Will State Pension ever go completely?

As already stated our social system/State takes a high % if you look at total payroll in any employment you will see close to one sixth of payroll goes to the state in prsi over the 20 years of Even Stevens employment,,
That's actually pretty low by European standards. Aggregate (employer + employee) social insurance contributions in various countries as a percentage of earnings:

UK: 23.8%
Finland: 31.4%
Spain: 37.1%
Germany: 38.4%
Italy: 40%
France: 68%

There are various reasons for this, but it mostly comes down to a combination of those countries providing a wider range of benefits, than we do, or higher benefit amounts, or relying to a larger extent on social security contributions to fund the system (i.e. no funding from general taxation).
If there was to be no state pension most of the above contributions would need to fall away and be replaced by high taxation,
(most of the extra taxation will be paid by the very people calling for the state pension to be done away with,
Well, if there was to be no state pension then you wouldn't need to replace the contributions in full. Most people who currently get the state contributory pension would qualify for a full or partial non-contributory pension, but that would be a lesser amount, and of course some wouldn't qualify for any non-contributory pension at all. So overall public spending on providing retirement income would fall quite a bit, and the contributions would only have to be partly replaced by other tax increases.

Still, people would complain about the tax increases. But they'd complain even more about the severe impact on older people of reduced retirement income. Which I think is the reason why this is politically unfeasible. The anger people feel at paying an extra 0.5% or 1% in social insurance is as nothing compared to the anger they would feel if Great Auntie May had to come and live with them because she could no longer afford to run her own home.
 
@BIG-notorious There is a purchase and transfer option to "buy back" referable amounts on the single pension scheme. It's expensive but the option is there.
I'm well aware of the facility and when it was announced I was quite excited about it, right up to the point where I looked at the details. It's not only expensive as you say but only available by way of lump sum purchase rather than (like the older schemes) salary deduction. So unless you have a large lump sum hanging around which you can use to purchase what is effectively an index linked lifetime annuity from age 66, then that option isn't open to you.

Most public servants (myself sadly included in that majority) don't have a large lump sum available to dump into their pension all at once. Most also don't have eligible accrued benefits from other employments to transfer in. So it's not for the large majority a realistic option, even if it's an option in theory. Also the purchase is based on a return of around 4.5% at 66 AND there's no return other than inflation between when you purchase and when you draw down, so if you buy €1,000 worth of pension or lump sum at age 55 you've basically put €23k earning a paltry 2% or so interest for a decade while it could be doing something useful.

You could use an AVC fund to build your SPS benefits up to about half final salary (ok, this would include the state pension) and get the full Revenue allowed (?200k) tax free lump sum too.
TFLS is max of 1.5 x final salary, and the 50% of final salary is based on working until 66. Retiring at 60 as I plan to do I would (even if I somehow maxed out my Single Scheme entitlement to 50% of my final salary which I'm not sure is even possible) result in a 20% drop in my SPSPS pension AND a reduction of around €16k as I wouldn't have access to the supplementary pension or COAP for another 6 years. That'd cut my income from around €80k a year to just over €19k a year during the earliest and what are likely to be my healthiest and most active years of retirement.

So the SPSPS is for most really only a modest supplement to the COAP and AVCs, as compared to being the main event in terms of retirement like the earlier schemes. Not to be relied upon really.

Giving self employed people an inflation linked pension for life in exchange for 4% of their salary is bonkers. It will have to go.
Inclined to agree on this one but think upping the contribution rates significantly is the way to go. But I'm one of the few people who believes that they personally should be paying more tax.

Giving very wealthy people the COAP when they don't need it will have to go.
Yes & no. A hard cutoff brings its own problems as people will moan about it being either too high or too low. I think it's more politically reasonable to leave it to the general taxation system to claw back 50% of it. Also, very wealthy people (say top 5%?) will be by definition always be the small minority of recipients and paying half of it back to the exchequer and therefore cutting or reducing their entitlement to the COAP will have a small impact.

The time to address these issues is now, when we have some financial headroom, not when the international lenders again refuse to give us any more credit.
The time to address these issues was 10 years ago but successive governments made the conscious & deliberate decisions to prioritise tax cutting ahead of either building up a significant strategic reserve or investing in infrastructure. Current strategic reserve is what, €12 billion? Compared to €35 billion before the 2008 crash, so maybe 20% of what it was 17 years ago after accounting for inflation. So if the decade long taxes bonanza returns to normal then we'll be in a far worse position than we were before due to the already wasted decade.

But the second best time to address these issues is now. But I don't really see that happening.

The country went bust during the financial crisis and had to be baled out. They probably won't bale us out again.
They probably will bale us out again. QE is a big bazooka in the hands of the ECB which can be deployed again if needs be to ease borrowing rates for the State and businesses. Also having one of your member states collapse under financial pressure isn't going to be a better look for the EU in 2028 than it was in 2008....

