CPP, subsidizing survivor pensions, not fair — to a point
Posted on October 3, 2017 in Social Security Debates
—
NationalPost.com – Health/Seniors
September 29, 2017. WANDA MORRIS
It’s not fair!
I remember my 10-year-old self being absolutely incensed. My older sister was getting new clothes; I was getting (mostly) hand-me-downs.
My mom explained that there wasn’t enough money for new clothes for both of us, and my sister’s old clothes had plenty of life left. It wasn’t fair. But, in retrospect, with limited resources and growing children, it was the right thing to do.
Today, I hear a lot about unfairness from our members. One subject that draws more anger than most is the Canada Pension Plan (CPP).
The plan is a bit like reverse life insurance. In life insurance, you pay a premium for decades with one of two outcomes: you die early and your survivors receive a cheque, or you die late and are rewarded with a long life.
In CPP, the opposite happens, you either get both a long life and lots of pension cheques, or a short life and a moderate benefit to your surviving spouse, if you have one.
Besides the unarguable unfairness of dying young, many spouses are aggrieved because their survivor’s pension is only a fraction of their spouse’s full pension (the survivor’s pension is 60 per cent of the spouse’s pension) or they don’t get even that (combined earned and survivor pensions cannot exceed the maximum earned pension under CPP).
Others, who have no surviving spouse, are angry that they can’t pass their survivor’s benefit to anyone else and are effectively forced to subsidize survivor’s pensions for those who are married.
The proposed Ontario Retirement Pension Plan (ORPP) attempted to rectify this by providing everyone paying into it a survival benefit for their spouse, beneficiary or estate if the individual died within 10 years of retirement. When Ontario dropped its provincial pension program in favour of a national CPP enhancement, this refinement was dropped along with it.
Not only do the benefits paid out of CPP vary by the recipient’s marital status and longevity, the amount paid in to receive a particular level of benefit can vary considerably, too.
While all working Canadians aged 18 to 65 who earn $3,500 or more from one employer must contribute to CPP; only our 39 top-earning years are used in calculating our pensions from CPP. As long as we’ve paid maximum CPP premiums in at least 39 years, we are eligible for the maximum CPP pension payout. We could work another 10 or 20 years, but our pension cheque will not change.
An additional provision lets parents who took time out to raise children drop additional years and still qualify for a maximum CPP payout. While the child-rearing provision can be exercised by whichever parent is the primary caregiver for their children, some men argue that their premiums should be reduced so they aren’t subsidizing CPP benefits for (primarily) women who are out of the workforce.
The fundamental problem with CPP is that it serves two masters: it’s designed to serve as a self-funding aid to financial security in retirement and to alleviate the plight of impoverished single seniors, most of whom are women. If CPP were designed purely as a pension plan with no “interference” from policy objectives, pension payments would correlate with years worked, and individuals who are married would have to take a lower benefit on retirement so that funds would be available to pay a survivor’s pension benefit to their spouses.
Is CPP fair? No. But it’s also not fair that far too many older single women live in poverty. Subsidizing child-rearing years and paying survivors’ pensions may not be fair, but it’s the right thing to do.
http://nationalpost.com/health/seniors/grey-matters-cpp-subsidizing-survivor-pensions-not-fair-to-a-point
Tags: ideology, participation, pensions, standard of living, women
This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 3rd, 2017 at 12:40 pm and is filed under Social Security Debates. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
333 Responses to “CPP, subsidizing survivor pensions, not fair — to a point”
« Older Comments | Newer Comments »
Recent Comments
This blog post is excellent, probably because of how well the subject was developed. I like some of the comments too though I could prefer we all stay on the subject in order add value to the subject!
You have some helpful ideas! Maybe I should consider doing this by myself.
I saw a similar post on another website but the points were not as well articulated.
fantastic internet site, I could definitely go to your web page once more…acquired some really nice info.
This blog post is excellent, probably because of how well the subject was developed. I like some of the comments too though I could prefer we all stay on the subject in order add value to the subject!
Hello this is kinda of off topic but I was wondering if blogs use WYSIWYG editors or if you have to manually code with HTML. I’m starting a blog soon but have no coding knowledge so I wanted to get advice from someone with experience. Any help would be enormously appreciated!
These kind of posts are always inspiring and I prefer to read quality content so I happy to find many good point here in the post. writing is simply wonderful! thank you for the post
Howdy I wanted to write a new remark on this page for you to be able to tell you just how much i actually Enjoyed reading this read. I have to run off to work but want to leave ya a simple comment. I saved you So will be returning following work in order to go through more of yer quality posts. Keep up the good work.
Amazing content on your website.
Good post. I study something more difficult on different blogs everyday. It’s going to always be stimulating to learn content material from other writers and observe a little bit one thing from their store. I’d prefer to use some with the content material on my blog whether you don’t mind. Natually I’ll give you a link in your web blog. Thanks for sharing.
you’re in reality a just right webmaster. The web site loading velocity is incredible. It sort of feels that you’re doing any distinctive trick. In addition, The contents are masterpiece. you’ve performed a great process on this topic!
This contained some excellent tips and tools. Great blog publication.
Thank you for all the information was very accurate, just wondering if all this is possible.~
Like the way you’ve outlined things. Easy to follow. Not cluttered.
I am very happy to look your post. Thanks a lot and i am taking a look ahead to touch you.
Its wonderful as your other blog posts : D, regards for putting up.
Just want to say what a great blog you got here!I’ve been around for quite a lot of time, but finally decided to show my appreciation of your work!
Our community leaders need to read this, and look at developing some of your recommendations.
I think this is among the so much vital info for me. And i’m happy reading your article. But wanna remark on few common issues, The site style is wonderful, the articles is really excellent : D. Just right job, cheers
Appreciation for taking the time to discuss this topic, I would love to discover more on this topic. If viable, as you gain expertise, would you object to updating the website with further information? It is tremendously beneficial for me.