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.
Short-run effect on <strong>pension</strong>er incomes<br />
Table 4.2. Percentage of individuals ent<strong>it</strong>led to more and less than the full<br />
<strong>single</strong>-<strong>tier</strong> amount, under current and proposed systems<br />
State <strong>pension</strong> ent<strong>it</strong>lement<br />
Current system<br />
Men Women All<br />
£1 or more below £146.30 p.w. 68.4 91.0 75.4<br />
W<strong>it</strong>hin £1 of £146.30 p.w. 2.3 1.5 2.1<br />
£1 or more above £146.30 p.w.<br />
Single-<strong>tier</strong> system<br />
29.3 7.5 22.5<br />
£1 or more below £146.30 p.w. 65.7 77.3 69.3<br />
W<strong>it</strong>hin £1 of £146.30 p.w. 5.0 15.3 8.2<br />
£1 or more above £146.30 p.w. 29.3 7.5 22.5<br />
Sample size 741 334 1,075<br />
Source: Authors’ calculations using English Long<strong>it</strong>udinal Study of Ageing and National Insurance<br />
administrative data.<br />
It can also be noted from Table 4.2 that only 8% of individuals in our cohorts<br />
would actually receive <strong>pension</strong> income at the SPA equal to the proposed <strong>single</strong><strong>tier</strong><br />
amount – 23% would enjoy a higher income due to pre-existing ent<strong>it</strong>lements,<br />
while 69% would have a <strong>pension</strong> income lower than the full <strong>single</strong>-<strong>tier</strong> amount.<br />
This may make the simple, largely flat-rate nature of the policy more challenging<br />
to communicate, as few individuals will in<strong>it</strong>ially receive exactly the full <strong>single</strong>-<strong>tier</strong><br />
<strong>pension</strong> level at SPA.<br />
Implications of historic contracting out for ent<strong>it</strong>lements under the <strong>single</strong>-<strong>tier</strong><br />
system<br />
One reason why a significant fraction of individuals in these cohorts will have a<br />
<strong>single</strong>-<strong>tier</strong> <strong>pension</strong> below £146.30 is that many individuals have been contracted<br />
out of the second-<strong>tier</strong> state <strong>pension</strong> (SERPS/S2P) in the past. While these<br />
individuals may appear to have relatively low state <strong>pension</strong> ent<strong>it</strong>lements, they<br />
should have accrued rights in a private <strong>pension</strong> that (in expectation) are worth at<br />
least as much as the state <strong>pension</strong> forgone and they will have paid<br />
commensurately lower NI contributions. It is therefore interesting to illustrate<br />
<strong>what</strong> Figures 4.1 and 4.3 look like if we include these contracted-out <strong>pension</strong><br />
ent<strong>it</strong>lements as well – that is, if we pretend that these individuals had instead<br />
been contracted in throughout their working lives. This is shown in Figure 4.4,<br />
w<strong>it</strong>h the proportions above and below the <strong>single</strong>-<strong>tier</strong> amount summarised in<br />
Table 4.3.<br />
If no individual had ever contracted out, 95% of men and 67% of women would<br />
be ent<strong>it</strong>led to a state <strong>pension</strong> income under the new system of at least the full<br />
<strong>single</strong>-<strong>tier</strong> amount based on their accrual up to 2016 (compared w<strong>it</strong>h 34% and<br />
23% respectively shown in Table 4.2). Under the current system, assuming no<br />
past contracting out, 91% of men and 39% of women would have a state <strong>pension</strong><br />
income of at least £146.30.<br />
In the absence of contracting out, a larger proportion of individuals would see<br />
their <strong>pension</strong> ent<strong>it</strong>lement boosted to the full £146.30 by the new system: 4% of<br />
31