as a cheque or via a bank account which is managed by a Hungarian service provider. Technically both options are available, and in these cases there are no bank transfer costs. In this way the pension is provided in full without any deduction.

- A second option is for the beneficiary to open a bank account in Hungary or in one of the EEA states and receive the pension to his/her own Hungarian/EEA bank account which option, similarly to the first option, does not generate any bank transfer costs. (If a beneficiary living abroad and would like to request the payment of the benefit to an own Hungarian bank account, and cannot travel to Hungary to open an account, in addition to the above, it is possible to sign a contract by post for opening an account with Erste Bank Hungary Zrt.)

- A third option is to require payment to a bank account managed in a country with which Hungary has concluded a bilateral agreement, however, bank transfer costs shall be paid.

Payment via direct postal delivery is not possible for beneficiaries living abroad (neither to the EEA nor to countries with bilateral agreement).

Payment to countries with which Hungary has no legal bonding (EU law or bilateral agreement in force) is excluded by law. May we add for clarification purposes that beneficiaries living in countries to which transfer is excluded can use the above-enumerated options. They can appoint a legal representative or open a bank account in Hungary or in the EEA/Switzerland. Obviously, it might be necessary to transfer the pension from these bank accounts further to their country (e.g. to a Chinese bank account). But this second, further transfer is beyond the legal relationship between the beneficiary and the Hungarian pension institutions.

9 Paragraph 79 (2) of the Act. 5

It is to be stressed that only transfer within the EEA and Switzerland bear no bank transfer costs. The underlying reason lies in the mandatory rules of European Law, namely Regulation 883/2004/EC on social security coordination and its implementing Regulation 987/2010/EU which lay down the requirement of equal treatment. Article 4 of Regulation 883/2004/EC states ‘Unless otherwise provided for by this Regulation, persons to whom this Regulation applies shall enjoy the same benefits and be subject to the same obligations under the legislation of any Member State as the nationals thereof’. It means that until the transfer of Hungarian pensions is free from bank transaction costs within Hungary the same treatment is accorded to non- Hungarian beneficiaries living in Hungary. Moreover, to help pensioners enjoying their benefit in full, exemption from transaction fees within the EEA and Switzerland has also been introduced. This is undertaken through the SEPA payment system. The Single Euro Payments Area (SEPA) is a payment-integration initiative of the European Union in order to simplify and decrease bank transfers in euro, of which the Hungarian Central Bank is also a party.

The European Economic Area (EEA) states are the following: the Republic of Austria, the Belgian Kingdom, the Bulgarian Republic, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Croatia, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Finland, the French Republic, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Hellenic Republic, Ireland, the Republic of Iceland, the Italian Republic, the Republic of Latvia, the Principality of Liechtenstein, the Republic of Lithuania, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Republic of Malta, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Kingdom of Norway, the Republic of Poland, the Portuguese Republic, Romania, the Slovak Republic, the Republic of Slovenia, the Kingdom of Spain, the Swiss Confederation, the Kingdom of Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great- Britain and North-Ireland.

Countries with which Hungary has concluded a bilateral agreement that concerns pensions are: the Albanian Republic, Australia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada (Québec), the Republic of India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of Kosovo, the F.Y. Republic of Macedonia, Mongolia, Montenegro, the Republic of Serbia and the United States of America.

The bilateral agreements can be divided into the following groups:

- Social policy agreements based on the territorial principle (Hungarian-Soviet agreement)

The agreement is based on the territoriality principle meaning that claims are investigated by the competent institution of the state in which the applicant resides on the basis of the service/insurance time acquired in both countries. The Hungarian-Soviet agreement covers the former Soviet Successor States excudingf Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Uzbekistan, Moldavia, Belarus and Azerbaijan.

- Pro-rata agreements

These agreements are based on equity meaning essentially that each country pays only after the service period accrued on its territory (applicable with Serbia, Macedonia, Montenegro and Bosnia-Herzegovina, Canada, korea, Québec and Mongolia)

Administrative rules on transfer

The Pension Payment Directorate in Budapest in Hungary is the organ which is entrusted to effectuate the payment of pensions both in Hungary and abroad. Transferring the benefit to a bank account managed in an EEA state or country pursuant to bilateral agreement is only possible in the currencies offered by the Hungarian Central Bank, namely in American dollar (USD), English pound (GBP), Australian dollar (AUD), Czech crown (CZK), Danish crown (DKK), Euro (EUR), Japanese yen (JPY), Canadian dollar (CAD), Hungarian forint (HUF), Polish zloty (PLN), Norwegian crown (NOK), Swiss franc (CHF), Swedish crown (SEK).

