logo
How Labour's winter fuel fiasco paves the way for means-testing the state pension

How Labour's winter fuel fiasco paves the way for means-testing the state pension

Yahooa day ago

As Rachel Reeves announced an about-turn on her winter fuel policy this week, she opened a whole new can of worms for pensioners.
The Chancellor's decision to return the payments to those with an income of under £35,000 has created a complicated means-test and reignited calls from some commentators to claw back other benefits, such as the state pension, from those deemed 'wealthy'.
Means-testing the state pension system would be a radical move that no British chancellor has dared attempt before. But Labour is desperate for cash and has shown it is not afraid to anger older voters.
Could Ms Reeves possibly get away with it?
Introduced in 1909 and originally worth five shillings a week, the state pension is a cornerstone of the welfare state. Today, workers pay National Insurance contributions for 35 years to receive its full benefit.
The full new state pension is £230.25 a week, while the old 'basic' pension – for those who reached state pension age before April 2016 – is £176.45 a week.
However, the benefit has become increasingly unaffordable to administer. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) predicts the country's spending on pensioners will reach £180bn by 2029.
The idea of reserving the payment for those who need it most has therefore become increasingly attractive. Both Labour and the Tories pledged to keep the 'triple lock' that means pensions are increased each April by the highest of wage growth, inflation or 2.5pc. Means-testing could be one way to dramatically cut costs, without breaking that pledge.
In January, Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, caused uproar when she said her party would 'look at means-testing' the state pension. Key Labour advisers, think tanks and academics have also voiced support for the plan.
Means-testing would completely upend the system. But this week's winter fuel policy reversal could make it slightly easier.
Under the latest changes, all pensioners will receive the winter fuel payment, worth up to £300 a year. However, those who earn more than £35,000 will be expected to return it to HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC).
To administer the new system, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) will tell HMRC who they've paid the winter fuel payment to. HMRC will then apply the income test to determine who will need to repay the money.
Government departments have long shared data about taxpayers, including doing so specifically to pay or not pay a pensioner benefit, such as free TV licences.
But is this Whitehall bureaucracy really a slow slide towards a means-tested state pension? Telegraph Money reader Jim Humphrey fears so.
The 69-year-old, a part-time financial adviser from St Albans, is one of the estimated two million pensioners who will still not receive the winter fuel payment. This is because his income exceeds the £35,000 threshold.
He is worried Labour is on a 'slippery slope' to means-testing the state pension. He said: 'I don't need the money, but it is a question of principle... I have paid tax for many, many years.'
Other state benefits have been means-tested in recent years.
Free TV licences for all over-75s were scrapped in August 2020 and restricted to those who qualify for pension credit. Last year's restriction of the winter fuel payment to those on pension credit was also a form of means-testing – as is the payment of pension credit to those on the lowest incomes.
Campaigners and economists have also pushed for free prescriptions for the over-60s to be similarly restricted.
Last October, Dr Kristian Niemietz, of the Institute for Economic Affairs think tank, said: 'Means-testing old-age benefits is a way to make fiscal savings while insulating the poorest from cuts.'
Labour is also gearing up to ban over-60s from taking student loans from 2027, as it introduces a 'Lifetime Learning Entitlement'.
Ben Ramanauskas, of think tank Policy Exchange, said: 'The Government's approach to cutting spending through means-testing is the right one.
'However, this alone will not significantly lower the cost of the UK's unsustainable welfare bill, improve public finances, or give younger taxpayers a fair deal.'
Other countries already operate means-testing on their state pension payouts. In Canada, which operates a flat-rate benefit system, a maximum of $1,433 (£773.30) is paid each month, and is topped up for those on low incomes.
In Chile, a pension is paid to those over 65, unless your family's wealth is deemed to be in the top 10pc of the population. Those with an income of less than $1,210,828 (£955.30) a month are eligible, whether they are still working or not.
In Australia, the state pension – or 'age pension' – has no reference to how long a person has worked. Instead, it is granted as an age-based means-tested benefit. About a third of pensioners have their pension cut because they have other sources of income.
Moving to an Australian-style system would be highly controversial, angering those who say if you have 'paid in' you should get the full amount irrespective of your income.
Mike Ambery, of pension provider Standard Life, said: 'There would need to be a change in applying for state pension as well as the detail to replicate means-testing in other countries. The practicality and change to a universal system now would be operationally significant.'
There would be other barriers to overcome. The Government could only make significant savings if people are able to generate big enough private pension savings. But despite the 'automatic enrolment' reforms that made workplace pensions compulsory, millions of people are on course for meagre retirement incomes.
Research by the Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association (PLSA) found that the cost of all but the most basic retirement has increased over the past year.
Two retirees running one small car, eating out weekly and taking a four-star foreign holiday each year would now need an income of almost £35,000 each before tax to retire comfortably, rising to £52,000 if they live alone.
Meanwhile, anyone living alone on the state pension would even fall short of a basic retirement, which now requires an income of £13,400 a year, the PLSA said.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

