The system favors those who have been self employed and purchased RRSP,s as compared to those who worked for a company. Both were set up to provide retirement income.
Lets take a company locked in pension of 500,000 .
Lets compare an RRSP.at the same dollar value 500.000. The locked in pensioner will have is funds handed to him or her in dribbles and drabs until age 90. Only a percentage is available each year. Those with RRSP,s there is no limit of withdrawal.and to get more of your money , the RRSP holders will never have to apply to the FSCO, and pay a fee ranging fro 200.00 to 600.00..
Also thanks to Bill 27 61 MPPs with locked in pensions had their pensions totally unlocked including Dalton McGuinty. This could even be against the charter of rights and freedoms. Philip

I am in the position of making application for early CPP effective as early as Sept 2011 & find myself in the position of doing some serious investigation. A friend told me about your article. After reading the info posted at the CPP website & your article, I continue to lean toward taking an early pension. I would like to get back out of it, those contributions that I have made into it.

I have no significant-other, or dependents. This pension will be to & for me, only. I suspect this is a growing demographic group.
At my death, the pension stops.
When I die, whether now, (pre 60 yo) or at 65 yo, or at 70 plus, the maximum possible CPP payout to my estate is:
NOT the residual of those cumulative contributions that I’ve made (est. $31,000) ,
or better yet, some amount in which a formula would factor in what my employers contributed over all those years, but
a grand total of $2,500. In my case that’s approximately 8% of my contributions.
In very simple terms, that seems flawed. Unfair. “Theft”. of my contributions & all those made by others in similar circumstances.

The conventional scenarios focus on: whether a person is taking a late pension, or at 65 yo, or
a person taking a pension at 60 yo, = would be taking a reduced pension, & if to live past the 72 yo (& effective 2011 onward, at some later date)= the break even factor, the cumulative early CPP payout, evens out with what one would have received, & then falls behind, had they begun payments at 65 yo.

In my scenario, with my seemingly unique sense & perspective of “fairness”, my goal is that if there is no “fair” payout to my estate, I would like to try to be payed/collect at least the total of those contributions that I’ve made into CPP.
Using your eg. Mary who will get $672 & Joan $614 & a simple average $643/mo, it would take approximately 48 mo/4 years to collect, so from age 60 yo until age 64 yo.
Using the eg. at $960/mo, starting from age 65 yo. would require living until 67 2/3 yo.
I’d have to guess that I have a better chance of living until 64 yo than until 67 2/3 yo to collect.

So for me, the incentive to hold off/defer taking an early CPP until a later age eg 65 yo, would need to include a CPP revision that would make provision for payout to the estate of at least the cumulative amount of those contributions that the person made.

I do recognize that CPP may well pay out for many years after age 67 & is indexed, & it’s many other attributes, and I will be grateful for that, with the constant pressure of increasing costs. But… the issue above needs to be addressed also.
……………………………….
For the record, I do believe that the CPP is a better alternative to the newly proposed contributory pooled pension plan. & for most of the reasons already covered by the media. I’d have to guess the current government is NOT in support of an enhanced CPP d/t the cost to the government. It’s only saving grace may be (although who knows?) that it might/should factor in an estate payout of those contributions made. I can only hope that reason will prevail.

Sincerely
Jan Coward