The poverty rate and low-income situation of older persons in Canada: An intersectional analysis

Highlights

In Canada, the low-income rates of older persons (aged 65 years and older) have dropped significantly over the past decades, especially from the late 1970s to the mid-1990s.

From 1976 to 1995, the older persons’ median income after-tax increased by 65.0%, driven by government transfers (such as the Canada Pension Plan / Quebec Pension Plans, Old Age Security, and Guaranteed Income Supplement programs). From 1996 to 2022, the median after-tax income of older persons has continued to increase (35.7%), but at a slower pace, mostly driven by increases in their market incomes.

Overall, older persons fare better now than in the past in terms of their income level, but, at the same time, they have lost ground relative to the incomes of younger persons aged 18 to 64 years since the mid-1990s, increasing the gap between both generations’ incomes.

The low-income situations of older women and men followed the same pattern over time; however, older women have had lower income and higher rates of low income than older men throughout the period studied, and the government’s transfers accounted for a more important part of older women’s income.

The difference in median income between older men and women hasn’t decreased much over time. The gender gap in median income was 33.8% in 1976 and it has decreased 7.7 percentage points over the period to reach 26.1% in 2022.

Older racialized women were the most likely of all groups of older women to live in low income or poverty (18.6% under the Low-income measure, after tax [LIM-AT] and 9.1% under the Market Basket Measure [MBM]), followed by older immigrant women (17.6% under LIM-AT and 7.3% under MBM).

Among older racialized women from the six largest racialized groups, Filipino women were the least likely of all same-age racialized women to live in low income (9.0% under LIM-AT) or poverty (5.8% under MBM). In fact, non-racialized older women (16.7% under LIM-AT) had a higher low-income rate than their Filipino women counterpart.

With respect to older immigrant women, the results varied significantly depending on the period of immigration and on whether they were part of a racialized group. For example, the low-income rate of non-racialized immigrant women aged 65 years and older who immigrated before 2011 (16.4%) was the lowest of all immigrant women of the same age and was also somewhat equivalent to the rate of older non-racialized Canadian-born women (16.7%).

Acknowledgments

This study is funded by Women and Gender Equality Canada.

Introduction

The population in Canada is aging; the number and proportion of older adults are rising. On July 1, 2023, about one-fifth (18.9%) of the population was at least 65 years of age (up from 12.6% in 2000) while the 0-to-15 age group accounted for 16.5% of the population, a decline from 20.5% at the turn of the millennium (Statistics Canada, Table 17-10-0005-01). The trend of the population aging is expected to continue and accelerate in the coming years. According to population projections, the 65-and-older age group could account for one-quarter of the population (24.9%) by 2051, for a total of almost 12 million persons (Statistics Canada, 2022). This acceleration of the aging of the population in Canada is a result from fertility being below the replacement level since the early 1970s, an almost continuous increase in life expectancy, and the advancing age of baby boomers.

An aging population has implications for many areas such as health, housing, care giving and receiving, and labour market (including the share of the population in the labour force); it shifts the balance of services needed and puts additional pressure on a number of sectors, such as health care and labour. For example, older persons are more likely to be seeking out services related to health and be looking for different types of dwellings (smaller houses/apartments, retirement homes), than young adults who may be thinking about buying their first home and be seeking out services such as daycare. Moreover, most of older adults work less or stop working at some point in old age, relying mostly on their pensions, savings and government transfers for their economic security – making them financially vulnerable to economic fluctuations, such as high inflation. Overall, the age structure of a society has significant effects on the overall economy and the society as a whole.

Although the population of both women and men is aging, women (53.8%) are overrepresented among the older population aged 65 years and older, and the gender difference is widening with age. For example, while women aged 65 to 69 represented 51.5% of the population of that age group, they accounted for 74.1% of the population aged 95 to 99 years on July 1, 2023 (Statistics Canada, Table 17-10-0005-01). Not only do women tend to live longer than men, but they are also at a higher risk of being in low income than men. Women often earn less than men during their working ages because of a series of factors such as the gender wage gap, their higher likelihood of experiencing career interruptions or working part-time (to care for their children or parents for example), and their lower rate of labour force participation. As a result, older women are less likely to have accumulated sufficient savings, have access to or sufficiently contributed to a workplace retirement plan, and they are more likely to rely on government transfers than men.

