Some provincial politicians are again trying to make the dubious case that we have a "retirement income crisis" to revive calls for a mandatory expansion to the Canada Pension Plan (CPP). While the issue is set to be on the agenda at the annual federal-provincial finance ministers meeting in December, the reality is that the case for expanding CPP is built on shaky assumptions about retirement income inadequ
The tone and language used by Professor Rhys Kesselman in his criticism of our recent study on the CPP and RRSPs is a far cry from the professionalism and decorum one would expect from a distinguished economist and holder of a Canada Research Chair. Rather than stick to debating the facts, Professor Kesselman stoops to innuendoes and school yard taunts to disparage our work. Reasonable people should be able to disagree without being disagreeable.
The idea of expanding the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) resurfaced in December 2012 during a meeting of the federal and provincial finance ministers. The ministers agreed to explore possible reforms to the CPP at their next meeting expected sometime in the coming months.
The recent Canadian federal election campaign saw a number of arguments raised both for and against expanding the Canada Pension Plan (CPP). This debate is an important one for Canadians, since it affects their disposable income both during their working lives and in retirement.