This country just raised the retirement age to 70 — and others may follow
Denmark has officially raised its retirement age to 70 — and other countries may make similar moves.
The Danish Parliament passed legislation on Thursday that will gradually raise the retirement age to 70 by 2040.
The change applies to anyone born after December 31, 1970.
The bill, which passed with 81 votes in favor and 21 against, marks one of the most significant changes to the state pension age in Europe. It also signals a broader shift in how developed economies are preparing for aging populations and mounting fiscal pressures.
The move stems from a 2006 welfare agreement that ties the pension age eligibility to life expectancy. With people living longer, the government argues that raising the retirement age was needed to keep the pension system financially sustainable.
"In 2040, we will raise the retirement age from 69 to 70 years, among other things, to afford proper welfare for future generations," Ane Halsboe-Jørgensen, Denmark's employment minister, said in a statement following the vote.
She said it would be the last time her party voted for an increase under the current system, citing the need for a fairer model that reflected differences in career length and job type.
The decision has sparked anger from unions and workers in physically demanding sectors such as construction and agriculture.
Denmark's largest trade union, 3F, has argued that the policy will disproportionately burden lower-income workers. It said surveys had found three-quarters of their members doubted they could keep working into their 70s.
Pension changes have become a flash point across Europe. Just two years ago, France was rocked by months of mass protests and strikes after President Emmanuel Macron's government raised the retirement age from 62 to 64.
Nonetheless, as demographic pressure mounts globally, Denmark's move may be a bellwether.
Countries including Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK have already scheduled retirement age increases to 67 by 2031, 2028, and 2028, respectively.
With life expectancy continuing to rise, birth rates falling, and the need for a sustainable ratio of workers to retirees, economists and researchers say retirement ages will probably need to be pushed back further.
A 2024 report from the UK's International Longevity Centre projected that Britain would have to raise the retirement age to 71 by 2050 to maintain the ratio of workers to retirees.
Similarly, in the US, the retirement age for full Social Security benefits has already been raised from 65 to 67.
While Republicans have proposed a further increase, President Donald Trump said on the campaign trail in June 2024 that he would "not raise the retirement age by one day."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
37 minutes ago
- Washington Post
What is next for American universities?
In his May 30 Friday Opinion column, 'Republicans want to tax the Ivy League into submission,' Perry Bacon Jr. fretted that increasing the current 1.4 percent tax on the net investment income of the largest private endowments in the nation would somehow 'hurt not only students and faculty at those schools but the country overall.' This is like worrying that closing the carried interest loophole would mean the end of Wall Street.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
DNC chair, almost crying, claims David Hogg is making it impossible to lead party: ‘No one knows who the hell I am'
DNC Chair Ken Martin vented about party Vice Chairman and Parkland shooting survivor David Hogg to the point of near tears in a recent call with top Dem brass, saying, 'No one knows who the hell I am. 'I'll be very honest with you: For the first time in my 100 days on this job, the other night I said to myself for the first time, 'I don't know if I wanna do this anymore,' ' Martin bluntly admitted in leaked audio of the May 15 Zoom meeting, which was obtained by Politico, Martin, who was elected boss of the Democratic National Committee in February, bemoaned the shadow that Hogg cast over him by igniting a firestorm within the party over his plans to fund primary challenges against incumbent Dems. Advertisement 'No one knows who the hell I am, right?' Martin said during the call, in which he singled out Hogg, who was in the meeting. 'I'm trying to get my sea legs underneath of me and actually develop any amount of credibility so I can go out there and raise the money and do the job I need to put ourselves in a position to win,' the chairman said. 'I don't think you intended this, but you essentially destroyed any chance I have to show the leadership that I need to,' he said, directly addressing Hogg. 'So it's really frustrating.' Advertisement 3 Ken Martin didn't mince words about his frustrations with DNC Vice Chair David Hogg in leaked audio. AP 3 Hogg has been working to fund Democratic primaries against safe DEM incumbents despite his role as a party's vice chair. Getty Images for Fast Company Toward the end of the leaked audio, Martin's voice grew softer, and he paused at least twice, appearing to be on the verge of choking up. The DNC boss told Hogg, 'I deeply respect you' and 'was looking forward to working with you' while griping about the dilemma that the 25-year-old school mass-shooting survivor created. Advertisement Martin, referring to the state of the DNC, said, 'It has plenty of warts, and we're all trying to change those, for sure, but the longer we continue this fight, the harder it is for us to actually do what we all want to do, which is make a difference in this country again.' About 10 people were reportedly on the call. The Post reached out to the DNC and Hogg for comment. Hogg later posted text messages with the Politico reporter who broke the story as evidence that he didn't leak the audio. Advertisement Martin was meanwhile adamant that 'I'm not going anywhere' after the leaked audio surfaced. 'I took this job to fight Republicans, not Democrats,' he said in a statement obtained by Politico. 'As I said when I was elected, our fight is not within the Democratic Party, our fight is and has to be solely focused on Donald Trump and the disastrous Republican agenda. 'That's the work that I will continue to do every day.' Hogg announced in April that his 'Leaders We Deserve' group would shell out about $20 million to meddle in Democratic primaries located in safe districts to edge out what it considers complacent incumbents in favor of ones who are more feisty. 3 Hogg has argued that the party needs to become more combative. Getty Images Last month, Hogg's group made its first endorsement, backing Illinois state Sen. Robert Peters (D) for the seat held by US Rep. Robin Kelly (D-Ill.), in Illinois' 2nd Congressional District. Kelly is running to replace retiring Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) in 2026. Many Democrats are incensed that Hogg is attempting to retain his role as a vice chair at the DNC and intervene in primaries at the same time. Hogg is one of three vice chairs. As with the Republican National Committee, the DNC provides candidates with resources and strategic assistance and is generally expected to be neutral in party primaries. Advertisement 'Our job is to be neutral arbiters,' Martin previously said in another leaked April call. 