Skip to content
parteiprogramm

SPD on pensions

From the program “More for You. Better for Germany.”

2025 federal election, February 23, 2025Original PDF, 68 pagesAnalyzed on October 2, 2026

AIThe summaries and placements on this page were written by AI. No person reviews each one. How they are made

Placement on Pensions

Average of the points on this page. The placement is made by AI.

Each axis measures one topic. There is no single "left" or "right" for everything here: economy, society, migration and security are kept apart. Only what the program says is placed. How to read the placement

  • Economyleaning more state (-1), from 2 points

    Points per step: 0 clearly more state, 2 leaning more state, 0 balanced, 0 leaning more market, 0 clearly more market

The small columns under the bars show how many points sit on each of the five steps.

Secure the pension level at 48 percent for good

The SPD wants to keep the pension level permanently at no less than 48 percent, since the current safeguard ends in mid-2025. It rejects a higher retirement age, and people with 45 contribution years would still be able to retire two years early without deductions.

Pensions should not fall behind wages. The SPD wants to keep the pension level at 48 percent or more. The retirement age should not go up. People with 45 working years may still retire earlier. People who work past retirement age should get benefits.

Without an extension, the level would fall according to the platform, which the SPD regards as a de facto cut to future pensions. It wants to build on the Grundrente (basic pension) and improved disability pensions, and adjust how income is counted against survivors' pensions. For work past retirement age, the ban on prior employment would be dropped so the same employer can hire again on a fixed term. Employer contributions to unemployment and pension insurance would then go to the employees themselves, and a lump sum could be chosen instead of monthly pension supplements.

Show the original quote (page 25)
„Wir sorgen dafür, dass das Niveau der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung dauerhaft bei mindestens 48 Prozent gesichert wird.“

Translation: We will ensure that the level of the statutory pension insurance is permanently secured at no less than 48 percent.

Page 25 in the original

Placement

  • Economyleaning more state

    Today's temporary floor would become permanent and the retirement age would not rise, locking in public pension benefits against cuts under discussion.

Pension insurance for all, targeted support for extra savings

In the long run, everyone in work is to belong to the statutory pension insurance, starting with the self-employed. The SPD wants to give more support to occupational and private pensions so that low earners in particular can save additionally.

The public pension should later cover everyone who works. First, the SPD wants to cover self-employed people. Company pensions should get more support. State money for private savings should mainly help people with low pay.

The self-employed would get basic coverage for old age and reduced earning capacity that also holds when forms of employment change. Occupational pensions could be shaped through collective agreements; offers without a contribution guarantee but with higher expected returns are to spread further, and tax support for low earners is to grow. State subsidies for private provision would go only to new products with transparent, capped costs and focus on small and medium incomes.

Show the original quote (page 25)
„Wir wollen mehr und langfristig alle Erwerbstätigen in die Solidarität der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung einbeziehen.“

Translation: We want to include more, and in the long term all, people in work in the solidarity of the statutory pension insurance.

Page 25 in the original

Placement

  • Economyleaning more state

    Compulsory insurance would gradually extend to further groups and subsidies be targeted at low incomes, widening the solidarity-based system.

What do the other parties say on pensions?

All programs at federal level compared