26.07.2013 Views

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 ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Short-run effect on <strong>pension</strong>er incomes<br />

simulate data for cohorts born up to 5 July 1954. <strong>The</strong> way that we have done this<br />

is described in more detail in Appendix B, which also provides an assessment of<br />

the reliabil<strong>it</strong>y of the ELSA–NI linked data and the simulated data. 38<br />

Together, the ELSA data and simulated data provide us w<strong>it</strong>h a sample of the<br />

cohorts who will reach SPA up to 5 April 2020 – that is, during the first four years<br />

from the proposed implementation date for the <strong>single</strong>-<strong>tier</strong> <strong>pension</strong>. Table 4.1<br />

shows some summary statistics on the sample. One point to note is that, because<br />

of the way that the SPA for women is increasing between 2016 and 2020, far<br />

fewer women than men will reach SPA during this period. <strong>The</strong>refore, 69% of our<br />

sample are men and only 31% are women.<br />

In this chapter, we examine how our results vary across individuals w<strong>it</strong>h<br />

different levels of wealth. <strong>The</strong> measure of wealth we use is total household net<br />

wealth. This includes all financial, housing, private <strong>pension</strong> and physical assets<br />

held by an individual and their partner (where relevant), less any outstanding<br />

mortgages and other debts. Table 4.1 shows that among our sample, half of<br />

individuals live in a household w<strong>it</strong>h total net wealth of no more than £226,823.<br />

<strong>The</strong> men on average live in slightly wealthier households than the women in our<br />

sample. In the following subsections, some analysis is presented by ‘quintile’ of<br />

total net wealth. To construct these quintiles, we divide our sample up into five<br />

equally-sized groups based on the wealth per person held by their family un<strong>it</strong>.<br />

4.2 Comparing state <strong>pension</strong> income at SPA under<br />

the proposed and current systems<br />

This section describes – for individuals reaching SPA between 6 April 2016 and 5<br />

April 2020 – how state <strong>pension</strong> income at SPA under the proposed system will<br />

compare w<strong>it</strong>h <strong>what</strong> they would get under the current system. <strong>For</strong> more detail on<br />

how <strong>pension</strong> income will be calculated in the new system and how rights already<br />

built up under the existing system will be ‘protected’, see Sections 3.1 and 3.4.<br />

<strong>The</strong> data we have only include information on individuals’ activ<strong>it</strong>ies up to 2010–<br />

11. In this section, we start by describing <strong>what</strong> individuals’ state <strong>pension</strong> rights<br />

would be under the current and proposed systems if they then did no ‘cred<strong>it</strong>able’<br />

activ<strong>it</strong>ies from 6 April 2016 onwards. We then discuss how this compares w<strong>it</strong>h<br />

the picture if individuals expect to continue working or doing other cred<strong>it</strong>able<br />

unpaid activ<strong>it</strong>ies between 2016 and when they reach the SPA. More detail on the<br />

assumptions made is provided in Appendix B. 39<br />

38<br />

Appendix B is available online at http://www.ifs.org.uk/docs/report_<strong>single</strong><strong>tier</strong>_<strong>pension</strong>_appendices.pdf.<br />

39 http://www.ifs.org.uk/docs/report_<strong>single</strong>-<strong>tier</strong>_<strong>pension</strong>_appendices.pdf.<br />

27

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!