Less than half of pensioners aged 65-75 ‘confident their savings will last'
Less than half (48%) of people aged 65 to 75 are confident their private pension savings will stretch for the rest of their life, research indicates.
The survey, for Aviva and Age UK, took place among 1,000 people in this age group who are on a moderate retirement income, excluding people who only receive the state pension and those with more than £20,000 in annual household income from a defined benefit (DB) salary-related pension.
Those taking part in the survey, carried out by consultancy Ignition House in October and November 2024, said they did not pay for financial advice.
More than four-fifths (83%) said an income for life from their private pension savings has become more important to them as they get older, and the same number said they would be worried if their retirement income fell – with women more likely to feel this way than men (87% compared with 79%).
Two-thirds (65%) of those surveyed do not believe there is enough support for people managing their financial needs as they age.
Aviva and Age UK said the research highlights the 'pressing need' for regular financial reviews within retirement.
They suggested that a 'mid-retirement MOT' could offer pensioners guidance and support while they are in retirement andwould act as a financial and lifestyle review that could include a conversation about estate planning, fraud protection, access to state benefits, and managing finances if they start to experience cognitive decline.
Over-50s can access free guidance from the Government-backed Pension Wise service.
Doug Brown, chief executive of insurance, wealth and retirement at Aviva, said: 'Pensioners today clearly value financial security, but many seem to be sleepwalking into later retirement with a set and forget approach to their retirement income.'
Paul Farmer, Age UK's chief executive, said: 'We frequently hear from struggling pensioners, many of whom have a small private pension of their own, about how tough they have found the last few years.
'Managing your pension and other finances becomes harder as you get older – especially where people have suffered a major life-change like a bereavement or a dementia diagnosis.
He added: 'The mid-70s is often a point where people need to take stock and think through their options.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Here's why SpaceX faces a bright future as government contractor despite Musk-Trump divorce
The public breakup between Elon Musk and President Trump has cast a pall over the future of SpaceX – but the mogul's company should remain on a solid trajectory because the two sides need each other. Trump has counted on his estranged First Buddy's privately owned firm to fulfill the administration's plans for NASA to return to the moon, ongoing operations at the International Space Station, a reported classified deal with US intelligence to build hundreds of spy satellites and expanding internet access to rural parts of America. SpaceX – known for building and launching rockets, and the Starlink satellite internet network – has approximately $22 billion in government contracts on the books, according to Reuters. That includes a roughly $5 billion deal to build the Dragon spacecraft for use by NASA, which Musk threatened to decommission in his unhinged social media rants aimed at Trump – only to later reverse course hours later. Trump threatened to end Musk's federal contracts in response to the verbal onslaught, which included the allegation that Trump is 'in the Epstein files' and that he would have 'lost the election' without his help. 'Trump could certainly cancel most deals and contracts if he wants but the government may still have to pay them – depends on the contract details,' a Republican consultant connected with Trump, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly about the feud, told The Post on Friday. The two men appeared no closer to a detente, with Trump refusing to get on the phone with his former DOGE cost-cutter and largest campaign benefactor after he blasted the White House-backed 'One Big Beautiful Bill.' While that makes for great theater, the split probably works in both of their favors, according to the source. 'Trump and Elon both got what they wanted here,' the GOP consultant said. 'Elon was able to distance himself from Trump in a public enough way to get his businesses back on track and Trump was able to have all of the MAGA warriors who were questioning the bill shut up or even defend it so they could defend Trump and prove they took his side.' SpaceX 'will be fine' despite the fireworks, the source added. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt declined to comment on the war of words. 'President Trump is focused on making our country great again and passing the One Big Beautiful Bill,' she said. SpaceX did not immediately return a request for comment. As the founder, chairman and CEO of SpaceX, Musk is in total control with 79% of the company's voting shares as of 2023, according to a filing at the time. The closely held firm recently secured a $350 billion valuation. Overall, Musk and his businesses that also include Tesla, brain chip firm Neuralink and The Boring Company have received at least $38 billion in government contracts, loans, subsidies and tax credits, according to a recent Washington Post analysis. If Trump does decide to go to DefCon 5 on Musk, the billionaire's alleged drug use could be used as one possible lever to wriggle out of the SpaceX contracts. During Trump's first term in office in 2019, Bloomberg reported that the Pentagon was reviewing Musk's SpaceX security clearance after he smoked marijuana during an appearance on 'The Joe Rogan Experience' podcast. While Musk has strenuously denied misusing drugs, House Democrats this week requested details from Trump on whether he had any knowledge of Musk working 'under the influence.' The possible loss of government contracts would not be 'catastrophic' for Musk or his rocket company. 'SpaceX has developed itself into a global powerhouse that dominates most of the space industry, but there's no question that it would result in significant lost revenue and missed contract opportunities,' Justus Parmar, CEO of SpaceX investor Fortuna Investments, told Reuters. Meanwhile, MAGA firebrand Steve Bannon called for the South African-born Musk to be deported – and floated the possibility that Trump could use a Korean War-era statute called the Defense Production Act to enable a federal takeover of the privately owned company. However, the headline-grabbing proposal is likely a nonstarter. 'There's no way Bannon's idea of just taking over private companies works out long term, both because it would be litigated and because other companies would keep the US government at arm's length to avoid future similar issues,' the consultant said. 'Neither outcome is workable.'
