In an increasingly globalized world, millions of workers move between countries, expanding their careers, and their social security contributions, beyond the borders of a single country.  In addition, a growing phenomenon are workers who decide to migrate at the end of their working careers, looking for a place to enjoy their retirement with a lower cost of living, better climate or higher quality of services. This phenomenon is not only characteristic of countries with strong economies, where pensioners seek to increase their purchasing power, it can also be when pensioners seek to join family members abroad. The possibility of receiving pensions abroad is crucial for those who decide to emigrate.

International social security agreements play a crucial role in the migration of pensioners, as they establish the basis for the protection of their acquired rights and guarantee the continuity of their benefits when migrating from one country to another. International agreements may also include provisions to avoid double taxation of pensions, which is crucial for pensioners who may be subject to taxation by the country paying the pension and in the country of residence.

Examples of the magnitude of the numbers involved; in 2022, France paid 8.88 billion euros (EUR) to residents abroad (EUR 724 million more than in 2021). Regardless of their country of residence outside France, recipients of a benefit can request that it be paid into a bank account in France or abroad. (CLEISS, 2022). Whilst, according to 2022 data, the United States (US) Social Security Administration (SSA) paid about 6.1 billion US dollars (USD) in benefits to 760,000 beneficiaries outside the country (LaPonsie, 2024).

In the case of Spain, at the end of 2023, the National Social Security Institute (Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social – INSS) had 117,285 pensioners residing abroad and made annual payments of EUR 648 million (National Social Security Institute (Federation of Administrative Bodies of Spanish Social Security, 2024). In Canada, by the end of the same year, benefits totaling 1,408,026,508 Canadian dollars (CAD) had been paid to residents abroad under benefits obtained through the application of international agreements and to Canadians who had decided to live abroad (beneficiary removals) (Canada, 2023).

In the Netherlands, 350,000 benefit recipients live abroad and collect EUR 5,600,000 yearly (Brinkman, 2021). Finally, the German Federal Pension Insurance (Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund – DRV Bund) had 1,773,625 beneficiaries living in 200 countries outside Germany in 2021 and made payments of 6.7 billion euros (Bourauel, 2021).

In this context, the institutions responsible for pension administration and payment must have mechanisms to validate that the beneficiaries receiving benefits continue to be eligible to receive them, particularly that they are not deceased (ISSA, 2021). Such mechanisms depend, in the first instance, on their place of residence.

If the beneficiary resides in the same country as the institution paying the benefit, then the institution could obtain the life-status data from entities that manage death information using data‑sharing or information exchange mechanisms in the same country. However, if the beneficiary resides in a country other than that of the institution, the request for this information to the country of residence requires an agreement between the countries to formalize the exchange of these types of information.

Without information provided by local or foreign institutions, social security systems have established procedures to ensure payments reach the rightful beneficiaries, such as individual proof of life.  Proof of life prevent errors or fraud in benefit payments made with international transfers by preventing lengthy, complex and costly processes to recover undue payments.

Proof of life consists of an individual certification that requires an action on the part of the pensioner, either physically or digitally, and over the years, this procedure has evolved significantly, especially with the incorporation of digital technologies. However, adopting these innovations has been uneven, with some institutions moving towards more modern solutions and others remaining with traditional methods.

This article explores the current state of the proof of life in various social security institutions worldwide, highlighting both advances and persistent challenges. It analyzes cases where digitization has enabled a more direct and efficient approach to the citizen, as well as situations where there have been no significant changes or where proof of life is not required as a precondition for payment.

In addition, the importance of international agreements for the exchange of information on deceased persons is discussed. These agreements complement these initiatives by making it possible to obtain information on the state of life of sets/groups of beneficiaries based on requests made by the institution paying the benefits, making it possible to improve coordination and security in managing data between countries.

Proof of life and improper payments

Proof of life for beneficiaries outside the country that pays their benefits (export of social security benefits) is a crucial mechanism for such controls. In fact, in all countries where proof of life is applied, failure to complete the procedure leads to suspension of benefit payments.

Several types of life tests are used; each type has its own methods and requirements, which may vary according to the country and available technology.