'We can't be both the referee and also the player at the same time.' Martin had pressured Hogg to either sign a neutrality pledge or step down from his highly coveted perch. Last month, around the time of the leaked Martin Zoom call, the DNC Credentials Committee heard complaints that Hogg and fellow Vice Chair Malcolm Kenyatta were improperly elected to their positions in February. The complaint was furnished by Oklahoma DNC member Kalyn Free, who pointed to committee rules calling for the party to have as close to gender parity as possible. She argued that the election of Hogg and Kenyatta flouted those rules. Advertisement The DNC subpanel recommended that the party hold new elections for the vice chair positions to rectify that issue. All of that controversy has clouded the DNC's efforts to go on the offensive against Republicans and President Trump amid deep soul-searching within the party over what went awry during the 2024 presidential election.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Should you claim Social Security at 62 or 70? The answer may surprise you
Should you claim Social Security at 62 or 70? The answer may surprise you The decision on when to claim Social Security is complex and personal. What's the ideal age for claiming Social Security retirement benefits? It depends on who you ask. The earlier you start, the smaller your checks. But, you'll collect these payments for more time. That's the trade-off. But what exactly are your options, and how much of a difference can claiming later rather than earlier make? The answer might surprise you. Claiming Social Security early vs. waiting Social Security offers taxpayers a respectably wide range of payment options. Eligible individuals can claim as early as the age of 62, but can also wait until they turn 70. Or, they can file at any point in time in between. Each of these choices, however, results in a different monthly payment. And the disparity between these payments can be stark. The table below puts things in perspective, comparing the difference in payment size for each age of this nine-year range relative to this year's average Social Security retirement benefit of $1,976 per month. Notice that while there's a progressive reduction in benefits the earlier you claim, there's also an ever-growing benefit for delaying the initiation of benefits beyond your full retirement age (or FRA). This additional benefit, however, stops growing once you turn 70. You're reading that right. For the average beneficiary right now, the difference between claiming when you're 62 versus claiming at the age of 70 is over $1,000 per month. That's no small amount for most households. And the bigger your payment, the bigger the potential difference. Things to consider about taking Social Security The comparisons are clear -- there's an obvious and meaningful mathematical upside in waiting as long as possible to file for Social Security's retirement benefits. Except these numbers alone don't necessarily tell the entire story for every individual and their unique situation. It's possible there's a very good reason to claim Social Security benefits as early as you possibly can, like health-related matters. You may also have enough money saved up to tap later in your life (like an IRA) to allow you to begin collecting some income before you otherwise might. More: 3 ways to increase your Social Security benefit today There's another often overlooked upside to claiming at 62 years of age, however, even if you don't need this money yet because you're still gainfully employed. That is, you might be able to do something more financially productive with these cash payments than the Social Security Administration is doing for you on your behalf. Although the figure's not etched in stone, the average internal rate of return on money withdrawn from your paycheck and forked over to Social Security has been in the ballpark of 4%, after inflation. Sometimes it's more. Other times it's less. Any given year's effective return on this "investment," however, mirrors the average yields on longer-term U.S. Treasury Bonds at the time. Right now that's between 4% and 5%. If you can take these payments and do something more constructive with the money, it makes sense to do so. But won't collecting Social Security while you're also working possibly reduce your Social Security payment? If you're below your full retirement age, yes, it can. Specifically, any work-based wages beyond $23,500 you earn this year will start to shrink any Social Security payments you're already collecting. If you're going to earn enough at your job in 2025, in fact, it's possible you could erase all of your current Social Security benefits payments. You're not actually losing money if this ends up being the case, however. These reductions are ultimately credited toward future Social Security payments, which are no longer reduced by work-based income once you're past your full retirement age. (There's also a very specific income threshold that applies only in the year in which you reach your full retirement age, although that's best left to another discussion.) In many regards this option allows you to have your cake and eat it, too. For most people though, just know that plans to invest their early Social Security payments rarely pan out as initially intended. Successfully implementing such a plan requires a great deal of discipline. Just think about it very carefully Bottom line? There's no one-size-fits-all answer as to when you should claim your Social Security retirement benefits. You'll want to think carefully about your particular situation, including making some predictions as to what it will look like in the future. Broadly speaking though, it rarely hurts to wait just a little while longer to claim, if only to make sure that plan is going to work for you, or to beef up your numbers just a little bit more. And you will most definitely want to make sure it works for you before making the decision. The Social Security Administration will allow people who have claimed at or after reaching full retirement age to suspend these payments if they've only been collecting for 12 or fewer months. Anyone initiating these benefits before reaching their full retirement age, however, is permanently locked into their reduced payments. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. The Motley Fool is a USA TODAY content partner offering financial news, analysis and commentary designed to help people take control of their financial lives. Its content is produced independently of USA TODAY. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook Offer from the Motley Fool: If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known "Social Security secrets"could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. JoinStock Advisorto learn more about these strategies. View the "Social Security secrets" »
