Main menu:

History of RPE Thought

Posts by Tag

RSS New from the CCPA

  • Boom, Bust and Consolidation November 9, 2018
    The five largest bitumen-extractive corporations in Canada control 79.3 per cent of Canada’s productive capacity of bitumen. The Big Five—Suncor Energy, Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL), Cenovus Energy, Imperial Oil and Husky Energy—collectively control 90 per cent of existing bitumen upgrading capacity and are positioned to dominate Canada’s future oil sands development. In a sense they […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • A new Director for CCPA's BC Office: Message from Mary Childs, Board Chair October 24, 2018
    The CCPA-BC Board of Directors is delighted to share the news that Shannon Daub will be the next BC Director of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Last spring, Seth Klein announced that, after 22 years, he would be stepping down as founding Director of the CCPA-BC at the end of 2018. The CCPA-BC’s board […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Who Owns Canada’s Fossil-Fuel Sector? October 15, 2018
    The major investors in Canada’s fossil-fuel sector have high stakes in maintaining business as usual rather than addressing the industry’s serious climate issues, says a new Corporate Mapping Project study.  And as alarms ring over our continued dependence on natural gas, coal and oil, these investors have both an interest in the continued growth of […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Pharmacare consensus principles released today September 24, 2018
    A diverse coalition representing health care providers, non-profit organizations, workers, seniors, patients and academics has come together to issue a statement of consensus principles for the establishment of National Pharmacare in Canada. Our coalition believes that National Pharmacare should be a seamless extension of the existing universal health care system in Canada, which covers medically […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Kate McInturff Fellowship in Gender Justice September 19, 2018
    The CCPA is pleased to announce the creation of the Kate McInturff Fellowship in Gender Justice.This Fellowship is created to honour the legacy of senior researcher Kate McInturff who passed away in July 2018. Kate was a feminist trailblazer in public policy and gender-based research and achieved national acclaim for researching, writing, and producing CCPA’s […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Progressive Bloggers

Meta

Recent Blog Posts

Posts by Author

Recent Blog Comments

The Progressive Economics Forum

Is The OAS/GIS Program Unaffordable?

No. Of course not. Even if the government waves around scary large increases in nominal dollar terms.

As has been widely reported, the most recent OAS actuarial report shows that total program expenditures will rise from $38.8 billion in 2011 to $107.9 billion in 2030. However, the dollar figure reflects, not just an increase in the number of OAS beneficiaries (from 4.9 million to 9.3 million), but also inflation. And the economy will grow over the same period.

As a share of GDP, the program cost is forecast to increase from 2.36% in 2011, to a peak of 3.14% in 2030, after which year the cost will fall. In other words, the cost of the program as a share of national income will increase by 33% from 2011 to 2030, even though the number of seniors will increase by 90% over that period. Growth of costs is slowed by the fact that benefits are indexed to inflation rather than to average wages, which are soon expected to rise at a faster pace than has been the case over the past twenty years and more.

Despite claims that OAS costs will be “unaffordable,” [sic] the Parliamentary Budget Officer has just reported that the federal government’s fiscal position is – admittedly following the new cap down the road on the Canada Health Transfer – sustainable in the context of an ageing society. In fact, they project that the federal government is now on track to eliminate the federal debt and to start running a surplus, all in the context of an aging society. The size of the underlying surplus is put at o.4% of GDP.

It also has to be borne in mind that OAS (but not GIS) benefits are taxable, so the federal government recoups a significant share of what is paid out. In most cases, even GIS recipients will pay some modest income tax on their OAS income.  The amount of OAS recouped by the federal government through income taxes can be estimated to be about 20%. And, of course, retirees pay consumption and other taxes as well.

(OAS benefits are also clawed back above a high income threshold, currently $69,562, and OAS benefits are completely taxed back above an individual income of $112,772. But this recovery applies to only 6% of OAS beneficiaries, and just 2.3% lose all of the benefit.)

Revenues from income tax on OAS may increase moving forward as a rising proportion of relatively affluent seniors have earnings from employment. The labour force participation rate of persons aged 65 to 70 more than doubled from 11.4% to 23.9% between 2000 and 2011. This is partly due to inadequate pensions and retirement savings, but also to the fact that some persons over age 65 want to work and are able to do so.

Statistics Canada recently reported that, while life expectancy has been rising, the average number of years spent not working  has been stable since the mid 1990s due to the fact that more and more seniors are staying in the workforce longer.

It can be noted that the widely touted option of raising the age of eligibility from 65 to 67 would not, in and of itself, save a lot of money. Average life expectancy at age 65 is 20 years (18.3 years for men and 21.5 years for women) meaning that the average new OAS beneficiary will receive benefits for twenty years.  Raising the eligibility age from 65 to 67 would reduce the cost by 10%, and by even less if life expectancy continues to rise.

The CLC proposal to phase in an increase in CPP benefits, supported by many pension experts and by most provinces, would reduce GIS benefits down the road.  While an expanded CPP would take forty years to fully mature, it would still have a significant impact when we hit the peak retirement years of the baby boomers, the majority of whom are still in their early 50s.

 

 

Enjoy and share:

Comments

Comment from Victor
Time: February 10, 2012, 12:49 pm

The Govt is also ignoring the revenue side. How much tax revenue ie. income taxes will be generated from the 65+ year co-hort over the next 20 years? It should at least double in real terms since the number of seniors will double in number. What about taxes from transfer of assets? the pre-boomers will hand over billions in assets over the next 20 years to the boomers.

Comment from Bobby
Time: February 12, 2012, 10:07 am

A lot of people are really in the dark about OAS/GIS and “who actually” qualifies for it. A LARGE number of people will never qualify for the OAS and don’t even know it. YET. For example a lot of people (ie. a lot of Bell Canada employees) have taken VSP (Voluntary Supplementary Program) and termination packages in the 1980′ and 1990’s..most of these convert into a LIRA (Locked in account ) and then to a RLIF..which then turns into an annuity. These scenarios translate eventually into the fact that you cannot get or qualify for OAS or any supplemental if you already have another source of guaranteed income. A lot of people don’t know it yet but once they access these packages at age 55.. they will soon find out. And there is going to be a lot of disappointed people who didn’t see this coming. Their former employers didn’t tell them about this and their fiancial advisors didn’t tell them of this either. Hate being the bearer of bad news.

Write a comment





Related articles