Majority of UK adults underestimate retirement savings needs
A sizable minority of UK adults underestimate how much they need to save for retirement, with many questioning their capacity to accumulate the necessary pension pool for financial security in later life. According to new data from St. James's Place (SJP), three out of five respondents (60%) are unsure whether they will have saved enough to meet a moderate level of living in retirement.
The findings, published in SJP's Financial Health Report, revealed a concerning lack of understanding and engagement in retirement planning. The average total pension worth of UK people is £50,923 ($65,828), which is significantly lower than the £500,000 recommended by the Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association (PLSA) for a modest retirement living.
Surprisingly, nearly a quarter (23%) believe they will only need £50,000 or less to retire comfortably, while nearly one-fifth (17%) say they will rely completely on state pension.
Lack of Pension Awareness and Engagement
A sizable proportion of Americans are still disengaged from pension planning. One-third (32%) say they have no idea how much they have saved, and one-fifth (19%) have never evaluated their pension at all.
More over a third (36%) of individuals approaching retirement, aged 55 and up, believe they need less than £50,000 to maintain a decent quality of living, despite projections that this would barely cover a basic lifestyle.
The data also revealed that financial planning plays a crucial role in building retirement confidence. Over half (56%) of those with a financial plan feel secure about their future, compared to just 33% without one. However, nearly a quarter (23%) of UK adults say that saving for their pension is not a priority.
A Growing Gap Between Savings and Reality
In addition to this, the report also highlighted that those approaching retirement are the least confident about achieving financial security. Just 15% of people aged 45-64 believe they will save enough for a moderate standard of living, compared to 32% of 35-44-year-olds and 40% of younger adults aged 16-34.
For those already in retirement, the average pension savings across workplace and individual plans sit at £76,151 for 65-74-year-olds and £89,349 for those aged 55-64. These figures fall far short of the £500,000 recommended for a moderate standard of living, let alone the £790,000 required for a comfortable retirement.
Alexandra Loydon, Director of Advice Policy & Operations at St. James's Place stated: 'As a society, we face significant gaps in awareness and preparedness for retirement. The shift from defined benefit to defined contribution pension schemes has transferred the burden of saving for retirement onto individuals and, while the introduction of automatic enrolment into workplace pension schemes marked a significant milestone in promoting retirement savings, the harsh reality is that many individuals are facing significant shortfalls.
'It is concerning that many people lack an understanding of how much they need to put aside to fund a moderate or comfortable standard of living in retirement and are not confident they'll reach these standards by retirement. Even among those approaching retirement, confidence is worryingly low.'
Call for Action on Retirement Planning
The research underscores the urgent need for improved financial education and engagement with pension planning. Loydon emphasises the importance of proactive steps, calling for financial education to be integrated into school curriculums and for reforms to auto-enrolment contributions to help address shortfalls.
She added: 'Our research shows that having a financial plan in place builds confidence and engagement with retirement finances. As we move forward, decisive action at a policy, industry and individual level is required, such as integrating financial education into the school curriculum, addressing the current shortfalls in auto-enrolment contributions, and enhancing access to financial advice and guidance to help overcome barriers to retirement planning.'
With a substantial portion of UK adults at risk of falling short in retirement, increasing awareness and encouraging long-term financial planning will be critical in closing the gap.
"Majority of UK adults underestimate retirement savings needs" was originally created and published by Private Banker International, a GlobalData owned brand.
