The end result could be more people shifting to last-resort social assistance.
Open image viewer
Finland’s social security minister Sanni Grahn-Laasonen pictured here in Parliament on 4 March 2026. Image: Henrietta Hassinen / Yle
The Ministry of Social Affairs and Health is considering merging the national pension and the guarantee pension to simplify the minimum pension safety net.
The country’s so-called guarantee pension and national pension top up the income of those with little or no employment history, bringing their retirement benefits close to those received by low-wage earners.
The government is also exploring tightening residency requirements for immigrants’ access to pensions. Under the proposals, a full benefit would require decades of residence in Finland, rather than the current three years.
The changes could reduce pension entitlements for some immigrants, potentially shifting more recipients onto basic social assistance.
The government minister heading this exploration, Sanni Grahn-Laasonen (NCP), told Yle that any potential merger of the national and guarantee pensions would be painless for beneficiaries.
“We have carried out preliminary assessments in the ministry and are ready to begin preparations. The work must be done with a full evaluation of its effects, so that the change does not create uncertainty for anyone’s future,” she said.
For immigrants, however, the outcome may be different. “At the same time, residency requirements could also be harmonised,” Grahn-Laasonen added.
Historic holdover?
In Finland, a full national pension — currently 787 euros a month for a single person — requires roughly 40 years of residence. By contrast, the full guarantee pension, at 990 euros, can be obtained after three years in the country.
Grahn-Laasonen argued that the guarantee pension was created when immigration was far lower, and said it would be reasonable for these parallel pension systems to have harmonised eligibility criteria.
Last year, nearly 116,000 people received the minimum pension, which comes to just under 1,000 euros per month. Of these, 19,081 had an immigrant background.
The introduction of the full guarantee pension in 2011 was, in part, linked to immigration policy, specifially to address the situation of low-income Ingrian returnees. These are the descendants of ethnic Finns from the former Soviet Union, who gained the right to settle in Finland under an ancestry-based policy introduced in 1990.
If the national pension and guarantee pension were merged, and immigrants were required to reside in Finland for decades to qualify for the full benefit, many could be pushed into reliance on last-resort social assistance.
“In Finland, no one is left without last-resort support, which is provided through social assistance,” Grahn-Laasonen said.
Savings questioned
Critics say the change would not necessarily create big public savings.
While the state might save on benefit levels, administrative costs would rise due to increased bureaucracy, according to Liisa Siika-aho, who heads the social security department at the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health.
This is because pension decisions are made in a single assessment covering decades, whereas social assistance is typically reviewed on a monthly basis.
According to Grahn-Laasonen, it is problematic that a long career in low-paid work does not translate into a substantial pension benefit when compared with someone who has no work history in Finland.
Meanwhile, Finance Minister Riikka Purra (Finns) is reported by Helsingin Sanomat to plan to bring the potential merger of the guarantee and national pensions to April’s budget framework talks.
The pension debate has followed on from comments made by Suvi-Anne Siimes, who heads pension lobby Tela. She told Helsingin Sanomat this month that immigrants are accessing guarantee pension too easily.
You can find out more about how Finland supplements small pensions here.