UK military could 'potentially' be used to defend Israel, chancellor tells Sky News
UK military could 'potentially' be used to defend Israel, chancellor tells Sky News

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

UK military could 'potentially' be used to defend Israel, chancellor tells Sky News

The chancellor has told Sky News that UK military assets could "potentially" be used to help defend Israel, and the government is "not ruling anything out". Rachel Reeves said that while the UK is calling for de-escalation in the region, it is also sending military assets, including fighter jets, "to protect ourselves and also potentially to support our allies". The chancellor went further than the prime minister last night, who confirmed the movement of military assets, but refused to say if they could be used to help Israel. She also warned about rising oil prices and disruption to key trade routes in the Middle East, which could see inflation in Britain. Politics Hub: Speaking to Sky's Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips, the chancellor said sending military assets to the Middle East "does not mean that we are at war", and emphasised that "we have not been involved in these strikes or this conflict". "But we do have important assets in the region," she continued. "And it is right that we send jets to protect them. And that's what we've done. It's a precautionary move, and at the same time, we are urging de-escalation." Asked what the UK government would do if the Israelis requested the deployment of assets to support their operations, Ms Reeves reiterated that there has been no UK involvement so far and would not get in to "operational decisions for the future". She said: "This is a fast moving situation. Israel has every right to defend itself. We also are very concerned about Iran's nuclear deterrent." She continued: "We have, in the past, supported Israel when there had been missiles coming in. I'm not going to comment on what might happen in the future. But so far we haven't been involved. We're sending in assets to protect ourselves and also potentially to support our allies." Pushed on the question of what the UK would do if Israel asked for support with its operations, the chancellor replied: "I'm not going to rule anything out at this stage. It's a fast moving situation, a very volatile situation. But we don't want to see escalation." Read more: Asked if the UK would support a change of regime in Tehran, she replied: "I've got no time for the Iranian regime for the suppression and repression of their own people, and we have serious concerns, which we've expressed on a number of occasions, about the Iranian nuclear programme. "But we want to see de-escalation at the moment. We are not trying to ramp up the rhetoric." Ms Reeves also warned of the consequences of the conflict in the UK, saying that oil and gas prices "have gone up by just over 10%" since the conflict started, and warning there is a risk that key trade routes through the Middle East could be disrupted.

Rachel Reeves Clashes With Trevor Phillips Over Labour's Grooming Gangs U-Turn
Rachel Reeves Clashes With Trevor Phillips Over Labour's Grooming Gangs U-Turn

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Rachel Reeves Clashes With Trevor Phillips Over Labour's Grooming Gangs U-Turn