The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
15 Cities Where Even the Upper-Middle Class Can't Afford a Typical Home
A middle-class income ranges all the way from two-thirds to twice the median income, which means that homes are affordable for some middle-class Americans but not others. A recent Zoocasa report analyzed housing affordability in 100 major cities and found that lower-middle-class earners cannot afford a median-priced home in any of the cities, while upper-middle-class buyers can afford a median-priced home in 85 cities. That means that in 15 major cities, even upper-middle-class Americans can't afford to buy a median-priced home. Find Out: Read Next: Here's a look at the cities where upper-middle-class Americans may be priced out of the housing market. Median home price: $2,020,000 Highest middle-class income: $272,458 Max affordable home price: $1,223,956 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$796,044 Explore More: Median home price: $1,450,000 Highest middle-class income: $169,744 Max affordable home price: $762,536 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$687,464 Median home price: $1,450,000 Highest middle-class income: $171,828 Max affordable home price: $771,898 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$678,102 Median home price: $1,320,000 Highest middle-class income: $193,656 Max affordable home price: $869,956 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$450,044 Median home price: $1,165,100 Highest middle-class income: $169,814 Max affordable home price: $762,851 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$402,249 Median home price: $1,450,000 Highest middle-class income: $255,978 Max affordable home price: $1,149,923 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$300,077 Median home price: $1,178,000 Highest middle-class income: $212,116 Max affordable home price: $952,883 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$225,117 Median home price: $1,320,000 Highest middle-class income: $253,460 Max affordable home price: $1,138,612 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$181,388 Median home price: $660,000 Highest middle-class income: $107,636 Max affordable home price: $483,530 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$176,470 Median home price: $862,600 Highest middle-class income: $159,402 Max affordable home price: $716,077 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$146,523 Median home price: $826,600 Highest middle-class income: $163,212 Max affordable home price: $733,193 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$93,407 Median home price: $1,036,500 Highest middle-class income: $211,560 Max affordable home price: $950,385 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$86,115 Median home price: $725,300 Highest middle-class income: $153,154 Max affordable home price: $688,010 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$37,290 Median home price: $643,900 Highest middle-class income: $137,270 Max affordable home price: $616,654 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$27,246 Median home price: $974,907 Highest middle-class income: $213,246 Max affordable home price: $957,959 Difference between max affordability and median home price: -$16,948 More From GOBankingRates 25 Places To Buy a Home If You Want It To Gain Value This article originally appeared on 15 Cities Where Even the Upper-Middle Class Can't Afford a Typical Home
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
2 key findings on Democrats' brand problem from the new CNN poll
There's new evidence that the Democratic Party's reputation is in a bad place. That doesn't mean the party is doomed, electorally speaking. There's plenty of reason to doubt that, given lots of history and its performance in the 2025 elections thus far — but it is a complicating factor for the party's path forward. And a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS provides insights into the party's problems. It's worth a breakdown. The poll, which was released Sunday, asked a battery of questions about how people view both parties. Perhaps most striking was that people were more likely to view the Republicans than Democrats as the party with strong leaders (40% to 16%) and even the 'party of change' (32% to 25%). Neither party won close to a majority in either category. But the former is notable because there is such a gulf between the two parties. And the latter is notable because the party that's out of power is usually viewed as the party of change. Not this time. So what can we read into these findings? The 'strong leaders' question might be the most troublesome finding for Democrats. Only about 1 in 6 Americans said Democrats have stronger leaders than Republicans. As remarkably, only 39% of Democrats said that. We've seen hints of this in previous polls. A March CNN poll found about 3 in 10 Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters couldn't name a single leader who best reflected the party's core values. An AP-NORC poll last month showed just 35% of Democrats said they were at least 'somewhat' optimistic about the future of their party, compared with 55% of Republicans for their party. This might not seem too surprising. We just said goodbye to a Democratic president (Joe Biden) who was a diminished figure even when he was still in office. And the Democratic nominee who replaced him (Kamala Harris) wasn't exactly viewed as the future of the party when she took over the ticket in the 2024 race — and then lost. But there was a time when Democrats were at a somewhat similar crossroads, and the numbers weren't as dismal. A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll asked the same question in 2006 — after John Kerry's unsuccessful emergence as Democrats' 2004 presidential candidate — and found a smaller 14-point advantage for Republicans. Back then, 63% of Democrats said their party had stronger leaders than Republicans — 24 points higher than today. One reason for the difference is that the 2025 and 2006 polls asked the question in a slightly different way, partly because one was conducted entirely by phone and the other mostly online. Today's poll gave people an explicit 'neither' option, which the 2006 poll didn't (though some people volunteered that option back then). Nearly half of Democrats in the new poll (48%) chose that option. That's still a remarkable finding. Combined with the 13% of Democrats who said Republicans have the stronger leaders, that's 6 in 10 Democrats this year who don't think their side has stronger leaders than a party led by a president whom a huge majority of them revile. The other notable finding is on which party is the 'party of change.' Americans chose Republicans, 32% to 25%. That's not a