NZ Super: who gets it, what it costs, and what parties would change

How it works now

New Zealand Superannuation is paid from age 65 to everyone who qualifies, regardless of income or assets. It is not a fund anyone paid into: it comes out of current tax revenue, so today's workers pay for today's retirees.

To qualify you currently need to be a citizen or permanent resident and to have lived in New Zealand for at least 10 years since turning 20, five of them after age 50. That residency requirement is being progressively lifted to 20 years.

Argument one: should the NZ Super age rise?

ACT supports lifting the age of eligibility, arguing current settings are fiscally unsustainable. National would keep it at 65 until 2044 and then lift it gradually to 67, which does not affect anyone born before 1979.

Labour, the Greens, Te Pāti Māori and NZ First all oppose raising the age. The strongest argument against is that it is not a uniform ask: a builder's body may not last to 67 even if an office worker's does, and Māori and Pacific life expectancy is lower, so a higher age means a smaller share of those populations collect it at all.

Argument two: should eligibility depend on citizenship?

This is new for 2026. NZ First would restrict NZ Super to citizens only from 2029, with Winston Peters describing the cost of paying Super to migrants as a 'ticking timebomb'. The party is explicit that it would not raise the age to 67, so this is a different lever entirely.

Supporters argue a universal pension funded by current taxpayers should go to people who have committed to the country. Opponents argue permanent residents pay the same tax for the same decades, that the residency requirement already rising to 20 years addresses the concern, and that it would create two classes of taxpayer.

No other party has adopted the policy.

Why this keeps coming back

Superannuation is the single biggest long-term pressure on the government's books, and every option is unpopular with someone. Raising the age asks one generation to work longer. Means testing penalises saving. Leaving it alone means higher taxes or less spending elsewhere later.

That is why parties tend to promise changes decades out, well beyond the term they are asking you to elect them for.