NZ Super and the 2026 election: Where the parties stand

For someone who owns their home, relies mainly on NZ Super, faces rising household bills and needs regular healthcare, three questions are particularly important when comparing the parties:

• Eligibility age: Will you continue to qualify for NZ Super at 65, or could you have to wait longer?
• Payment amount: Will NZ Super remain universal, how will payments keep pace with living costs, and could your other income or assets affect what you receive?
• Eligibility rules: Could citizenship or residency requirements change who qualifies?

New Zealand's general election is scheduled for 7 November 2026. The parties have begun announcing their policies, and there are meaningful differences in their approaches to retirement income. National and Labour have also recently agreed to discuss a longer-term, cross-party approach to retirement policy. That discussion does not, by itself, mean they have agreed on a retirement age. reuters.com, 1news.co.nz

The comparison below reflects publicly reported positions and announcements available as of 18 October 2026. An important distinction is that a party's stated intention is not the same as a change that has already been legislated.

1. Compare the parties at a glance

Party	Retirement age	Universal entitlement and means testing	Payment approach
National	Proposes gradually raising the age to 67, with a delayed start.	Supports universal NZ Super and opposes means testing.	Has not proposed replacing universal NZ Super with an income-tested pension.
Labour	Keep the age at 65.	Supports universal entitlement and opposes means testing.	Retain the existing system; has not proposed a new pension formula for 2026.
New Zealand First	Keep the age at 65.	Opposes means testing but proposes restricting eligibility to New Zealand citizens from 2029.	Retain NZ Super and its existing entitlement structure, subject to the proposed citizenship change.
ACT	Gradually raise the age to 67 over eight years.	Supports reforming the current arrangements; its position on universal entitlement needs to be distinguished from its retirement-age proposal.	Emphasises reducing long-term government spending.
Green Party	Keep the age at 65.	Supports universal NZ Super.	Emphasises making retirement income adequate to cover older people's living costs.
Te Pāti Māori	Has advocated earlier eligibility for Māori, potentially around ages 55–58.	Opposes raising the age; a comprehensive 2026 policy on the entire payment system has not been confirmed in the sources reviewed.	Emphasises Māori wellbeing and the effects of differences in life expectancy.
The Opportunities Party (TOP)	No straightforward commitment to retain the current age under its proposed replacement system.	Proposes replacing NZ Super with a broader Citizen's Income arrangement, with a top-up linked to existing NZ Super rates.	Proposes a longer-term change in how retirement income is funded, including a greater role for KiwiSaver.

Sources: Grey Power's September 2026 party questionnaire, Local Matters' 2026 party-policy comparison and The Spinoff's analysis of retirement policy. National's position is also discussed in 1News's October 11 report. The parties' proposals are not all equally detailed, so an unconfirmed position should not be read as a commitment. (Grey Power; Local Matters; The Spinoff.)

Let's look more closely at the proposals that could affect your retirement income.

2. National: Gradually raising the eligibility age

National's policy is to increase the age at which people qualify for NZ Super, eventually reaching 67.

Its proposed transition is intended to give people time to prepare, rather than change eligibility immediately. The precise timing and transitional rules are important: the effect on you would depend on your age and date of birth.

National supports universal NZ Super and has said it would not introduce means testing. In other words, its approach is to change when people qualify, rather than make eligibility depend on how much money they have.

National argues that an ageing population and the growing cost of superannuation mean the current arrangements need to change over the longer term. Labour disputes the need to change the age during its next term and argues that retirement policy must be considered alongside revenue, KiwiSaver, housing and healthcare. (1News, 11 October 2026; The Spinoff.)

What this means for you: The key question is whether you would be affected by the proposed transition. If you already receive NZ Super, do not assume that a proposed increase would automatically stop your payments. Check the final policy's transitional provisions.

National's proposal is principally about the future eligibility age, not a proposal to reduce the pension simply because you own your home.

3. Labour: Keep NZ Super at 65

Labour has committed to retaining the age of eligibility at 65 and opposes means testing.

Its stated approach is to preserve the existing universal system, providing retirement income without requiring people to pass an income or asset test.