CBS News
2 hours ago
- CBS News
Supreme Court halts lower court orders requiring DOGE to hand over information about work and personnel
Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Washington — The Supreme Court on Friday halted lower court orders that required the White House's Department of Government Efficiency to turn over information to a government watchdog group as part of a lawsuit that tests whether President Trump's cost-cutting task force has to comply with federal public records law. The order from the high court clears DOGE for now from having to turn over records related to its work and personnel, and keeps Amy Gleason, identified as its acting administrator, from having to answer questions at a deposition. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. "The portions of the district court's April 15 discovery order that require the government to disclose the content of intra–executive branch USDS recommendations and whether those recommendations were followed are not appropriately tailored," the court said in its order. "Any inquiry into whether an entity is an agency for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act cannot turn on the entity's ability to persuade. Furthermore, separation of powers concerns counsel judicial deference and restraint in the context of discovery regarding internal executive branch communications." The Supreme Court sent the case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for more proceedings. Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily paused the district court's order last month, which allowed the Supreme Court more time to consider the Trump administration's bid for emergency relief. A district judge had ordered DOGE to turn over documents to the group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, by June 3, and for Gleason's deposition to be completed by June 13. The underlying issue in the case involves whether DOGE is subject to the Freedom of Information Act. CREW argues that the cost-cutting task force wields "substantial independent authority," which makes it a de facto agency that must comply with federal public records law. The Justice Department, however, disagrees and instead claims that DOGE is a presidential advisory body housed within the Executive Office of the President that makes recommendations to the president and federal agencies on matters that are important to Mr. Trump's second-term agenda. DOGE's agency status was not before the Supreme Court, though the high court may be asked to settle that matter in the future. Instead, the Trump administration had asked the justices to temporarily halt a district court's order that allowed CREW to gather certain information from DOGE as part of its effort to determine whether the task force is an advisory panel that is outside FOIA's scope or is an agency that is subject to the records law. The judge overseeing the dispute, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, had ordered DOGE to turn over certain documents to the watchdog group by June 3 and to complete all depositions, including of Gleason, by June 13. Mr. Trump ordered the creation of DOGE on his first day back in the White House as part of his initiative to slash the size of the federal government. Since then, DOGE team members have fanned out to agencies across the executive branch and have been part of efforts to shrink the federal workforce and shutter entities like the U.S. Agency for International Development and the U.S. Institute of Peace. DOGE has also attempted to gain access to sensitive databases kept by the Internal Revenue Service, Social Security Administration and Office of Personnel Management, prompting legal battles. In an effort to learn more about DOGE's structure and operations, CREW submitted an expedited FOIA request to the task force. After it did not respond in a timely manner, CREW filed a lawsuit and sought a preliminary injunction to expedite processing of its records request. The organization argued that DOGE was exercising significant independent authority, which made it an agency subject to FOIA. Cooper granted CREW's request for a preliminary injunction in March and agreed that FOIA likely applies to DOGE because it is "likely exercising substantial independent authority much greater than other [Executive Office of the President] components held to be covered by FOIA." He then allowed CREW to conduct limited information-gathering, which the watchdog group said aimed to determine whether DOGE is exercising substantial authority that would bring it within FOIA's reach. A federal appeals court ultimately declined to pause that order, requiring DOGE to turn over the documents sought by CREW. In seeking the Supreme Court's intervention, Solicitor General D. John Sauer said CREW is conducting a "fishing expedition" into DOGE's activities. He warned that if Cooper's order remains in place, several components of the White House, such as the offices of the chief of staff and national security adviser, would be subject to FOIA. "That untenable result would compromise the provision of candid, confidential advice to the president and disrupt the inner workings of the Executive Branch," Sauer wrote. "Yet, in the decisions below, the court of appeals and district court treated a presidential advisory body as a potential 'agency' based on the persuasive force of its recommendations — threatening opening season for FOIA requests on the president's advisors." But lawyers for CREW told the Supreme Court in a filing that the Justice Department's position "would require courts to blindly yield to the Executive's characterization" of the authority and operations of a component of the Executive Office of the President. They said adopting the Trump administration's approach to DOGE would give the president "free reign" to create new entities within the Executive Office of the President that exercise substantial independent authority but are shielded from transparency laws. "Courts would be forced to blindly accept the government's representations about an EOP unit's realworld operations, unable to test those representations through even limited discovery," CREW's lawyers wrote. "It is that extreme position, not the discovery order, that would 'turn[] FOIA on its head.'"
Bloomberg
3 hours ago
- Bloomberg
Rio Tinto Eyes Bailout for Australian Aluminum Smelter, AFR Says
Rio Tinto Group is seeking a multibillion-dollar government bailout for its Tomago aluminum smelter — Australia's largest electricity user — due to spiraling energy costs, the Australian Financial Review reported. The talks center on the smelter's electricity contract for 2026 to 2029 and the federal government's production tax credits, the newspaper reported Saturday, citing unidentified sources familiar with the discussions. One person interviewed by the AFR said any bailout package will likely be 'more sophisticated' than a direct subsidy and that talks are mainly being conducted with the New South Wales state government.
