Canada’s governments should consider updating the current retirement age to match the reality of today’s workforce, according to a new report by the Canadian Institute of Actuaries.

“Canadians are living longer than ever, and many are choosing to work beyond age 65,” said John Dark, president of the CIA, in the report. “It makes sense to update our country’s retirement income programs to reflect this fact.”

The report also noted life expectancy at age 65 has increased significantly since 1966, with men living another 19.9 years (up from 13.6), and women living another 22.5 years (up from 16.9).

Read: Pension stakeholders call on feds to remove barriers to longevity risk pooling

It recommended deferring the age at which Canada Pension Plan/Quebec Pension Plan and old-age security benefits are paid out by raising the retirement age from 65 to 67, the early retirement age from 60 to 62 and the maximum retirement age from 70 to 75.

The CIA suggested these changes be rolled out over a 10-year period, meaning they wouldn’t impact people currently over the age of 60. The first two years should be used to advise Canadians about what’s ahead, noted the report, while each of the eight years following should include a gradual increase to the retirement age in three-month increments.

“In addition to the financial benefit of receiving higher lifetime retirement income, our proposal provides financial protection for retirees against the cost of living longer and the significant erosion of savings from the effects of inflation,” said Jacques Tremblay, a fellow of the CIA, in the report.

Joe Nunes, executive chairman of Actuarial Solutions Inc. and a fellow of the CIA, says the association is trying to encourage people to think about accessing their savings earlier and wait on the government programs until later for their own benefit.

Read: Physical workers face retirement challenges as longevity rises: survey

This is a good strategy for most Canadians, said the report, though it noted members of the physical labour force may have concerns due to the nature of their work and the potential need to retire earlier. It added governments should continue with ancillary social programs like guaranteed income supplement, and said it isn’t suggesting the qualifying age be deferred to 67.

“I think that the deferral to age 67 or some later age is going to happen in the next decade, [but] I think the question is, what benefit will be promised?” says Nunes. “And we’re trying to say, let’s make sure it’s a bigger benefit so that there’s an incentive for people to wait longer for [it].”

The CIA acknowledged its proposal is just getting the conversation started and noted it’s up to governments to decide how to proceed.

“We would welcome the opportunity to help governments review the country’s retirement programs and decide what changes work best for all Canadians,” said Dark.

Read: How does Canada’s public pension system measure up globally?

Copyright © 2020 Transcontinental Media G.P. Originally published on

Join us on Twitter

See all comments Recent Comments

Jean Culliton:

All well and good to extend the retirement age to 67 for some professions. but consideration needs to given to the labour force in physical positions of which many are not physically able to work until 65 even. There needs to be a retirement policy for those workers.

Monday, April 15 at 11:26 am | Reply

Jorge Cruz:

Increasing the retirement age makes sense as long as flexibility and adjustment to individual situations are part of the process. Forcing workers in physically and emotionally stressful jobs to continue until a later age, might lead not only to a miserable old age life but also to higher healthcare costs.
Consideration should be given also to immigrants in a country with 20% of foreign-born people. Is the expectancy of life among immigrants the same as among Canadian-born individuals?
Another issue is the increasing unemployment in some professions, and particularly in the youth and among college and university graduates. Would increasing the retirement age worsen the chances for a career in Canada for the new talent and lead to talent migration to other countries? How would that affect the competitiveness of Canada in the future?

Sunday, May 05 at 3:09 pm | Reply


I think the retirement age should stay where it’s at. Trudeau should think twice about this he at first disagreed with Harper for jacking the retirement age up to 67 which isn’t suppose to take effect til 2023. I hope Trudeau keeps it where it’s at. How are those going to enjoy their retirement years if the age was jacked up, you might want to travel before your health gets hindered more. Lots of people suffer from dementia when they hit their 60’s, it’s the short term stuff that makes things complicated. Oh, I’m not accepting excuses. Good luck all, vote Liberal!!

Saturday, July 27 at 6:47 am | Reply


I do not agree with raising the retirement age from 65. There are many older people who once laid off (from approx 50+ yrs of age), have difficulty finding another job and may never find another job. In many cases these older workers are “discarded” as e.g. being overqualified, or are too old for the job – not that anyone says too old as this is against the law.
However, this is the reality.
Are these older people to suffer because the government wants to find savings?
Note: these same people have paid in to CPP for many years prior to being laid off, or the company sold and reorganizations occur for example.
I believe the retirement age should remain at 65 with the individual’s choice as it currently stands to opt to defer receiving their CPP at a future date.
Respectfully……….. 🙂

Tuesday, October 22 at 1:30 pm | Reply

Add a comment

Have your say on this topic! Comments that are thought to be disrespectful or offensive may be removed by our Benefits Canada admins. Thanks!

* These fields are required.
Field required
Field required
Field required