Labour argues that changes to retirement policy should not focus on the pension age in isolation. Its finance spokesperson, Barbara Edmonds, agreed in October to participate in a cross-party discussion about retirement that would include NZ Super, KiwiSaver, housing and healthcare. She maintained that Labour's position for its next term was to preserve the current eligibility age. (1News, 11 October 2026.)

What this means for you: Labour's stated policy would retain the current age of 65 and universal entitlement. It has not proposed a new NZ Super payment formula as part of its 2026 policy announcements reviewed here.

It is worth distinguishing this from other Labour policies that could affect your household budget, particularly healthcare and electricity costs. Those are relevant to your overall financial position but are not changes to NZ Super itself.

4. New Zealand First: Keep the age at 65, with a citizenship change

New Zealand First has made a clear commitment to preserving the current pension age.

Winston Peters stated in August 2026 that his party does not support raising the eligibility age to 67, introducing means testing or treating NZ Super as unaffordable. (New Zealand First: Seniors Sole Defender.)

However, there is an important qualification.

In September, New Zealand First announced that from 2029, only New Zealand citizens would be eligible for NZ Super under its proposal. The party argues that the scheme should prioritise citizens who have worked and paid taxes in New Zealand. (New Zealand First: NZ Super for Citizens Only.)

This is a change to the proposed eligibility rules, even though the party opposes raising the retirement age or means testing.

What this means for you: If you are a New Zealand citizen receiving NZ Super, the proposed citizenship restriction would not appear to change your eligibility on that basis. If you are not a citizen, the proposal would warrant close examination, including how it would interact with existing residence and eligibility rules.

New Zealand First's stated position is to preserve the pension's basic structure rather than replace it with an income-tested scheme.

5. ACT: Gradually raise the age to 67

ACT supports increasing the eligibility age to 67 over an eight-year transition.

Its proposal would allow people to continue accessing KiwiSaver at 65, even if they had to wait longer for NZ Super. ACT has also proposed an exception for people who have spent at least 20 years in physically demanding work, who could apply to receive NZ Super from 65. Existing superannuitants would not have their entitlement changed under the proposal reported by Local Matters. (Local Matters.)

ACT argues that changes are necessary to address the long-term cost of an ageing population.

What this means for you: As with National, the key consideration is whether you would be covered by the transition or any protection for existing recipients.

ACT's proposal also raises a practical question for people who rely heavily on NZ Super: if the eligibility age changes, what income would be available between 65 and the new qualifying age?

KiwiSaver access is not the same as receiving NZ Super. If you have limited retirement savings, the distinction could be important.

6. Green Party: Retain universal NZ Super at 65

The Green Party supports keeping NZ Super universal and retaining the age of eligibility at 65.

Its position places emphasis on ensuring that older people have enough income to meet everyday costs. The party has also supported looking at retirement policy as a whole rather than treating the pension age as the only issue.

The Greens have indicated that they would participate in a cross-party discussion of retirement if it considered the wider system rather than focusing exclusively on raising the eligibility age. (Grey Power; 1News.)

What this means for you: The party's stated position is to retain the current age and universal entitlement. However, that should not be taken to mean that it has promised a particular additional payment or a specific increase in NZ Super beyond the existing system.

If your main concern is keeping retirement income adequate as household expenses rise, the details of the party's wider cost-of-living and healthcare proposals would also be relevant.

7. Te Pāti Māori: Earlier eligibility for Māori

Te Pāti Māori has argued that Māori should be able to access superannuation earlier than other New Zealanders, with proposals discussed in the range of approximately 55–58 years.

The party's argument centres on differences in life expectancy and health outcomes. It opposes increasing the standard eligibility age.

This is a distinct proposal: rather than applying one higher age to everyone, it argues for earlier access for Māori in recognition of unequal health and retirement outcomes. (The Spinoff.)

What this means for you: The proposal would be most directly relevant to Māori and would require further detail about the eligibility criteria and how earlier payments would be funded.

Te Pāti Māori did not respond to Grey Power's 2026 questionnaire, and I have not verified a complete formal 2026 policy covering all aspects of NZ Super. Its previously stated position should therefore not be mistaken for a fully specified election policy.

8. The Opportunities Party: Replace NZ Super with a Citizen's Income

The Opportunities Party (TOP) proposes a more fundamental restructuring of retirement income.

