The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has launched a call for evidence to support its third state pension age (SPA) review, looking for further views on what factors it should consider in determining the SPA for future decades.

The government previously announced plans for a review of the SPA, which is required as part of its obligations under the Pensions Act 2014, alongside the revival of the Pensions Commission, as it looks to explore adequacy issues and undersaving concerns.

As part of this review, the government has appointed the Government Actuary's Department (GAD) to prepare a report looking at the proportion of adult life in retirement, whilst independent reviewer, Dr Suzy Morrissey, has been tasked with preparing recommendations for a framework that would allow the Secretary of State to consider future state pension age arrangements in the light of the long-term demographic pressures the country faces.

The call for evidence is intended to support this independent report, gathering views and evidence on the potential merits of linking SPA to life expectancy, the role of SPA in managing the long-term sustainability of the state pension, and the international experience of automatic adjustment mechanisms for making decisions about SPA. 

In particular, the call for evidence is calling for views on how linking SPA to life expectancy could impact intergenerational fairness, and how changes to SPA could impact people differently. 

It is also considering the advantages and disadvantages of using the SPA to manage the cost of the state pension in the longer term, and what factors could be considered for use in an automatic adjustment mechanism, and why. 

The call for evidence also queries what other factors the government should consider, as well as which factors (life expectancy, sustainability, and others) are most important when setting the SPA.

Commenting in the call for evidence, Morrissey said: "My report must include the key factors the government should consider in determining SPA for future decades.

"Most of us will expect to receive at least some state pension once we reach SPA. The impact of decisions around SPA are far-reaching. 

"Therefore, I want to make sure I have heard views from a broad range of organisations, experts and individuals throughout the course of my review, including those who have an interest in the wider social and economic impacts of an ageing society."

Whilst the closing date for submitting responses is 24 October 2025, industry organisations have already begun to share their key thoughts on the reivew, with the Work and Pensions Committee, for instance, outlining a number of key recommendations relating to the state pension.


Unpopular decisions may be needed, though, as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) recently warned that the government will need to make "difficult decisions" to rebuild fiscal buffers given the UK's ageing population, highlighting the state pension triple lock as one potential area for reform.

Indeed, Just Group group communications director, Stephen Lowe, warned that the government may have to look at options either to increase the SPA or to moderate the amount paid if it wants to avoid increasing taxes or means-testing the state pension.

However, he admitted that "neither of these are political vote winners – and as we have seen with the winter fuel and disability payments, once a benefit is introduced it becomes extremely difficult to reduce or withdraw that support".

"If the government does bring in changes to the state pension – either to the amount or the age at which it is paid – then it makes sense for people who are not yet receiving it to build up some resilience against those changes," he stated.

“This is important because more than four in ten of current recipients tell us the state pension accounts for the majority of their income and there is a significant proportion wholly reliant on it.

"So, if the government either limits the amount paid or pushes out the age at which the state pension can be claimed, then some people will face a wider financial gap than they planned and will need to cover it from their own resources."

---