Figure 1. Types of life tests

Some of the main types of proof of life are described below:

1. In presence: This type of testing requires the beneficiary to appear in person at a designated authority, such as a government office, consular office, bank branch or paying institution. During this visit, the beneficiary must provide valid identification and may be required to sign forms or answer questions to confirm identity. This method is the oldest and most traditional and is still widely used.
2. Life certificates: Beneficiaries may be required to obtain a certificate of life issued by a local authority, such as a civil registry office or a notary's office. This certificate confirms that the person is alive and is then sent to the entity administering the benefits. This method is common where face-to-face visits may not be practical due to distance or lack of adequate infrastructure.
3. Electronic or digital proof: With the advancement of technology, some countries have adopted electronic methods for proof of life. This may include using digital platforms accessible on websites or mobile apps, where beneficiaries submit identifying information videos of themselves, or use biometric systems (such as facial recognition or fingerprints) to confirm their existence. Sometimes, video calls are also used to remotely verify that the person is still alive.
4. Proof through financial institutions: In some cases, financial institutions that handle benefit payments may perform proof of life on behalf of social security entities. This may involve the beneficiary reporting to a bank branch or paying institution periodically to confirm their identity, incur expenses with a banking card, or sign a declaration of life.

The evolution of proof of life mechanisms has included improvements such as eliminating physical presence. This improvement simplifies the process for beneficiaries, improves administrative efficiency, and reduces operational costs associated with managing these procedures. Automating these processes minimizes human error, frequency can be increased, and the possibility of improper payments and fraud is reduced. In addition, the digitalization of the systems makes it possible to verify the identity of beneficiaries more efficiently.

It is important to note that the proof of life coexists with other mechanisms countries use to check at the international level that the beneficiaries of their schemes are not deceased.  Some institutions have begun to enter into international data exchange agreements.  Unlike proof of life, data exchange mechanisms between institutions do not involve the beneficiaries. They can make it possible to obtain information on large sets but are limited to countries that have signed these specific international agreements.

Proof of life and international information exchange agreements

Although the countries that have signed international social security agreements incorporate the concept of "administrative collaboration" in the texts of the conventions, it is not common practice to include a specific mention regarding the performance of proof of life.

International agreements for exchanging information on deceased persons play a crucial role in the modernization of life monitoring, a process distinct from traditional proof of life. These agreements allow social security institutions to share data efficiently and securely, updating their beneficiary records based on death information. This ensures that pensions are paid only to those entitled to them, significantly reducing the risk of fraud and minimizing the administrative burden on pensioners.

However, the major difficulty with these agreements lies in managing data protection and developing secure platforms to exchange sensitive information. These issues, essential to ensure the privacy and security of beneficiaries, are key to achieving a more coordinated and transparent international data management.

Proof of life for overseas residents

ISSA survey on proof of life

For the 2023–2025 triennium, the International Social Security Association (ISSA) has created the Working Group on International Social Security Agreements and Data Exchange. The group is composed of institutions from 22 countries and meets regularly. Its mandate is to assist member institutions in effectively managing an increasing number of international social security agreements. To this end, the group members completed a survey on their proof of life practices (national and international). The main conclusions are listed below.

Although most countries that responded (except for Argentina and Canada), require beneficiaries to perform a proof of life test periodically, in many cases the test is aimed only at beneficiaries residing abroad. In the case of Argentina, although the National Social Security Administration (Administración Nacional de la Seguridad Social – ANSES) does not request proof of life, beneficiaries residing abroad must provide ratification of the payment methods (confirmation of the bank accounts to transfer the payments) every six months.

Concerning periodicity, in most cases, proof of life is required once or twice a year, but practices are varied, and in this regard, there is no international rule.  The internal legislation of each country or institution determines the frequency.

For example, to continue receiving social security payments from Antigua and Barbuda, a certificate of life must be presented. The life certificate must be signed by a notary, an embassy official, a justice of the peace or a senior employee of another Caribbean Community (CARICOM) social security system (in the case of beneficiaries living within that Community); and this certificate must be processed quarterly, i.e., in March, June, September and December. (Antigua and Barbuda Social Security Board, n.d.)

In the case of Australia, proof of life is required for people over 80, who have lived outside the country for more than two years. Services Australia issues a notice to beneficiaries every two years requiring them to complete and return a proof of life certificate within 13 weeks. As in the case of Antigua and Barbuda, this document must be certified, but for Australia the list of persons who can do so is more extensive.

