Should we do away with the mixed-age couples rule for pension credits?

To save pension credit for older households, the mixed-age couples rule was implemented in May 2019, but a charity says it is unjust

The controversial mixed-age couples rule of the government may be causing hundreds of thousands of low-income couples to unfairly lose out on additional financial support through Pension Credit.

Introduced in 2019, the mixed-age couples rule prohibits state pension-age individuals from claiming Pension Credit if their spouse is younger than 66.

Until their spouse reaches state pension age, they would have to begin claiming universal credit instead.

Approximately 60,000 low-income couples are being denied access to higher benefits as a result, according to a warning from the later life charity Independent Age.

Once the older partner reaches state pension age, the charity is pleading with the government to reverse the mixed-age couples rule, allowing couples to receive pensioner benefits.

It asserts that although universal credit is available to couples in this circumstance, it is not intended to satisfy the needs of those who are older than the state pension age.

Chief executive of Independent Age Joanna Elson stated: "The mixed-age couples rule is unjust and needs to be overturned. It is unfair that low-income older individuals with younger partners are denied access to essential financial assistance and must wait years to receive benefits like Pension Credit. Couples where the younger partner works at a low-paying job or is unable to work because of health issues or because they are taking care of their older partner are supported by Independent Age. This rule runs the risk of causing more elderly people to experience severe financial hardship.

"Your financial support shouldn't be based on who you chose to spend your later years with after falling in love. Due to this rule, far too many elderly couples are compelled to live on meager incomes. The government needs to go back and undo it.

Independent Age will be sending Valentine's Day cards to all 650 MPs, urging them to reverse the mixed-age rule, in observance of Valentine's Day and to draw attention to its campaign to change it.

What rule applies to mixed-age couples?

On May 15, 2019, the Tory government implemented the mixed-age couples rule in an effort to streamline Pension Credit.

Pension Credit is meant to give long-term assistance to pensioner households that are no longer economically active due to their advanced age, according to the argument.

Before, if a mixed-age couple was on a low income and one of them was of state pension age and the other was below the threshold, they could choose to claim either working age benefits or pension age benefits.

However, the Welfare Reform Act of 2012 stipulates that couples can only receive pension age income-related benefits once both partners have attained the legal age of majority.

Anyone who has been receiving the benefit since May 15, 2019, is impacted by the changes.

Is it unjust to have mixed-age couples?

Because the mixed-age couples rule requires low-income individuals to apply for universal credit, which is less than pension credit, critics claim it is unfair.

According to government statistics cited by Independent Age, impacted couples may lose an average of £5,900 annually, with some losing up to £7,000.

A further 12 percent of couples who may qualify for Pension Credit have an age difference of more than 10 years, according to data from 2019. This means that the older partner may not be able to access pensioner entitlements until they are in their late 70s.

Pensioners with lower incomes are having problems because of this policy.

According to Independent Age, a 79-year-old called to report that their partner's age of 59 prevented them from claiming pension credit. They will not be eligible for financial assistance until they are 87 years old, as per the mixed-age couples rule.

Elson went on to say: "The government has established a faulty system that allows two individuals of the same age to receive entirely different treatment simply because one of them has a younger partner.

"My partner June, who is three years younger than me, will be impacted when I reach the retirement age of 67 in 2028, a little more than two years from now," stated Andy Cressey of Goole, Yorkshire, in another instance. According to the information I've been able to locate, June will need to apply for universal credit, and her eligibility to receive my state pension will be reduced by one pound for every pound. This essentially means that my state pension will be our only source of income.

In addition, I've learned that the council will cover all of my rent and council taxes if we live apart because I'll be a pensioner and my partner will be eligible for universal credit. Therefore, living apart will benefit us more, which is absurd. If that is true, we would not have the money to live together. The system is absurd to say the least, so why should I pay rent and council tax when I live with my younger partner and she will have little to no income of her own?