big gap, but it is counterintuitive given Republicans swept the House, Senate and White House last fall. Historically speaking, it's almost always the party that's out of power that's viewed as the party of change. Before the 2006 election, the same CNN-ORC poll mentioned above showed Democrats had a huge, 56% to 29% lead on this measure. Then, as now, Democrats didn't hold the presidency or either chamber of Congress. But the numbers are very different today. Not only do Democrats trail on this measure, but only a slight majority of Democrats themselves — 51% — say their party is the party of change. And only 18% of independents say that. It's likely this is, in part, about Democrats' failure to position themselves as change agents, but also about what President Donald Trump is doing — and about people not necessarily seeing 'change' as a good thing. However you feel about the changes Trump is making, there is no question he is pushing lots of them. You see that in his and the Department of Government Efficiency's rapid overhaul of the federal government and in Trump's historic efforts to expand executive power — in ways that are often being halted by the courts because they go too far, too fast. It's possible that people just see Trump changing lots of things, whether for good or ill in their opinions, so the 'party of change' mantle doesn't mean what it usually does. We already saw during the 2024 campaign that people's definitions of 'change' were somewhat jumbled by unusual circumstances — i.e., Harris replacing Biden, and a former president running as the challenger. But it's also pretty clear that Democrats have failed to make themselves into a viable and attractive alternative to the party in power. The new CNN poll also asked which party people viewed as the 'party that can get things done.' Republicans led on this by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, 36% to 19%. Only 49% of Democrats and 11% of independents picked the Democratic Party as the more formidable one. There's also, of course, Republicans' big edge on the 'strong leaders' question. None of this means Democrats are sunk in the 2026 elections — or anything close to it. History shows the party that doesn't hold the White House almost always wins midterm elections, in large part because they're viewed as a check on the president. Democrats and liberal candidates have also been doing well in special elections and other races held since the 2024 election. In other words, being not-Trump could be good enough to at least reclaim a very closely split House. But if the Democratic Party wants to run up the score in 2026 and really chart a path for the 2028 election, it has some real work to do on its branding.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump pushes 'Big, Beautiful Bill' as solution to four years of Biden failures: 'Largest tax cut, EVER'
President Donald Trump turned to social media on Monday evening to sell Americans on his vision for the "Big, Beautiful Bill," calling it an opportunity to turn the U.S. around after what he called "four disastrous years" under former President Joe Biden. The House passed the spending bill in late May and it is now in the Senate's hands. "We will take a massive step to balancing our Budget by enacting the largest mandatory Spending Cut, EVER, and Americans will get to keep more of their money with the largest Tax Cut, EVER, and no longer taxing Tips, Overtime, or Social Security for Seniors — Something 80 Million Voters supported in November," Trump said in a post on Truth Social. "It will unleash American Energy by expediting permitting for Energy, and refilling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. It will make American Air Travel GREAT AGAIN by purchasing the final Air Traffic Control System." The president said the bill includes the construction of The Gold Dome, which he says will secure American skies from adversaries. The bill will also secure the border by building more of the wall and "supercharging the deportation of millions of Criminal Illegals" that he said Biden allowed into the U.S. White House: Dems Have 'Never Been More Radical, Out Of Touch' After Voting Against 'Big, Beautiful Bill' "It will kick millions of Illegals off Medicaid, and make sure SNAP is focused on Americans ONLY! It will also restore Choice and Affordability for Car purchases by REPEALING Biden's EV Mandate, and all of the GREEN NEW SCAM Tax Credits and Spending," Trump wrote. "THE ONE, BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL also protects our beautiful children by stopping funding for sick sex changes for minors." Read On The Fox News App The Senate returned to Washington on Monday, and in his post, Trump called on his Republican allies in Congress to work quickly to get the bill on his desk before July 4. In a separate post, Trump addressed what he referred to as false statements about the bill, reiterating that it is the "single biggest Spending Cut in History." Gop Holdouts Sound Alarm On $36T Debt Crisis As Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Passes House Vote He noted that there will not be any cuts to Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid, adding they will be saved from "the incompetence of the Democrats." "The Democrats, who have totally lost their confidence and their way, are saying whatever comes to mind — Anything to win!" Trump said. "They suffered the Greatest Humiliation in the History of Politics, and they're desperate to get back on their game, but they won't be able to do that because their Policies are so bad, in fact, they would lead to the Destruction of our Country and almost did. "The only 'cutting' we will do is for Waste, Fraud, and Abuse, something that should have been done by the Incompetent, Radical Left Democrats for the last four years, but wasn't," he concluded. House Gop Unveils Medicaid Work Requirements In Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Senate Republicans will get their turn to parse through the colossal package and are eying changes that could be a hard sell for House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who can only afford to lose three votes. Congressional Republicans are in a dead sprint to get the megabill — filled with Trump's policy desires on taxes, immigration, energy, defense and the national debt — onto the president's desk by early July. If passed in its current state, the bill is expected to add roughly $3 trillion to the national debt, including interest, according to the Committee for Responsible Federal Budget. Fox News Digital's Amy Nelson, Pilar Arias, Brie Stimson and Alex Miller contributed to this article source: Trump pushes 'Big, Beautiful Bill' as solution to four years of Biden failures: 'Largest tax cut, EVER'