In Canada, efforts have been made in the past years to reduce poverty, including for older persons. Canada’s Poverty Reduction Strategy was developed and launched in 2018, the Poverty Reduction Act came into force in 2019, and, since 2016, the federal government has increased its income support to older persons in Canada, notably via the Old Age Security (OAS) and the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) programs to increase their economic security.

This paper draws a portrait of the economic situation of older persons (aged 65 years and older) in Canada – with a special focus on different groups of older women. More specifically, using the combined data from the Survey of Consumer Finances, the Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics, and the Canadian Income Survey, the evolution of the low-income situations, median income, and sources of income of older women and men from 1976 to 2022 are studied in the first section of the paper. The experiences of poverty and low income may vary depending on the intersecting barriers people may face based on different characteristics, the second section of this paper uses an intersectional lens to disaggregate further than gender. Using the 2021 Census of Population, the second section looks specifically at the low-income and poverty rates of different groups of older women, including older immigrant and racialized women.

Section 1: The prevalence of low income among older persons viewed through different lenses

Poverty is a multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only the levels of income and consumption, but also other facets such as health and education, vulnerability and risk, marginalization and exclusion, power, status and prestige, etc. As such, low income and poverty are not the same. However, they are closely related and income remains an important aspect of poverty (Murphy et al., 2012).

In Canada, the Market Basket Measure (MBM) has been the official measure of poverty since 2019.^.Note  It is based on the cost of a specific basket of goods and services (such as food, clothing, shelter, transportation, etc.) representing a modest, basic standard of living. When the disposable income of a person (or an economic family) is lower than the cost of this specific basket of goods and services, the person (or every member in the case of an economic family) is considered to be in poverty. While having an official measure of poverty allows the government to set concrete poverty reduction targets and monitor progress, the MBM is not the only measure of low income used in Canada.

In addition to the MBM, two other measures of low income have been routinely used: the Low-income measure; and, the Low-income cut-off. The Low‑income measure (LIM) is widely used for international comparisons of poverty, especially across OECD countries. It refers to a fixed percentage (50%) of median adjusted income (for different household sizes) of private households. ​The threshold is calculated as half of the median of the contemporary income distribution. When the adjusted household income falls below half of the median adjusted income, all persons in that household are considered as being in low income. The Low-income Cut-offs (LICO) refer to an income threshold, defined using 1992 expenditure data (adjusted to constant dollars using the Consumer Price Index), below which economic families or persons not in an economic family would likely have devoted a larger share of their income than average on the necessities of food, shelter and clothing. More specifically, the thresholds represent income levels at which these families or persons are expected to have spent 20 percentage points or more of their income than average on food, shelter and clothing.

Each of these measures uses different methods (e.g. expenditure-based metric, income distribution-based metric), has different thresholds and describes different aspects of low income (e.g. (in)capacity to afford products and services of a basic standard of living, income inequality, larger share of income devoted to the necessities of food, shelter and clothing than the average). Following international best practices, these three measures will be used in the first section of this paper in order to provide a rich picture of the low income and poverty situations of older persons in Canada.

The poverty rate of older persons is below that of the working-age population while their prevalence of low income is higher

In Canada, the low-income rates of older persons (aged 65 years and older)^Note  have dropped significantly over the past decades under both LIM-AT and LICO-AT,^Note  especially from the late 1970s to the mid-1990s (Chart 1). For example, as shown by the combined data from the Survey of Consumer Finances, the Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics, and the Canadian Income Survey,^Note  the low-income rate of older persons fell from 30.6% in 1976 to 3.9% in 1995 under LIM-AT and fell from 29.0% to 8.7% under LICO-AT. This decline has been largely attributed to increases in income from private pensions and the introduction and expansion of federal income security programs such as the Canada Pension Plan (CPP), Old Age Security (OAS), and Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) programs (HUMA, 2010; Myles, 2010). Indeed, the CPP and the Quebec Pension Plans (QPP) were implemented in 1966 and the first cohort to receive full CPP/QPP benefits turned 65 in 1976 (Myles, 2010). Moreover, as a result of the expansion of private occupational pensions that took place between the 1950s and the 1970s, the average number of covered retirees started increasing in the 1980s and the coverage rate continued rising among successive retirement cohorts as the decade advanced (Myles, 2000).