The beneficiary is enabled to choose the concrete currency. Of course, in order to carry out a successful bank transaction, the precise data shall be given to the Pension Payment Directorate on payment form no. 3970-003. This data include regular international bank transfer data like name and address of the foreign payment service provider, SWIFT (BIC) code and the international bank account number (IBAN).

There are no bank transfer costs within the EEA and Switzerland. Expenses of direct payment to a country pursuant to a bilateral agreement, however, have to be borne by the beneficiary, which amounts to HUF 2500 per transaction in 2017. In addition to this basic amount further costs might be calculated in accordance with internal business rules of the given foreign bank.

A special rule has been introduced as of 1 July 2013 for beneficiaries living in an EEA state, or in a country with which Hungary has concluded a bilateral agreement. If the Hungarian partial pension (pro rata pension) does not reach the prevailing Hungarian old-age pension minimum - HUF 28 500/month in 2017 - payment on a quarterly, half yearly or yearly basis posterior is also possible. An express application for this has to be submitted to the Pension Directorate.

Number of newly received applications and awarding decisions* Name 2009 2010 2011

New applications received 16 014 16 462 18 162

According to bilateral social policy and social security agreements 1 899 2 000 2 346 According to European Union coordination regulations 12 757 13 191 14 882 Persons living in third countries 303 314 281 International legal remedy 1 055 957 653 Awarding resolutions** 6 773 6 573 5 834

According to bilateral social policy and social security agreements 1 254 1 014 956 According to European Union coordination regulations 5 257 5 311 4 583 Persons living in third countries 207 194 189 International legal remedy 55 54 106 Source: ONYF (2009-2011)

IV.2 Demographic and demographic description and analysis There is no agreement among gerontologists what can be upper limit of human life and when higher and higher life expectancies will be realised in human societies. In developed countries life expectancy is going to increase by an additional 20 years above the age of 65 for both sexes. Even the additional life period is also significant in itself, but if we add to this that not only life span is increasing but also the life span without major chronic diseases then it is clear what an enormous human potential has been born with wide spread consequences. The next important factor in the migration of the elders is the size of the secure income from pensions, which is below the levels of the economically active periods, but the income guaranteed by the state is above the amount needed for plain subsistence. Third, the more and more frequent use of means of transportation being able to come over great distances has made travelling time much shorter, has led to the relative decrease of prices, which in turn allows more and more people to travel. The fourth factor can be the ongoing integration of the different continents, most importantly that of North America and Europe. The unification in these places makes border crossing, the change of residence, the transfer of pension amount, social and health benefits and the use of common currency much easier.

It is to be stressed that in the case of elderly people receiving Hungarian state pension we witness something different as echoes to the phenomena referred to above. They represent a rather special group of people and in this study, we analyse pensioners receiving Hungarian state pension abroad. We have to note that they form a special part of the Hungarian emigrants of retired age groups living abroad. The majority of these people left Hungary after the 1956 exodus during the 1960s, 1970s and especially in the 1980s with a valid tourist passport, among whom a lot of people were already middle aged. They were people who mainly left after working already 10-15 years in Hungary and aged in the destination country. In our present study, we investigate the volume of Hungarian state pensioner abroad, analyse the demographic and geographic composition of them plus the amount of pension sent for the period between 2000 and 2015 with the creation of time series.

The full scope administrative type of data came from National Pension Directorate (except for the classic remittances that erected from Hungarian National Bank). The main methods are time series analysis and cartographic visualisation. We must add a methodological note: from this perspective of our study the gaining of foreign citizenship has no relevance as foreign citizenship does not count from the point of view of receiving Hungarian state pension.

According to the National Pension Directorate the number of people receiving Hungarian state pension abroad was 12.7 thousand at the beginning of 2000, which shows an increase of 18.9 thousand people as compared to the year of 2015. This figure (31.8 thousand pensioners) is a minor portion of the more than 400 thousand emigrants who left the country after 1953 (9%) till 1995. They also represent a tiny proportion of 1.2% in the total pensioner population of around 3.1 million.

Although among the Hungarian emigrants continuously men formed the majority, due to the differential mortality of the two sexes among the Hungarian state pensioners living abroad women outnumbered men. The sex ration in 2000 was 53.0% to the advantage of women, which ratio went up to 56.3% in 2015. It is to be noted that similar proportions have been registered in the total pensioner population in Hungary. Naturally, the most important explanatory factor is the longer life span of women.

