IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Private Pensions and Equity in Ireland and the U.K

Listed author(s):
  • Gerard Hughes

    (Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI))

Registered author(s):

    The strong link between private pensions and employment status means that there is little interest in the equity of private pension arrangements since it is expected that inequality in earnings will be reproduced in inequality in pensions. Nevertheless, the equity of private pensions is an issue as governments in mainly English speaking OECD countries subsidise their provision through the tax system and governments in a number of EU countries are now considering this policy as a way of coping with increases in long-term pension costs due to ageing of their populations. The favourable tax treatment of private pensions provided in Ireland and the United Kingdom is outlined and compared with the tax treatment of private pensions in OECD countries. It is shown that the annual cost of tax expenditure on pensions amounted to over 1 per cent of GDP in both countries in 1997, that it substantially exceeded the cost of their means-tested social assistance schemes and amounted to two-thirds of direct expenditure on social insurance pensions in Ireland and to one-third in the U.K. Evidence relating to the distribution of pension tax expenditure shows that the present tax treatment of private pensions is inequitable as about two-thirds of the benefits accrue to the top two income deciles in both countries and 3 per cent or less to the bottom two deciles. Proposals for containing the cost of public pension systems in Europe by relying on greater private pension provision in the future can learn from experience in Ireland and Britain that using tax incentives to promote private pension provision could impose substantial costs on the Exchequer. The regressive nature of such incentives means that all taxpayers have to pay more taxes to provide benefits which accrue overwhelmingly to higher income taxpayers.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    File Function: First version, 2002
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) in its series Papers with number WP142.

    in new window

    Length: 20 pages
    Date of creation: Mar 2002
    Handle: RePEc:esr:wpaper:wp142
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Whitaker Square, Sir John Rogerson's Quay, Dublin 2

    Phone: (353-1) 863 2000
    Fax: (353-1) 863 2100
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Alicia H. Munnell, 1991. "Are pensions worth the cost?," Working Papers 91-2, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
    2. Phil Agulnik & Julian Le Grand, 1998. "Tax relief and partnership pensions," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 19(4), pages 403-428, November.
    3. Munnell, Alicia H., 1991. "Are Pensions Worth the Cost?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 44(3), pages 393-403, September.
    4. Whitehouse, Edward, 1999. "The tax treatment of funded pensions," Social Protection and Labor Policy and Technical Notes 20126, The World Bank.
    5. Martin Feldstein & Andrew Samwick, 1998. "The Transition Path in Privatizing Social Security," NBER Chapters, in: Privatizing Social Security, pages 215-264 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Malcolm Edey & John Simon, 1998. "Australia's Retirement Income System," NBER Chapters, in: Privatizing Social Security, pages 63-97 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. repec:ntj:journl:v:44:y:1991:i:no._3:p:393-403 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Alan Budd & Nigel Campbell, 1998. "The Roles of the Public and Private Sectors in the U.K. Pension System," NBER Chapters, in: Privatizing Social Security, pages 99-134 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:esr:wpaper:wp142. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sarah Burns)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.