There are several other examples where proof of life processes consists of face-to-face tests, such as the cases of the Peruvian Pension Standardization Office (Oficina de Normalización Previsional – ONP), the Institute for Social Insurance (Zavod Za Socijalno Osiguranje – SZO) of Serbia, the National Social Security Fund (Caisse nationale de sécurité sociale – CNSS) of Tunisia and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) of the United Kingdom. In these four cases, the frequency with which proof of life is required varies, with Tunisia requiring it most frequently, requesting it every six months, and the United Kingdom providing a longer period between tests, extending to two years.

Towards digital proof of life and online platforms

Some institutions are adopting electronic or digital proof of life processes for residents abroad.  Such is the case of the National Social Security Institute (Instituto Nacional de Previdência Social – INPS) of Cabo Verde, which is currently developing a specific application to perform the proof of life test, as well as a web service to fulfill this same function. However, until these options are available, the life test continues to be performed at embassies and consular services on an annual basis. (INPS Cabo Verde, n.d.)

Brazil's National Social Security Institute (Instituto Nacional do Seguro Social – INSS) has already incorporated technology and offers beneficiaries residing abroad the possibility of taking the test in the traditional face-to-face manner or through the MeuINSS (MyINSS) application using facial recognition; this life test must be taken annually (Brazilian Government, n.d.; INSS Brazil, 2024).

In the case of Spain, the proof of life that is required once a year and can be done in person, but also through a mobile application developed by the National Social Security Institute called VIVESS, which is available in four languages, and performs the identification of the person through biometric data (Delgado Azuara, 2024). The application uses the ID and a photograph. It automatically confirms the person's life in the pension database, avoiding the intervention of civil servants in the accreditation of life in each case.

The Social Insurance Bank of the Netherlands (Sociale Verzekeringsbank – SVB) has also developed a mobile application that allows life verification for people living abroad. Still, to use it, a formal request must be made to the SVB. The application, called VIVO, requires the beneficiary to take a moving photograph (self-portrait/selfie) during the birthday month, i.e. on an annual basis.

As mentioned above, in addition to the options of proof of life through face-to-face certification and mobile applications, several social security institutions have opted to perform this procedure through online platforms.

A web application does not require any download. It is accessible from any device with a browser and Internet connection, whether a computer, tablet, or cell phone, regardless of the operating system (Windows, macOS, Android, iOS, etc.).

This is particularly useful because it allows users to perform the proof of life on various devices. In addition, since web applications are not as resource-intensive as some mobile applications, they tend to work better on older devices or devices with less processing power.

In Portugal, the Social Security allows pensioners to do the proof of life through its official website by using the ID or digital mobile key. This process not only facilitates compliance, but also ensures data security and the authenticity of the information provided.

Uruguay has implemented a similar system through the Social Insurance Bank (Banco de Previsión Social – BPS), where beneficiaries can validate their existence by applying facial recognition methods through an online service that requires their ID. This system is designed to simplify the process for pensioners, especially those living abroad, and allows them to perform the proof of life quickly and safely without the need to travel. In the Uruguayan case, the validity of the proof of life made in person is 6 months, while with the incorporation of the virtual system the term has been reduced and the duration is 30 days. (BPS Uruguay, 2023a and 2023b).

The Chinese Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security (MOHRSS) has developed a comprehensive solution that includes a mobile application and a web platform for the annual proof of life. Chinese pensioners can complete the procedure through the app or the online portal. For validation using biometric techniques, multiple software tool options are available to beneficiaries. For example, applications such as "12333" and "China Consular Affairs", official websites of the national social security public service platform and local human resources and social security public service platforms, mini social security e-card programmes, official accounts of local human resources and social security authorities on social networks. Although all these validation channels are available, the validation process is the same and the data is consolidated in the Ministry's business management system.

Germany’s DRV Bund has also developed a multiplicity of proof of life methods including international agreements on electronic exchange of death information (signed with Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom), traditional paper filing with a certification, and an app called "Digital Proof of Life Process" that uses biometrics for certification. For those who use face-to-face verification, the process is handled by Renten Service of Deutsche Post AG and the proof of life in all cases must be carried out annually (Deutsche Post AG, n.d.).  