That's actually pretty low by European standards. Aggregate (employer + employee) social insurance contributions in various countries as a percentage of earnings:

UK: 23.8%
Finland: 31.4%
Spain: 37.1%
Germany: 38.4%
Italy: 40%
France: 68%
Shhh. Either whine and moan that we're getting taxed too heavily or just keep your head down and be silent on the subject. You'll get no thanks here for providing evidence or numbers which contradict people's firmly held views that they're living in some kind of communist hellhole....
 
agree,
Some people underestimate how clued in people are to the amount of PRSI taken from payroll each week they don't mind paying in once the know a state pension will be payed out at retirement age,
Exactly and that's the key point, how can the state continue to deduct prsi which is a social insurance deducted to pay for supposedly free health , and state pension . If you have worked all your life and made contributions they have to provide some benefit. They can allow it to fall in real value by not increasing it so much or increasing the age of starting pension like other countries but politically they do not want to do that. There is no way people would accept prsi deductions with no benefits at the end of it, sure we don't even have free health at point of contact like UK has for our prsi deduction
 
Tom
If you add in the USC our rates should be the same as Germany,
The year the TROIKA arrived employees Payroll PRSI was 12% employers was around 10% so around 22% in total,
I know for the last 30 Years Irish and German Social security payroll deductions were around the same,

I know German employers and employees Get away more for there contributions than Irish employers or employees,

Self Employed pay around 1% less than the combined employers/employees payroll in social security in Germany,

If we the self employed in Ireland payed the same rates of social security as Germany and other EU Countries we would have far less noise about doing away with the state contributry pension,

This is not the kind of forum that understands or wants to understand these things,
 
Last edited:
There is no way people would accept prsi deductions with no benefits at the end of it,
Prsi deductions with no benefits already exist in this country.
This was brought in by Michael Noonan.

Here is an example of it.

Post in thread 'PRSI and planning retirement'
 
This was brought in by Michael Noonan.
I would say more than likely is was the Troika ,

I don't think they could believe there eyes when the seen some paying around 22% while others were paying a fraction
and almost all Funds coming out of the long term Employees PAYE/ PRSI 22% contributory pot,

The State need to be putting around 450,000 Euro of taxpayers money into the 22% paye prsi Fund for everyone that Qualifies for a state contributory pension who pay 4% Prsi and getting a full pension to make up the shortfall in contributions not levied to fund the state pension for this group,
 
Last edited:
They probably will bale us out again. QE is a big bazooka in the hands of the ECB which can be deployed again if needs be to ease borrowing rates for the State and businesses. Also having one of your member states collapse under financial pressure isn't going to be a better look for the EU in 2028 than it was in 2008....

https://www.dailywritingtips.com/bail-out-vs-bale-out/
 
Do the post 2005 get the OAP as well not sure if they are D Class prsi ? I know with the Single pension scheme you get your occupational pension and can claim for OAP
 
Public servants hired before April 1995 typically paid a lower rate of PRSI at class D, and so get much fewer SI benefits.

PS hired after April 1995 pay PRSI class A.
 
I know with the Single pension scheme you get your occupational pension and can claim for OAP
Not sure that anybody ever gets the full PS pension benefits AND the full OACP though?
Isn't it normally the full PS pension only (e.g 40 years service) or part of it and part of the OACP?
 
I know with the Single pension scheme you get your occupational pension and can claim for OAP

Correct.

Single Scheme members receive an Annual Benefit Statement showing their accumulated lump sum and pension retirement benefit as at each year end.

The annual Contributory State Pension is paid in addition to the above accumulated annual pension amount paid from the Single Scheme (refer: P32 Single Scheme booklet) based on the PRSI record.
 
TFLS is max of 1.5 x final salary
But I think PS workers can also use AVCs to fund a TFLS up to 200k as per Revenue rules? That's one of the reasons, some don't consider, why making AVCs is still a good idea even when a PS worker, paying income tax at 40%, is going to retire on "full service" or close to it.

Yes with the Single Pension Scheme Purchase and Transfer facility you have to buy in lump sums but you can buy as little as a year at a time. For that reason it is suited to using an AVC fund to pay for it (by transfer) at the time of retirement or near to that, which is efficient.

But yes it is expensive. I will be far short of full service at 66. I estimate from their calculator, if I purchase by transferring value from an AVC fund at age 66, it will cost me €465,000 to bring my TFLS up to 1.5 times final salary and buy just €15,500 more annual DB pension.

After reading @Brendan Burgess comments here is it wise for me to be so sure future Governments will be able to honour their public sector pension obligations? I might be better off keeping my AVC fund in equities as long as I have my own home and enough DB+State pension to keep the wolf from the door...
 
But I think PS workers can also use AVCs to fund a TFLS up to 200k as per Revenue rules?
The maximum TFLS is calculated using any of these 3 final remuneration amounts multiplied by 1.5.

The method which gives the highest amount will be used.
If this method gives an amount greater than 200k, then the TFLS is capped at 200k.

Any PS worker can only get their maximum revenue allowed TFLS calculated by these 3 methods.

In most cases these methods will calculate a higher TFLS than the one calculated by the Public Sector pension rules.

The extra tax free amount can be taken from their AVCs.


A PS worker can also get an extra post retirement payment (ARF, Annuity, extra taxable lump sum, or any combination of these funded by AVCs on top of their PS full service pension of 50% final salary and a TFLS of 150% of final salary.

Check here.
It's titled Pre 95 workers, but also applies to Post 95 workers.

 
Last edited:
Back
Top