The recently published “7 Steps Toward Better CPP/QPP Claiming Decisions” by the National Institute on Ageing offers critical insights into the decision-making process surrounding the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and Quebec Pension Plan (QPP), specifically focusing on the CPP break-even analysis approach. They state that this approach, which has long been a staple in financial guidance, is deeply flawed and potentially harmful, as it encourages Canadians to make decisions based on faulty assumptions and short-term thinking rather than considering their long-term financial security.
Understanding the CPP Break-Even Analysis
The CPP break-even analysis frames the decision to take CPP early or delay it by suggesting that an individual will not “break-even” unless they live past a certain age. This approach involves calculating the crossover point where the higher cumulative CPP payouts from delaying CPP payments match the lower cumulative payouts from taking them earlier. Essentially, the idea is that you need to guess if you’ll live past this break-even age to determine if delaying your CPP is worthwhile.
While this method may seem simple and appealing, especially for people who want to make quick decisions, the article strongly criticizes the break-even analysis for several reasons. These critiques are based on the financial and psychological risks it poses to retirees.
The Criticism of the CPP Break-Even Analysis Approach
The National Institute on Ageing points out multiple flaws in the CPP break-even analysis, arguing that this method does not serve Canadians’ long-term financial interests. Here are the key criticisms:
1. Longevity Pessimism: Underestimating How Long You’ll Live
One of the most significant issues with the CPP break-even analysis is that it plays on people’s inherent pessimism regarding longevity. Many individuals tend to underestimate how long they will live. This leads them to believe they won’t live long enough to benefit from delaying their CPP payments. The article cites research that shows how longevity pessimism can have a profound impact on retirement planning. By underestimating their lifespan, retirees may risk undersaving and overspending in retirement. Additionally, they may fail to recognize the long-term benefits of guaranteed, lifetime income streams like CPP, annuities, or defined benefit pensions.
Longevity pessimism is particularly dangerous because it affects one of the most crucial aspects of retirement planning: ensuring you do not outlive your savings. If someone underestimates how long they will live, they may claim CPP early, sacrificing years of potentially higher inflation-indexed payments that would have provided a more secure retirement.
2. A No-Win Situation for the Retiree
The article also criticizes the CPP break-even analysis for creating a no-win situation for retirees. It pits the retiree against their beneficiaries in a situation where the retiree “loses” if they live longer than the break-even age. The beneficiaries may gain from earlier untouched savings if the retiree dies before reaching the break-even age. This framing encourages people to prioritize their heirs’ financial interests over their long-term financial security and fosters a short-sighted view of retirement income.
By focusing on what will happen if they die early, retirees may overlook the crucial benefit of delaying CPP: a higher, inflation-protected income for the rest of their lives. The article explains that this trade-off is a very expensive and inefficient way to protect against the unlikely event of premature death.
3. Reinforcing a Gambling Mentality
Another major criticism is that the CPP break-even analysis encourages retirees to adopt a gambling mentality. This is linked to a concept called “mental accounting,” a psychological bias where individuals make financial decisions based on how they perceive their money in separate mental “accounts.” In the context of CPP, people often segregate the decision to delay or take CPP early as a bet on whether they will live long enough to make delaying worthwhile.
This kind of thinking distorts financial decisions and pushes retirees to treat their CPP benefits like a gamble—will they live long enough to “win” the higher payouts from delaying? The article warns that this type of reasoning leads people to ignore the broader, more significant question: Will they have enough income to sustain themselves for their entire retirement, which could last 30, 40, or more years?
4. Ignoring the Value of Financial Risk Protection
One of the CPP’s most valuable aspects is its ability to provide lifelong, inflation-indexed income that retirees cannot outlive. However, the CPP break-even analysis completely ignores the value of this financial risk protection. By focusing only on cash flows and returns, the break-even analysis reduces the decision to a financial equation, neglecting to account for the real risks that retirees face in their later years, such as inflation, investment risk, and the risk of outliving their savings.
The article argues that this deterministic approach is deeply flawed. Retirement planning should not only be about maximizing cash flows but also about managing risks. The CPP provides unparalleled security in retirement because it is inflation-adjusted and guaranteed for life. Yet, the break-even analysis discounts this essential benefit, encouraging people to claim their benefits early without considering the long-term security that delayed CPP payments offer.
5. Bias Toward Early Claiming
Perhaps the most concerning aspect of the CPP break-even analysis is that it promotes a bias toward early claiming. Research from the U.S. has shown that the break-even analysis is highly effective in pushing individuals to claim benefits earlier than they otherwise would. This same bias is likely at play for Canadians when presented with the CPP break-even framing. The research suggests that this decision-making method emphasizes the potential short-term loss (not living long enough to break even) over the long-term gain of higher, more secure retirement income.
This bias is particularly dangerous for financially vulnerable individuals, who are more likely to make suboptimal claims based on how the information is presented. People with lower financial literacy, credit card debt, or lower incomes are more susceptible to the psychological effects of the break-even framing, making them more likely to claim CPP early when it may not be in their best interest to do so.
6. Longevity and Retirement Security: Shifting the Paradigm
The article emphasizes the need to shift the paradigm away from the CPP break-even analysis toward a more comprehensive, holistic approach to retirement planning. Rather than focusing on guessing whether you will live long enough to break even, Canadians should be encouraged to think about the full range of risks they face in retirement. Longevity is unpredictable, and no one can accurately guess how long they will live. Therefore, retirement planning should involve preparing for many possible scenarios, including living longer than expected and needing guaranteed income well into advanced age.
The article calls for a more nuanced approach that considers a person’s overall financial picture, including other sources of income, taxes, personal preferences, and post-retirement financial risks like inflation and investment returns. By encouraging Canadians to think about long-term financial security rather than short-term gambles, the financial services industry can help retirees make better decisions about when to claim CPP.
Conclusion: Moving Away from the CPP Break-Even Analysis
In conclusion, the CPP break-even analysis is a flawed and potentially dangerous approach to retirement planning. It encourages people to make decisions based on short-term thinking, psychological biases, and faulty assumptions about longevity. Focusing too narrowly on whether they will “break even,” retirees may sacrifice CPP’s long-term security.
The National Institute on Ageing urges Canadians to abandon this outdated method and adopt a more holistic approach to CPP claiming decisions, one that takes into account the full spectrum of risks and rewards in retirement. Only by doing so can individuals make decisions that truly support their long-term financial well-being and ensure a secure, comfortable retirement.
This shift in perspective is crucial for improving the financial security of all Canadians, especially the financially vulnerable. By breaking the habit of using the CPP break-even analysis, financial professionals can help Canadians make better, more informed decisions that lead to greater long-term retirement security.
If you have any questions regarding the article on retirement, feel free to book a time to talk to our team or consider purchasing The Art of Retirement, which is filled with useful information about Canadians looking to retire.