Another demographic characteristic is as follow: the age composition of pensioners receiving pension abroad is much older as compared to the pensioner population ‘remained’ in Hungary. The proportion of people below 60 years old cannot be considered old, has increased from 4.6% to 6.1% during the investigated period. It is important to note that the increase was mainly due to pensioners below the age of 50. Thus, it shows that in this group of people early retirement also appears and it is not restricted to pensioners living in Hungary. It is also important to note that age group of the youngest among the elderly (aged 60-69) has also increased its proportion from 28.1% to 33.0%. This shows that Hungarian emigrants reaching the age of retirement do not return home, but in increasing proportion they applied for their state pension in Hungary. The increase of the proportion of those aged between 80 and 89 years is not surprising seeing the above mentioned trends, but in addition the selection impact of international migration shall also be taken into account. The same arguments can be formulated with regard to the age group of people above the age of 90.

Average pensions transferred abroad has been continuously lower than the average pensions paid in Hungary. Also the direction of the change is clear as with an intensifying divergence the nominal value of average sums sent abroad have become increasingly lower as compared to pensions paid in Hungary. In meantime, 2008, the multiplier was already two between the two average figures. Behind this gap the most important factors could be the much shorter average working career, the increase of time spent after the actual work in Hungary, changes in calculating pensions. These considerations also demonstrate that Hungarian state pensioners living abroad cannot really be in the group of pensioners enjoying wealth and comfort. Most probably people analysed in this study got old in the places where they receive the Hungarian state pension.

The geographical distribution of those receiving state pension abroad looks very diverse. There are Hungarian pensioners in all the major continents of the world. Only Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa has been very rarely the targets of Hungarian pensioners. In 2000, it is also true that on certain continents and in certain countries more pensioners live then in neighbouring countries. It seems rather clear that Hungarian pensioners also opted for countries which have traditionally received large numbers of immigrants. In other words, Hungarian pensioners appeared in larger numbers in North America in the United States and Canada; in South America in Brazil and Argentina, In Africa in South Africa, in the Middle East in Israel and in Australia and New Zealand. More than 40% of the Hungarian pensioners lived in the two countries of North America: 22.3% in the USA and 19.1% in Canada. At the same time one third of this group lived in the EU-15 states in 2000. Within the European Union in Germany (11.9%), Sweden (6.3%), Austria (5.0%), Greece (3.2%), and the United Kingdom (2.6%) people of the pensioners settled down. The values for France, Belgium and the Netherlands have moved

9 between 1-2%. In 2000 out of the Union 5.5% lived in Switzerland and surprisingly 6.6% of the Hungarian pensioners lived in Slovakia. The shares have changed significantly for the fifteen-year period. The role of traditional immigration countries have been diminishing all over the world except Germany, Austria and the United Kingdom. All in all, each country’ story is identical but we try to synthesise the main explanatory factors behind.

As concluding remarks we strengthen that: 1. The migration of the elderly and ageing-in-place of former immigrants are becoming the global processes, but its scale cannot be compared to the international migration of the active age groups or to the numbers of mobile people related to cycles of urbanisation. This can be partly explained by the fact that in many countries only a few people reach the age of retirement and there is no or there is just a fragmentary social security system. 2. People receiving Hungarian state pension outside the country represent a special population. It is important to note that not elderly migrants have been investigated, but only those who receive pension type benefits from Hungary. This population is just a special subpopulation in the overall group of Hungarian elderly emigrants. Their number steadily increased from 2000 and in 2015 it reached 32 thousand people. A part of them left the country in the 1970s and more importantly in the 1980s with a valid tourist passport, amongst whom there was a large enough population of middle aged people having worked already 10-15 years. Among the emigrants there was a male surplus, but due to differences in life expectancy the proportion of women among those receiving state pension abroad is well above 50%. 3. Concerning the geographic distribution of these groups it turns out that excluding most of the Asian and African countries Hungarian pensioners can appear in many corners of the world. The most important target countries were those which traditionally receive a large number of immigrants anyway. These countries include Canada, United States, Brazil, Argentina, South Africa, Israel and Australia. At the millennium, more than 40% of the Hungarian pensioners living abroad resided in the two countries of North America, while one third stayed in the EU-15 states. The most important countries were Germany, Sweden, Austria, United Kingdom and Greece. In addition, there were two non-EU countries at that time which provided some home for Hungarian pensioners (one tenth of them): Switzerland and Slovakia. Between 2000 and 2015 there was a radical shift in the geographical composition. Germany has become the most important host country with an increase by four times and Austria could gain in this respect also. With these changes and the expansion of the EU the European Union has become the most important target area. It is worth mentioning the case of Australia due the number of Hungarian state pensioners more than doubled between 2012-2015. We can state with high probability that the members of 1956 exodus aged in place in Australia and reached the Hungarian pensionable age (63 year). 4. Altogether we can hypothesise the group of Hungarian pensioners cannot be regarded as ‘affluent’ elders who have a pleasant and comfortable life. The average sum they receive is much lower as compared the local pensions and the negative difference just increased during the investigated period. In this respect, it seems that the Hungarian example is that of elderly migrants who maintain a weak and partial link to the Hungarian state and they receive just some additional income they deserve on the basis of work performed much earlier. Thus, beyond the pensioners of richer countries than

