Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

202. To ask the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the first- and full-year cost of restoring the right to retire at 65 and reintroducing the State pension. [31187/25]

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is important to note that the State Pension age was never 65 years of age. The State Pension (Contributory) and State Pension (Non-Contributory) were never paid at 65 years of age.

Reducing the State Pension age to 65 years would increase pension related expenditure significantly. While my Department does not have a detailed actuarial analysis of this option, a high-level estimate of the cost of introducing State Pension payments at the age of 65 based on current State Pension (Contributory) and State Pension (Non-Contributory) rates of payment (€289.30 and €278 respectively) from 01/01/2025 is an additional €430million for one year only. Likely increases in both eligibility and payment rates will increase this additional cost considerably in subsequent years.

This high-level estimate is based on net costs for future State Pension (Contributory) and State Pension (Non-Contributory) qualifiers but does not include estimates for any changes to household benefits, free travel or fuel allowance costs. In addition, the figure takes no account of any additional costs to public sector pensions.

The "Benefit Payment for 65 year olds" was introduced to provide a benefit payment for people who are aged 65 and who are required to retire, or who chose to retire, without a requirement to sign on, engage in activation measures or be available for, and genuinely seeking work. This payment was designed specifically to bridge the gap for people who retire from employment or self-employment at 65 years of age but who do not qualify for the State Pension until age 66.

Following on from the recommendations of the Pensions Commission, the Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment is introducing measures that allow, but do not compel, an employee to stay in employment until the State Pension age (66 years).

Demographic projections indicate significant increases in the number of future State Pension recipients which will impact on State Pension related expenditure. Clearly, reducing the State Pension age to 65 years of age would be very expensive and would require either considerable additional revenues, or, if introduced on a cost-neutral basis, very significant diversion of funds from elsewhere.

I trust this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.