Means test the state pension and raise the retirement age even faster argues thinktank

8th January 2014

img

The Institute of Economic Affairs has called for the state pension to be means-tested and described the recent plans for increases as unaffordable and irresponsible.

The right of centre thinktank wants the government to accelerate the move to a later retirement age. It also wants the government to consider scrapping the age discrimination legislation and employment legislation applying to older workers because it believes this actually puts employers off hiring older people.

Finally, and perhaps more surprisingly given the organisation’s political stance, it says the government should consider introducing compulsory pensions using the same model as Australia.

The IEA says the current system is actually encouraging early retirement which is putting huge financial strain on the UK.

It says employment rates amongst older-middle-aged people have fallen significantly. Between 1968 and the end of the 1990s, employment rates for men aged 60-64 slumped from around 80% to 50%. Despite a recent recovery in employment rates to 60% for males aged 60-64, in the last generation, there has been a marked decline in employment of older-middle-aged people.

The IEA says the result is that, under current policies, state pension provision and other benefits paid to those who retire before state pension age represent a ticking time bomb for the public purse. State pension expenditure is expected to rise by 2.4 percentage points of GDP between 2012 and 2062 – an increase of 42% as a proportion of national income.

The thinktank has published a report entitled Income from Work – The Fourth Pillar of Income Provision in Old Age written by Gabriel Sahlgren which it says conclusively finds that the current state pension system is incentivising early retirement.

It adds that employment protection legislation raises unemployment at older ages – including before state pension age. Later retirement benefits the individual through improved health and higher incomes and it also benefits taxpayers by reducing the costs of ageing populations.

It has put together ten policy recommendations which it says should ease the state pension time bomb.

1. Accelerate the rise in retirement age. From November 2018, the state pension age for men and women should increase by two months every quarter. This would see the age increase to 68 by January 2023.

2. Link retirement with life expectancy. From January 2023, the state pension age should be tied to life expectancy.

3. Exempt older workers from employment protection legislation. Employment regulation hurts the elderly overall, especially those currently unemployed. Removing regulations would incentivise employers to take on older workers and also enable greater labour mobility and flexible working patterns.

4. Introduce a pilot scheme to exempt older workers from age discrimination laws. If rigorously enforced, there is some evidence to show age discrimination laws make companies more reluctant to hire older workers. A large-scale pilot exempting some firms should be trialed.

5. Encourage individuals to save for their own retirement. With greater private pension provision, older workers would have to bear the costs of early retirement themselves.

6. Consider the introduction of compulsory private pension provision to replace the state pension. In Australia, pressure on the public finances has been successfully alleviated through a system of compulsory private pension provision. These reforms saw employers putting aside at least 9% of employees’ pre-tax earnings into a personal fund. Under such arrangements, individuals who choose to retire later benefit financially.

7. Reform disability insurance schemes. Often used as de-facto early retirement schemes, the government should tighten eligibility requirements. The overall incentive framework must be reformed to encourage labour force participation where possible.

8. Reform unemployment benefit schemes. These can also be used as an early exit route from the labour market. Evidence shows that countries with more generous unemployment insurance have an increased likelihood of the unemployed entering retirement.

9. Cut labour taxes. The government should extend National Insurance exemptions, reducing contributions as soon as a full state pension has been accrued.

10. Government should refuse to grant stronger union prerogatives over wage bargaining. Evidence suggests that higher levels of union involvement in wage setting put older workers at a disadvantage compared to prime-aged workers.

Commenting on the research, Professor Philip Booth, Editorial and Programme Director at the Institute of Economic Affairs, said: “The government needs to wake up to the reality of the long-term state of the public finances. People retire earlier on average today than they did in the 1960s despite huge improvements in life expectancy. People should have both the opportunity and incentive to continue some form of paid work into older age. Policymakers must urgently implement a coherent package of reforms, including a more rapid increase in the retirement age and a substantial reduction in employment protection legislation which is especially damaging to older people.”

5 thoughts on “Means test the state pension and raise the retirement age even faster argues thinktank”

  1. george says:

    Means test the state pension? This will penalise those who have saved and benefit those who have spent. Utter nonsense.

  2. Guy says:

    Members os the IEA should be hung for treason. Utter fools!

  3. Noo 2 Economics says:

    What drugs are these guys on? I’m particularly underwhelmed by Philip Booth’s highly emotive language – calls himself a professor, is that of the ministry of funny walks?!!

  4. Pavlaki says:

    No one retires voluntarily to live off the meagre state pension! The reason more people are forced into early retirement is age discrimination in the workplace. Companies do not want to hire older (55+) workers for higher positions but they are happy to have them to stack shelves.

  5. Lisa says:

    I can’t believe this. The state pension is NOT a benefit for the government to pay or withhold as it chooses, it has been paid for by the workers in this country. My husband and I are in our late 40s, and have paid thousands of pounds in national insurance contributions over the past 30 years. If we are later told that we are not poor enough to receive the state pension, we would like our contributions refunded to us. Failure to do this would be theft.

Leave a Reply to Lisa Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *