New Zealand’s universal superannuation system has long been a pillar of retirement
security, providing a reliable income to older citizens and helping to prevent poverty in old age. As pressures from an aging population and fiscal sustainability grow, debates have intensified over whether to raise the qualifying age above 65. However, there are compelling economic, social, and ethical reasons for maintaining the NZ Superannuation age at 65.
1. Fairness and Equity Across Demographics
Raising the superannuation age would disproportionately impact lower-income and manual workers. These individuals often enter the workforce earlier, perform more physically demanding jobs, and have shorter life expectancies than higher-income earners. Forcing them to work longer ignores the disparities in health and longevity across socioeconomic groups. Keeping the retirement age at 65 ensures a more equitable system that does not punish those who have contributed through years of labour-intensive work.
2. Strong Fiscal Position Relative to Other Nations
Compared to many OECD countries, New Zealand’s superannuation system is relatively sustainable. It is simple, universal, and tax-funded, without the complexity of means-testing or contribution-based entitlements. While aging will increase costs, the New Zealand system is currently projected to remain affordable as a percentage of GDP for several decades, especially when compared to nations with more generous or fragmented pension systems. Any fiscal pressures can be addressed through more moderate policy adjustments, such as tax reform or minor indexing changes, rather than shifting the age threshold.
3. The Value of Certainty and Stability
One of the strengths of the NZ Super system is its predictability. New Zealanders plan their lives around the expectation of retirement at 65. Changing the eligibility age would disrupt long-term financial planning for thousands of near-retirees, potentially forcing people to stay in unsuitable jobs or face hardship if they are unable to continue working. In contrast, maintaining the age at 65 provides social and economic stability, especially for those with limited private savings.
4. Supports Social Participation and Well-being
Superannuation is not just about income. It’s also about dignity, independence, and inclusion. At 65, many New Zealanders want to transition from full-time work to community involvement, part-time roles, or care-giving. Universal superannuation supports these transitions and helps older people contribute to society in unpaid but socially valuable ways. Delaying access could reduce these contributions and lead to poorer health outcomes due to prolonged work in unsuitable conditions.
5. Alternative Reforms Are More Targeted
If the goal is to ensure long-term sustainability, more targeted and progressive reforms may be more effective than raising the age. For example, policymakers could consider adjusting tax settings for wealthier superannuitants, better aligning superannuation with other forms of retirement income, or increasing support for people working beyond 65. These changes would preserve fairness while still managing fiscal risk.
Conclusion
New Zealand’s superannuation system, with its age of eligibility at 65, is a model of simplicity, universality, and fairness. While demographic change presents real challenges, the solution does not lie in raising the age for everyone. Instead, thoughtful, measured policy that protects the most vulnerable while enhancing long-term sustainability is the path forward. Keeping the superannuation age at 65 is not only fair—it’s smart, sustainable, and socially responsible.
– Walter James, CoOperativeNZ 2025