Hungary looking for advantages by moving in global hierarchies there are groups of people who have not and probably cannot capitalize on migration even in their elderly periods.

We tried to embed our research results in a broader scientific context, but we have found few opportunities to perform large scale international comparisons except for the seminal works of Tony Warnes. The investigation of inverse remittances as capital flows on the macro scale is fundamental. The currencies changeable and the existence of bank systems on different spatial level can facilitate the creation of secondary data on national retirees living abroad worldwide. The emerging databases across countries may be important resources for facilitating further international comparisons and may allow us to test the robustness of the findings of this case study.

APPENDIX

Table 1. Hungarian state pensioners abroad by sex, 2000–2015

Year Together) Man Woman (January) Number Number % Number % 2000 12 652 5 942 47,0 6 710 53,0 2002 14 855 6 432 43,3 8 423 56,7 2004 16 280 7 048 43,3 9 232 56,7 2006 18 655 7 980 42,8 10 675 57,2 2008 21 541 9 241 42,9 12 300 57,1 2010 25 133 10 803 43,0 14 330 57,0 2011 26 789 11 563 43,2 15 226 56,8 2012 27 912 12 049 43,2 15 863 56,8 2013 28 951 12 476 43,1 16 475 56,9 2014 30 133 12 978 43,1 17 155 56,9 2015 31 762 13 881 43,7 17 881 56,3

Source: National Pension Directorate, Statistical Department.

Table 2. The number and birth cohort of Hungarian state pensioners living abroad 2010–2015

Birth cohort 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 (number) 1950 - 1 759 2 182 2 656 3 227 4 005 5 136 1945–1949 4 667 5 969 7 112 8 168 8 873 9 529 1940–1944 6 268 6 613 6 696 6 698 6 706 6 777 1935–1939 3 662 3 681 3 661 3 614 3 708 3 814 1930–1934 2 958 2 921 2 845 2 767 2 791 2 846 1925–1929 3 196 3 100 2 915 2 740 2 566 2 415 1920–1924 1 928 1 755 1 577 1 383 1 200 1 022 1915–1919 505 418 345 273 226 223 –1914 190 150 105 80 57 Total 25 133 26 789 27 912 28 950 30 132 31 762 (%) 1950 - 7,00 8,15 9,52 11,15 13,29 16,17 1940–1949 18,57 22,28 25,48 28,21 29,45 30,00 1935–1939 14,57 13,74 13,12 12,48 12,31 12,01 1930–1934 11,77 10,90 10,19 9,56 9,26 8,96 1925–1929 12,72 11,57 10,44 9,46 8,52 7,60 1920–1924 7,67 6,55 5,65 4,78 3,98 3,22 1915–1919 2,01 1,56 1,24 0,94 0,75 0,70 –1914 0,76 0,56 0,38 0,28 0,19 0,00 Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

Source: National Pension Directorate, Statistical Department.

Table 3. Average Hungarian state pension in Hungary and paid abroad (HUF), 2000–2015

Average amount (HUF/month) Year (January) 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Abroad (1) 23 726 28 822 31 627 34 121 37 684 39 305 39 915 41 588 43 053 42 966 42 517

Hungary(2) 33 212 43 603 55 423 65 306 78 915 89 065 88 599 99 717 101 119 104 069 107 221

Ratio (1/2) 0,71 0,66 0,57 0,52 0,48 0,44 0,45 0,42 0,43 0,41 0,40

Source: National Pension Directorate, Statistical Department.

