Paris-based think-tank The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has suggested taking away payments for the wealthiest 5% to 10%, saying it would allow the Government to give more to people in greater need.
Mark Pearson, deputy director of employment, labour and social affairs with the OECD, was reported by the Financial Times, as saying: “Giving less [pension] to the people at the top would free up resources to increase general benefits.”
But Claire Trott, head of pensions strategy, Technical Connection was unconvinced by the idea.
She told FP Today: "Cutting state benefits is a contentious issue and judging who should and shouldn't get certain benefits is a costly process which can be very subjective and appear unfair.
“The introduction of the new state pension should in the long term simplify the payments and simplicity brings cost savings which could easily be made more complex again with this suggestion by the OECD.
"I understand the reasoning behind this suggestion but suspect the implementation wouldn't produce the outcome desired and would just create an even more divided population."
Fiona Tait, technical director at Intelligent Pensions, was also sceptical.
She said: “While it is certainly true that the UK faces an increasing burden of support for people living longer I would agree with comments that looking for greater contributions from the more wealthy in society would be better than removing benefits which they have effectively already funded for via their National Insurance contributions.
"Apart from the question of fairness, it would also create further uncertainly for people trying to plan for their retirement since they may not know until a fairly late stage if they would be eligible to receive the state pension or not.
"The government is already facing criticism from groups who will not receive the state pension they expected due to changes in the state pension age, this could result in the same problems all over again. It almost seems that every time our pension system achieves some welcome simplicity, as with the new flat-rate state pension, there is always someone looking to add additional complexity.”