Other institutions have already signed agreements to exchange death information, such as Employment Social Development Canada / Service Canada (ESDC) and the Social Insurance Bank (Sociale Verzekeringsbank – SVB) of Aruba.  Several other European countries are currently in the testing phase of this type of data exchange agreement.

Benefits of digital proof of life

The simplification of procedures is one of the key benefits of digital proof of life. Digitization has reduced the complexity of procedures, eliminated unnecessary steps and made the process more intuitive and faster. Beneficiaries no longer need to deal with lengthy bureaucratic procedures or the possibility of human error, optimizing the user experience and enabling more efficient management of resources.

The digitization of the process has also made it possible to avoid travel, which is especially beneficial for older people, those with reduced mobility or those living in remote areas. Thanks to online platforms and mobile applications, pensioners can perform the proof of life from the comfort of their home, without the need to physically go to social security offices, consulates or embassies. This advance not only makes life easier for users, but also contributes to reducing costs and time.

The implementation of video-identification mechanisms as an alternative to face-to-face certification represents a step forward in the modernization of these processes. These systems allow beneficiaries to perform proof of life through real-time video calls, providing an additional layer of security and effectively verifying identity. This technology, which is increasingly available on cell phones, tablets and computers, is especially useful in cases where other forms of identification are not viable, offering a flexible solution adapted to the different circumstances of users.

Finally, the automation of processes has significantly reduced the workload of consulates, embassies and social security institution officials. The implementation of digital systems not only reduces the administrative burden, but also minimizes the risk of fraud by increasing security controls. With advanced identity verification tools, proof of life is guaranteed to be authentic and more secure, protecting both beneficiaries and institutions.

Final remarks

A growing number of social security institutions around the world have made significant advances in the digitization of proof of life, however some entities still maintain traditional methods, such as face-to-face certification in offices or consulates. This situation inconveniences beneficiaries residing abroad or in areas of difficult access. The lack of progress in these cases underscores the need for broader and more uniform modernization at the global level to ensure that all pensioners can access more efficient and accessible services.

On the other hand, some social security institutions have opted not to require proof of life as a mandatory procedure prior/conditional to payment. These entities rely on other mechanisms and controls to guarantee the integrity of their beneficiaries' information. While this practice eliminates the process for pensioners by reducing the administrative burden for the institutions, it also implies implementing alternative controls for fraud prevention and accuracy in data handling.

One of the main challenges posed by the analysis of proof of life nationally and internationally is the lack of accurate and consolidated information on the amount of money paid to deceased beneficiaries, which in turn implies a lack of knowledge of the dimension of the potential problem.

The implementation by social security institutions of international proof of life through digital platforms accessible through mobile applications and websites has meant a remarkable approach of the Administration to the citizen. This digitized process has enabled pensioners and beneficiaries worldwide to meet their obligations in a more direct and accessible way, eliminating geographical barriers and providing a more inclusive service tailored to the needs of everyone. This approach strengthens the relationship between institutions and citizens, promoting greater trust in social security systems.

It is important to highlight the key role played by international agreements for the exchange of information on deceased persons in the modernization of life monitoring, which is different from proof of life. These agreements between countries allow social security institutions to exchange data efficiently and securely. By exchanging death information on large sets of beneficiaries, institutions can update their databases and ensure that pensions are only paid to those who are entitled. This approach not only reduces the risk of fraud, but also eases the administrative burden for pensioners, promoting more coordinated and transparent management at the international level.

Effective communication and training are essential to commit and accept the new proof of life modalities. To this end, some institutions, such as the BPS in Uruguay, have implemented innovations in stages and enabled counseling channels in consulates. Another interesting case is the promotional campaign by SVB in the Netherlands, which used behavioral sciences to promote the use, or the INSS in Spain, which included a video tutorial on YouTube.

The disparity in the adoption of digital solutions and the existence of institutions that do not require proof of life reflect a heterogeneous landscape in international social security. This situation creates challenges for consistency and fairness in treating pensioners globally. Institutions that have not yet advanced in digitization or do not require proof of life could benefit from the experience of those that have implemented technological solutions, adopting good practices that strengthen transparency, security and efficiency in their processes.

Références