Under its proposed Tax Reset, NZ Super would be replaced by a Citizen's Income, with a top-up bringing the total payment into line with current NZ Super rates. Over the longer term, the top-up could be reduced as KiwiSaver balances grow, so that wealthier retirees would fund more of their own retirement.

TOP also proposes a compulsory KiwiSaver system. (Local Matters.)

What this means for you: The transition and top-up rules would be especially important if most of your retirement income comes from NZ Super rather than private savings.

The proposal is not simply a commitment to retain the current pension with a different eligibility age. It would change the way the retirement-income system works.

Before assessing its impact on an existing retiree, it would be necessary to establish exactly how current recipients would be treated, whether their payments would be protected and how the new system would interact with other income and assets.

---

9. What about the amount you receive and the cost of living?

The retirement-age debate is only part of the picture. For a homeowner who depends on NZ Super, the way payments are adjusted over time can be just as important.

How NZ Super payments are adjusted

Under the current system, NZ Super rates are linked primarily to average wages, with an inflation check. The relationship between the rates and the average wage is intended to maintain the pension's value relative to earnings, while the inflation check helps protect purchasing power.

This is different from simply increasing payments by the rate of inflation every year. A change to inflation-only indexation could result in payments growing more slowly than wages over time. (The Spinoff's analysis of superannuation indexation.)

The parties' positions can be summarised as follows:

• National: Supports universal NZ Super but proposes raising the eligibility age. Its stated policy does not mean that people would lose NZ Super because they own their homes.
• Labour: Supports retaining universal NZ Super at 65, without means testing.
• New Zealand First: Opposes means testing and raising the age, while proposing the citizenship restriction from 2029.
• ACT: Proposes raising the eligibility age, with transitional arrangements and an exception for some people with long histories of physically demanding work.
• Greens: Supports universal NZ Super at 65 and emphasises adequacy of retirement income.
• Te Pāti Māori: Advocates earlier access for Māori, but the full details of a 2026 payment policy remain unconfirmed.
• TOP: Proposes replacing NZ Super with a Citizen's Income and a top-up linked to current pension rates.

It is important not to confuse a party's position on the eligibility age with a promise to increase the payment rate. They are separate policy questions.

Rates, insurance and electricity

The parties' NZ Super proposals do not, by themselves, tell you how much your rates, home insurance or electricity bills will rise or what financial assistance you might receive.

Those issues need to be examined through each party's wider cost-of-living policies, including any commitments on electricity prices, local-government rates, insurance costs and support for older homeowners.

For your circumstances, the useful question is not simply whether a party promises to preserve NZ Super. It is also whether its other policies would affect the amount of money left over after your essential bills are paid.

Healthcare costs

Healthcare is another important part of the comparison.

Labour's published 2026 cost-of-living plan, for example, proposes three free GP visits per person per year and removing the $5 prescription charge from 1 July 2027. These are proposed healthcare measures, not changes to NZ Super. (Labour's Cost of Living Plan.)

Because you need regular healthcare, it would be worth comparing the parties' detailed policies on GP fees, prescriptions, specialist care and access to treatment alongside their retirement-income policies.

---

10. The main questions to check before voting

Given your circumstances, I would separate the comparison into four practical questions.

Your concern	What to examine in each party's policy
Keeping NZ Super at 65	Whether the party would retain the age at 65, raise it later, or provide transitional protection for existing recipients.
Maintaining purchasing power	Whether it would retain the existing payment-adjustment formula and whether it proposes any additional retirement-income support.
Paying household bills	Whether it has specific measures addressing electricity costs, rates, insurance or assistance for older homeowners.
Accessing healthcare	Whether it proposes changes to GP charges, prescription costs, specialist services or other healthcare expenses.

One further point is worth watching: National and Labour's agreement to discuss a cross-party retirement accord means the issue could continue to evolve after the election. The parties have agreed to discuss the system, not to adopt a single retirement-age policy. (1News, 11 October 2026.)

The central distinction is this: Labour, New Zealand First and the Greens have explicitly supported keeping NZ Super at 65, while National and ACT propose raising the age. TOP proposes a different retirement-income system, and Te Pāti Māori has advocated earlier eligibility for Māori.

Those positions provide a starting point for comparing the parties, but they do not by themselves establish which party would leave you financially better off. That depends on the final policy details and on how the parties' healthcare and cost-of-living proposals would affect your household.