Thinktank Calls for Abolition of UK State Pension

Published: 23 September 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

A thinktank with links to Reform UK has proposed abolishing the United Kingdom’s state pension as part of a wide-ranging programme of tax and economic reforms that would reduce taxes by an estimated £75 billion. The proposals are contained in a 183-page report titled “Boosting Britain”, produced by the Centre for a Better Britain, or CFABB.

The report sets out a substantial restructuring of Britain’s tax system, retirement arrangements and financial regulations. Alongside its proposal to replace the existing state pension system, it calls for the abolition of inheritance tax and capital gains tax, the removal of several other taxes and a significant reduction in corporation tax.

The proposals have attracted attention because of the CFABB’s connections with Reform UK. The thinktank was founded and is led by Jonathan Brown, a former chief operations officer of Reform UK. Its work is therefore being examined in the context of the party’s economic and policy agenda, although the authors have said the report had not been formally reviewed by Reform UK.

The report proposes that the current state pension should eventually be replaced by a different retirement model centred on individual investment. Under the suggested system, every child would receive a £1,000 investment account at birth. Individuals would then be able to contribute a portion of their earnings to a personal retirement fund during their working lives.

The proposal would significantly change the role of the state in providing retirement income. Rather than the state pension remaining the primary universal source of retirement support for people who meet the existing eligibility requirements, the report envisages a system in which personal investment would play a much larger role.

The proposed state support would remain available as a means-tested safety net for people with the lowest incomes and assets. The report therefore does not simply describe a complete withdrawal of state support for older people, but instead advocates moving away from the existing universal state pension model towards a system that places greater emphasis on individual savings and investment.

Jonathan Brown has criticised the existing state pension arrangement, arguing that the current system places the financial burden of supporting retirees on workers. He has described the system in strongly critical terms and argued for a fundamentally different approach to retirement provision.

The report also recommends changes to public-sector pension arrangements. Among its proposals is closing some public pension schemes to new entrants, including arrangements covering groups such as teachers and civil servants. The intention would be to reduce future government liabilities while encouraging greater use of individual investment-based retirement savings.

The pension proposal forms part of a much broader economic programme. The CFABB report argues that Britain could stimulate investment, productivity and living standards by reducing taxation and changing regulations affecting businesses and financial institutions.

Among the proposed tax changes is the abolition of capital gains tax, which is generally charged on profits made from the disposal of assets. The report also proposes eliminating inheritance tax, arguing that such taxes can affect family businesses and influence decisions about where wealth is held.

The thinktank has also called for the abolition of stamp duty on property and shares, the digital services tax and air passenger duty. Another major proposal would reduce corporation tax from its current rate of 25 per cent to 15 per cent over an eight-year period.

Taken together, the report estimates that its tax proposals would cost the public finances around £75 billion. The authors argue that the measures could eventually support higher productivity, stronger business investment, increased business formation and higher living standards.

However, the report also recognises that major tax reductions would have to be accompanied by reductions in government spending if they were not to create significant pressure on public finances. It warns against repeating the financial turmoil associated with the short-lived economic programme announced under former prime minister Liz Truss.

The report does not, however, provide a complete account of how all of the proposed reductions in government revenue would be matched by spending cuts. That issue is likely to be central to debate over the proposals, particularly because pensions and other public services represent substantial areas of government expenditure.

The Department for Work and Pensions has previously forecast that the state pension would cost the public purse around £146.1 billion during the 2025-26 financial year, illustrating the scale of expenditure that would be affected by any fundamental change to the system.

The future of the state pension has already become a significant issue in British economic debate because of demographic changes, rising retirement costs and pressure on public finances. The state pension is currently an important source of income for millions of older people, while successive governments have faced difficult questions about how the system should be financed over the long term.

The CFABB proposal goes considerably further than adjustments to existing pension policy. Instead of modifying the current system, it seeks to shift retirement provision towards individually owned investment accounts.

The proposed £1,000 payment for newborns is intended to establish an early investment base that could grow over several decades. The report envisages people subsequently contributing to their accounts throughout their working lives, potentially providing a larger personal retirement fund when they reach old age.

Such a model would also alter the relationship between employment and retirement savings. Under the existing system, National Insurance contributions are connected to entitlement to the state pension. Under the proposed approach, a much larger share of retirement provision would depend on individual investment and accumulated savings.

The report has also proposed changes to the financial sector. It calls for weaker regulatory restrictions on banks and suggests a different approach to bank taxation. It also recommends changes to the structure of government, including breaking up some responsibilities currently located within the Treasury and transferring certain functions to a proposed department focused on economic growth.

Another proposal would link the remuneration of senior Bank of England officials to performance against inflation targets. The report’s authors confirmed that the approach could apply to senior positions including the governor of the Bank of England.

The publication comes at a politically significant moment, with the British government preparing its first budget under Prime Minister Andy Burnham. The government’s fiscal choices are being closely watched amid concerns about inflation, borrowing costs and the limits on available public spending.

The CFABB itself formally launched last year after previously operating under the name Resolute 1850. Its institutional connections with Reform UK have attracted particular attention as the party develops its economic programme.

The thinktank operates from Millbank Tower, near Reform UK’s headquarters, and has previously had senior figures associated with the party involved in its organisation. James Orr, who previously served as Reform UK’s head of policy, was chair of the CFABB advisory board before leaving that role when he joined Reform UK in February.

Orr was subsequently suspended by Reform UK earlier this month following an undercover investigation involving allegations concerning political donations and electoral law. He has denied wrongdoing. The CFABB has said he stepped down from his thinktank position when he joined Reform UK and was not replaced.

Despite the organisational connections, the CFABB has maintained that its report is its own work and that Reform UK had not formally reviewed it. Whether elements of the proposals eventually become part of Reform UK’s election platform therefore remains a separate political question.

The report is nevertheless likely to contribute to debate over the direction of British economic policy. Its proposals combine substantial reductions in taxation with major changes to pensions, financial regulation and the structure of government.

Supporters of the ideas would argue that lower taxes and greater private investment could encourage economic activity, while critics are likely to focus on the potential consequences for public services, government revenue and people who depend heavily on state support in retirement. Those competing assessments remain matters of political and economic debate rather than established outcomes.

The proposed abolition of the state pension is particularly significant because retirement income affects people across generations. Any transition from the current system would raise questions about existing pensioners, workers approaching retirement, younger employees and people whose ability to build private savings differs because of income or employment circumstances.

The report therefore represents more than a proposal concerning pensions alone. It sets out a broader vision in which individuals would take greater responsibility for retirement savings while the state would provide a more limited safety net. At the same time, businesses and investors would face a substantially different tax environment.

For now, the proposals remain those of the Centre for a Better Britain rather than established government policy. Their significance will depend on how they are received by political parties, economists, businesses and voters, and whether any elements are subsequently incorporated into formal election platforms or government programmes.

The publication has nevertheless placed the future of Britain’s state pension and the wider structure of taxation firmly back into political debate. With the government preparing its budget and parties considering their longer-term economic positions, questions about how Britain should finance retirement, public services and economic growth are likely to remain prominent in the months ahead.