Rachel Reeves clashed with Trevor Phillips after the government U-turned on its opposition to a national inquiry into the grooming gangs scandal. Keir Starmer has previously accused opposition politicians calling for one of jumping on a 'bandwagon of the far-right'. But he announced on Saturday that he supports the recommendations of an independent report into child sexual exploitation by Baroness Louise Casey, which is being published next week. It is expected to call for a judge-led inquiry into the grooming and sexual abuse of young girls across the country, mainly by groups of men of Pakistani origin. On Sky News this morning, Phillips asked Reeves whether those who had been dismissed for raising the issue were due an apology from the government. As the chancellor tried to say the 'most important thing' was getting justice for the victims of the grooming gangs, Phillips told her: 'No, what I've asked you is the most important thing.' Reeves then hit back: 'No no no. Trevor, what is the most important thing here? It is the victims and it's not people's hurt feelings about how they've been spoken about. 'The most important thing here is the victims of these evil crimes.' Undeterred, Phillips said: 'The reason this matters is because those people who raised these matters on behalf of victims, who cannot often speak for themselves, were accused by government ministers of 'total nonsense, misinformation and racism'. Surely that's important as well?' Reeves replied: 'The most important thing is the victims themselves, and we have been busy as a government implementing the 200 or so recommendations of the previous inquiry.' 'The most important thing is not people's hurt feelings about how they've been spoken about'@TrevorPTweets presses Chancellor @RachelReevesMP on whether the government was wrong to dismiss calls for a grooming gang inquiry as misinformation.#TrevorPhillips📺 Sky 501 — Sky News (@SkyNews) June 15, 2025 Keir Starmer Performs Major U-Turn As He Backs National Inquiry Into Groomings Gangs Here's Why Lucy Powell's Comments On Grooming Gangs Really Matter Yvette Cooper Slams 'Party Political Misinformation' Around Grooming Gang Probes

Britain ‘not at war' despite sending more RAF jets to the Middle East, Reeves says
Britain ‘not at war' despite sending more RAF jets to the Middle East, Reeves says

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Britain ‘not at war' despite sending more RAF jets to the Middle East, Reeves says

Rachel Reeves has insisted Britain is not at war despite sending more RAF jets to the Middle East amid devastating strikes between Iran and Israel. The chancellor said the UK could play a military role defending Israel from ongoing Iranian attacks, but said moves so far 'do not mean we are at war'. Speaking to Sky News, she said: 'We have, in the past, supported Israel when there have been missiles coming in. I'm not going to comment on what might happen in the future, but so far, we haven't been involved, and we're sending in assets to both protect ourselves and also potentially to support our allies.' Ms Reeves also warned that the conflict has pushed up oil prices by 10 per cent and could threaten to block key trade routes, including the Strait of Hormuz, hitting the finances of families in the UK. She said: 'It's very early days, and things are moving quickly, but when we urge for de-escalation in the region, that is in part because of the lives at risk… but also because what happens in the Middle East affects us here at home.' Iran and Israel continued trading heavy missile strikes overnight on Saturday, with at least seven dead in Israel and an unknown number of casualties in Iran. Israel targeted Iran's Defence Ministry headquarters in Tehran, while dramatic footage showed a huge blaze raging at the Shahran oil depot near Iran's capital, after it was targeted in an Israeli attack. Air sirens were heard in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem as casualties were reported from strikes on buildings in northern Israel and Bar Yam, a city just south of Tel Aviv. The outburst of conflict was sparked when Israel launched a series of attacks on the heart of Tehran's nuclear programme and armed forces. After Iran hit back, Sir Kir on Saturday said: 'I'm not going to get into the precise details, but we are moving assets, we've already been moving assets to the region, including jets, and that is for contingency support across the region.' 'Our constant message is de-escalate, and therefore everything we're doing, all discussions we're having, are to do with de-escalation,' he added. Donald Trump has vowed to respond 'at levels never seen before' if Tehran follows through on a threat to strike US bases. Posting on Truth Social, the US president said his forces had 'nothing to do with the attack on Iran, tonight" but warned: 'If we are attacked in any way, shape or form by Iran, the full strength and might of the US Armed Forces will come down on you at levels never seen before.' It comes after Iran warned on Saturday that it would target US, UK or French bases in the region if they shot down missiles heading for Israel.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store