Map 1. Number of people receiving Hungarian state pension outside Europe according to countries of residence, 2008-2010-2012-2015

Map 2. Number of people receiving Hungarian state pension within Europe according to countries of residence, 2008-2010-2012-2015

Bibliography Beets, G. – Miltényi, K. (eds.) (2000): Population ageing in Hungary and the Netherlands: a European perspective. Thela-Thesis, Amsterdam, 293 p. Bongaarts, J. (2006) How long will we live? Population and Development Review, vol. 32. no. 4. 605-628. Daróczi, E. (2007): Ageing and health in the transition countries of Europe – the case of Hungary. Working Papers on Population, Family and Welfare, no. 9. Demographic Research Institute of Hungarian Central Statistical Office, Budapest, 55. Dehoorne, O. – Ilies, A. (2003): Between tourism and migration, complex and renewed international mobilities in a globalising era. Romanian Review on Political Geography, vol. 5. no. 1. 87-96. Fokkema, C. M. (1996): Residential Moving Behaviour of the Elderly: An Explanatory Analysis for the Netherlands. Amsterdam: Tinbergen Institute. Gellérné Lukács, É. (2004): Munkavállalás az Európai Unióban. KJK–KERSZÖV Jogi és Üzleti Kiadó, Budapest, 302. Hall, M.C. (2005) Tourism. Rethinking the social science of mobility. Pearson Prentice Hall, Harlow, 448. Hervai Szabó, Gy. (2007) Global migration Processes, tourism and human rights. In Rátz, T. – Sárdi, Cs. (eds.) Intercultural aspects of tourism development, Kodolányi János University College, Székesfehérvár, 59-69. Illés, S. (2006) Indirect estimation on the types of international elderly migration in Hungary. Romanian Review on Political Geography, vol. 8. no. 1. 55-63. Józan, P. (2006): A new Hungarian revolution. Circulation, vol. 113. no. 5. 17–20. King, R. – Warnes, A. M. – Williams, A. M. (1998): International retirement migration in Europe. International Journal of Population Geography, vol. 4. no. 1. 91–111. Marosi, Gy. – Miltényi, K. (2002): A nyugdíjaskorúak vándorlásának néhány kérdése – a külföldön élő magyar nyugdíjasok. In Illés, S. – Lukács, É. (szerk.) Migráció és statisztika. KSH NKI, Budapest, 155–180. /Kutatási jelentések 71./ Michalkó, G. – Rátz, T (2008): The role of the tourist milieu in the social construction of the tourist experience. JOHAR: Journal of HospitalityApplication and Research, vol. 3. no. 1. 22-32. Oeppen J. – Vaupel, J. W. (2002) Broken limits to life expectancy. Science, no. 296. 1029- 1031. Sik, E. et al. (2001) Proposal for the formulation of Hungary’ s migration policy. In Sik, E. (ed.) Diasporas et politics. Centre for Migrattion and Refugee Studies, Budapest, 255-276. Schirrmacher, F. (2007) A Matuzsálem összeesküvés. Scolar Kiadó, Budapest, 208. Rédei, M. (2007): Mozgásban a világ. A nemzetközi migráció földrajza. ELTE Eötvös, Budapest. Pál, V. (2007): The geography of health in the Hungarian human geography. In Kovács, Cs (ed.) From villages to cyberspace. Department of Economic and Human Geography, University of Szeged, Szeged, 417–424. Rátz, T. (2004): European Tourism. János Kodolányi Univerity College, Székesfehérvár, 140.

Rees, P. – Stillwell, J. – Convey, A. – Kupiszewski, M. (1996): Population migration in the European Union. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, 390. Tóth, J. (1997): Hogyan válogassunk a migrációs politikai étlapról? In Sik, E. – Tóth, J. (szerk.) Migráció és politika. MTA PTI, Budapest, 176–181. /MTA Politikai Tudományok Intézete Nemzetközi Migráció Kutatócsoport Évkönyve, 1996./ Tóth, P. P. (2002): Magyar migránsok Európában. In Illés, S. – Lukács, É. (szerk.) Migráció és statisztika. KSH Népességtudományi Kutató Intézet, Budapest, 33–51.. /KSH NKI Kutatási Jelentések 71./ Warnes, A. M. (2001): The international dispersal of pensioners of affluent countries. International Journal of Population Geography, vol. 7. no. 4. 373–388. Warnes, A. M. – Williams, A. (2006) Older migrants in Europe: a new focus for migration studies. Journal of Ethic and Migration Studies, vol. 32. no. 8. 1257-1281. Williams, Allan M. – Hall, C. M. (2000): Tourism and migration: new relationship between production and consumption. Tourism Geographies, 2000. 2. v. 5–27.