A single-tier pension: what does it really mean? - The Institute For ...
A single-tier pension: what does it really mean? - The Institute For ...
A single-tier pension: what does it really mean? - The Institute For ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
A <strong>single</strong>-<strong>tier</strong> <strong>pension</strong>: <strong>what</strong> <strong>does</strong> <strong>it</strong> <strong>really</strong> <strong>mean</strong>?<br />
• those who were employed on relatively low earnings (although still at or<br />
above the LEL) between 1978 and 2001 – these individuals will have accrued<br />
BSP but l<strong>it</strong>tle or no SERPS ent<strong>it</strong>lement;<br />
• those who were carrying out activ<strong>it</strong>ies prior to 2002 that earned ent<strong>it</strong>lement<br />
to BSP but not SERPS – for example, caring for children, caring for sick or<br />
disabled adults, or receiving certain out-of-work benef<strong>it</strong>s;<br />
• those who have been self-employed.<br />
<strong>For</strong> these types of individuals, the proposed system is likely to represent a<br />
windfall gain. As discussed in greater detail in Chapter 4, most of these ‘winners’<br />
are in earlier cohorts.<br />
In add<strong>it</strong>ion, those who have spent periods contracted out of SERPS/S2P will have<br />
the potential to accrue a larger total <strong>pension</strong> than otherwise-identical individuals<br />
who had been contracted in, as they will be able to ‘work off’ these contractedout<br />
years in order to qualify for an increased state <strong>pension</strong> w<strong>it</strong>h no loss of private<br />
<strong>pension</strong> from their years spent contracted out.<br />
Given the trans<strong>it</strong>ion rules proposed in the Wh<strong>it</strong>e Paper, almost no one would see<br />
a significant reduction in their accrued ent<strong>it</strong>lement as a result of the reform. 32<br />
Those whose foundation amount exceeded the <strong>single</strong>-<strong>tier</strong> <strong>pension</strong> level in 2016<br />
would have that ent<strong>it</strong>lement ‘protected’. 33 However, there are potentially a large<br />
number of individuals who have not yet reached the SPA who should anticipate<br />
accruing a state <strong>pension</strong> ent<strong>it</strong>lement of more than £146.30 under the current<br />
system and who would, therefore, receive less under the proposed system than<br />
under the current one. As described in Chapter 5, these losers are most heavily<br />
concentrated in later cohorts – those who entered the labour market after (or not<br />
very long before) 2002.<br />
3.5 Changes to <strong>mean</strong>s-tested benef<strong>it</strong>s<br />
<strong>The</strong> current system of <strong>mean</strong>s-tested benef<strong>it</strong>s for <strong>pension</strong>ers includes the <strong>pension</strong><br />
cred<strong>it</strong>, which <strong>it</strong>self is comprised of two components – the <strong>pension</strong> cred<strong>it</strong><br />
guarantee cred<strong>it</strong> (PCGC) and the <strong>pension</strong> cred<strong>it</strong> savings cred<strong>it</strong> (PCSC).<br />
<strong>The</strong> PCGC tops up income to a minimum level (£145.40 for a <strong>single</strong> person and<br />
£222.05 for couples in 2013–14), whereas the PCSC was introduced to reward<br />
private saving and has a maximum award of £18.06 (£22.89 for couples). As of<br />
November 2012, 14% of 65- to 69-year-olds claimed the <strong>pension</strong> cred<strong>it</strong> and<br />
32 Some groups who do – those w<strong>it</strong>h fewer than 10 years of contributions and those who would<br />
have received <strong>pension</strong>s based on their spouse’s ent<strong>it</strong>lement who will now only receive a <strong>pension</strong><br />
based on their own contributions – are discussed in Chapter 4.<br />
33 <strong>The</strong> proposed ‘protection’ <strong>does</strong> actually const<strong>it</strong>ute a small reduction in <strong>pension</strong> ent<strong>it</strong>lements for<br />
this group. This is because state <strong>pension</strong> rights in excess of the <strong>single</strong>-<strong>tier</strong> level will only be<br />
uprated between 2016 and SPA in line w<strong>it</strong>h CPI inflation, rather than average earnings growth, as<br />
would happen under current legislation.<br />
22