"The state pension is unfair but the ‘solutions’ are worse"

Current affairs, gossip and general conversation

"The state pension is unfair but the ‘solutions’ are worse"

Postby dutchman » Fri Mar 26, 2021 4:50 pm

Means-testing is fraught with difficulty and early access risks pensioners scraping by on very little for decades

Image

What is a fair return on taxes after working for most of your life? You pay National Insurance for 35 years (though many pay for more), and in return you receive a state pension for life. The problem, of course, is that how long “life” lasts is different for everyone.

Assuming the pension was frozen at today’s level, £175.20 a week, someone living to 80 would receive £127,500 but for a 95-year-old it would be £264,000. Is that fair?

Perhaps this is the wrong question. After all, the clue’s in the name – any national insurance system, in this case against old-age poverty, has winners and losers.

With state pensions, the winners are the wealthy, who avoid the kinds of physical jobs that cut life expectancy, and also mean you need to stop working before 66. To compound the problem for the losers, the state pension age is rising to 67 between 2026 and 2028, and to 68 between 2044 and 2046.

These plans were put in train years ago, but since then, the pace at which the average life expectancy increased has slowed.

In addition, figures published this week showed that the gap in life expectancy between the richest and poorest was widening. This prompted the Trades Union Congress to call for the pension age to be frozen.

But are there other reforms to make it “fairer”? Everyone receiving the same does aid collective buy-in, as supporters of “universal basic income” often highlight, but something has to give.

It would be barmy to adjust payments based on an individual’s life expectancy. Means-testing will always have advocates but brings extra costs and added complexity. The old two-tier state pension has already been simplified and is now far easier to understand. Early access to state pensions for those in industries where working to 66 is unfeasible has been suggested, particularly after millions of women born in the 1950s were caught off guard by changes to their pension age.

It does make sense to let people take their pension early at a reduced level. This would help those unable to work, or who don’t expect to live long enough, to get a decent return. You can already do the opposite, and defer your pension to inflate what you do receive, but this again mainly benefits the wealthy.

However, the problem is that most of us are terrible at predicting our own longevity and underestimate. This is a financial disaster for someone who takes a lower pension at 50 and then lives to 90. Early access would also add more complexity, with millions receiving different monthly payments.

The TUC is right to warn about the dangers of a rising pension age and its impact on the poorest in society. But any plans to introduce flexible payments will only add complexity to an already confusing system.

It should be pushed to the back of the policy cupboard, pronto.

Image
User avatar
dutchman
Site Admin
 
Posts: 50286
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:24 am
Location: Spon End

Re: "The state pension is unfair but the ‘solutions’ are worse"

Postby dutchman » Sun Mar 28, 2021 2:09 am

I'm not saying I agree with it but I've long suspected the government will introduce means-testing for the state pension. The government can save itself a heap of money while at the same time claiming to keep the triple-lock guarantee, protecting the poorest pensioners and bringing the state pension into line with other benefits.

There are plenty of arguments against; private pensioners will lose out, there will be little incentive to save and remaining state pensioners could become marginalised from the rest of society.

Gordon Brown tried it when he was chancellor but was overruled by Tony Blair for the reasons I just mentioned. Now that government revenue has fallen off a cliff due to lockdown I'm sure someone at the treasury will resurrect the idea.
User avatar
dutchman
Site Admin
 
Posts: 50286
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:24 am
Location: Spon End

Re: "The state pension is unfair but the ‘solutions’ are worse"

Postby rebbonk » Sun Mar 28, 2021 2:43 pm

I suspect that you are on the money, however I don't think it will be just yet. Bozo might be riding on a bit of a high but he can't afford to upset the 'grey' vote. I can see it happening for the next generation of pensioners though.
Of course it'll fit; you just need a bigger hammer.
User avatar
rebbonk
 
Posts: 65579
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 7:01 am


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

  • Ads