PensionsSep 17 2018

Govt considers auto-enrolment solution for social care

twitter-iconfacebook-iconlinkedin-iconmail-iconprint-icon
Search supported by
Govt considers auto-enrolment solution for social care

The government is considering the creation of a solution similar to auto-enrolment to solve the UK's social care crisis.

According to media reports, the proposal - which is expected to be one of several being addressed in the upcoming Department for Health and Social care green paper - would imply that every adult in England would be expected to pay into a national fund to cover their care in later life.

If such a policy was introduced, individuals would have to actively choose not to make payments to the social care fund akin to pensions auto-enrolment.

Auto-enrolment into pensions was introduced in 2012, and according to recent data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), there were 8.8 million active members of pension schemes in 2017. 

Matt Hancock, Health and Social Care secretary, said: "I’m attracted to the model of auto-enrolment, which has been so successful in pensions.

"If you make it the norm, tell people what it is they have to do to look after themselves, it’s often the case that very few people will opt out.

"It takes away the injustice of people losing all that they have saved for."

According to a recent report commissioned by the Department of Health and Social Care public expenditure with social care is expected to soar.

The research showed the cost of social services for older people is projected to rise under the current funding system from about £7.2bn (0.45 per cent of GDP) in 2015 to £18.7bn (0.75 per cent of GDP) in 2040.

FTAdviser reported last week the government is planning to propose a new cap to fund social care in its upcoming green paper.

At a hearing in front of the economic affairs committee in the House of Lords on Tuesday (11 September), Chancellor of the Exchequer Phillip Hammond said the green paper would set out several proposals to reflect different ways of delivering and funding the cap.

Several solutions for the care funding problem are said to be on the table, including the ‘Care Isa’ – a capped savings product, exempt from inheritance tax – and a 'care pension', which mixes drawdown and care insurance.

It is estimated a mere 12 per cent of adults aged 55 or over are currently putting aside money to pay for their future care in the UK.

In December the government confirmed a proposed £72,500 cap on social care would be scrapped.

Former prime minister David Cameron had promised an upper limit on the amount people must pay towards their own care, following recommendations from the Dilnot commission in 2011.

But Mrs May's government said a green paper on long-term reform would be published this summer instead, which then got pushed back to the autumn.

The government has since hinted that the publication of the document could be further delayed, due to "unforeseen circumstances".

In the meantime, the House of Lords launched an inquiry into social care funding.

According to Steven Cameron, pensions director at Aegon, social care funding needs to be at "the forefront of 'life after Brexit' government plans".

He said: "We hope the promised green paper will set out a range of ideas to generate widespread debate and intergenerational buy-in.

"Making it the default to contribute in advance towards your own social care does have appeal but with an estimated one in four needing care in later life, three in four may feel they are paying in without benefiting."

He added: "While pensions auto enrolment is a savings plan, the plans for social care may be more of an insurance contract - with everyone's contributions being pooled to pay for those who need care in future. It's untested if individuals will be happy with this or if significant numbers opt out perhaps believing they won't need care."

Jeannie Boyle, director & chartered financial planner at EQ Investors, argued that given the pressure on household finance, the take up of this idea wouldn't be significant enough to make a difference.

She said: "Why force people to choose between a pension and a care fund? Saving more into a pension would achieve the same objectives with the added benefit of tax relief. Only one on four people need care so insurance based contracts make more sense if the government will not make provision out of general taxation.”

maria.espadinha@ft.com