Data table for Chart 1

Data table for Chart 1
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 1 LICO-AT ― Persons aged 65 years and over, LIM-AT ― Persons aged 18 to 64 years, MBM ― Persons aged 65 years and over, LIM-AT ― Persons aged 65 years and over, MBM ― Persons aged 18 to 64 years and LICO-AT ― Persons aged 18 to 64 years, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	LIM-AT ― Persons aged 18 to 64 years	LIM-AT ― Persons aged 65 years and over	LICO-AT ― Persons aged 18 to 64 years	LICO-AT ― Persons aged 65 years and over	MBM ― Persons aged 18 to 64 years	MBM ― Persons aged 65 years and over
	percent
Note .. not available for a specific reference period Source: Statistics Canada. Low income statistics by age, sex and economic family type, table 11-10-0135-01.
1976	10.0	30.6	10.5	29.0	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1977	10.5	33.1	10.4	30.4	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1978	9.9	32.0	9.6	29.4	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1979	10.5	28.3	10.3	26.1	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1980	10.3	24.1	9.9	21.4	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1981	9.7	20.4	9.8	21.0	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1982	10.4	15.4	10.8	17.8	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1983	11.2	15.7	12.5	19.4	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1984	11.4	14.3	12.4	16.2	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1985	10.6	11.9	11.6	14.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1986	10.4	11.1	11.2	13.5	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1987	10.3	10.3	11.1	12.6	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1988	9.6	13.1	10.0	13.0	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1989	9.3	10.7	9.3	11.3	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1990	10.7	7.5	11.2	10.8	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1991	11.0	5.4	12.7	11.1	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1992	11.6	5.2	13.2	9.8	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1993	11.4	5.5	13.6	10.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1994	11.8	4.1	14.1	8.6	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1995	11.9	3.9	14.4	8.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1996	12.4	4.6	15.0	9.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1997	12.7	4.9	15.2	9.0	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1998	12.8	5.9	13.9	8.6	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1999	12.5	6.3	13.4	7.9	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2000	12.7	7.6	12.9	7.6	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2001	12.3	8.0	11.7	6.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2002	12.6	9.7	12.0	7.6	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2003	13.0	9.1	12.2	6.8	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2004	13.2	8.7	11.9	5.6	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2005	12.6	10.2	11.4	6.2	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2006	13.1	10.2	12.2	5.9	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2007	12.7	11.0	11.0	5.6	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2008	12.8	12.9	10.5	6.1	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2009	13.3	12.6	11.0	5.8	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2010	13.1	13.2	10.6	6.0	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2011	12.7	13.4	10.4	6.5	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2012	13.2	12.3	11.0	4.6	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2013	13.0	11.6	10.8	3.8	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2014	12.6	12.6	10.0	4.0	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2015	13.9	14.6	10.5	4.5	15.7	7.1
2016	12.3	14.6	9.4	4.9	14.0	7.1
2017	12.1	15.4	9.4	4.5	13.4	6.1
2018	11.8	14.9	9.0	4.3	12.8	6.0
2019	11.4	15.7	7.9	4.2	11.8	5.7
2020	8.3	14.5	5.5	2.4	7.8	3.1
2021	9.0	17.1	5.7	4.5	8.2	5.6
2022	10.7	15.4	7.6	3.7	11.1	6.0

However, starting in the mid-1990s, the low-income trend started to diverge from one measure to another one. Under LICO-AT, and later under MBM, the declining trend generally continued (with some variations from 2020 to 2022, which may be due to the COVID-19 pandemic) while the low-income rates started to follow an upward trend under LIM-AT. These divergences suggest that, on the one hand, older persons in Canada are better off than in the past, in terms of their income level, but, on the other hand, that their income has not increased as quickly as the income of the working-age population (i.e. those aged 18 to 64 years).^Note  Indeed, the downward trend under LICO-AT can be understood as a decrease in the number of older persons who spent a larger share of their income than the average family on the necessities of food, shelter, and clothing. Similarly, the declining trend under MBM suggests that fewer older persons had a disposable income lower than the cost of a specific “basket” of goods and services. Finally, the upward trend under LIM-AT reflects a slower growth in median income among older persons than among the rest of the population. These different measures complement one another and present a more complete portrait of the low-income situation of older persons. Together, they show older persons fare better now than in the past in terms of their income level but, at the same time, that they have lost ground relative to the incomes of the working-age population since the mid-1990s. That’s also how the poverty rate (MBM) of older persons can be below that of the working-age population and, at the same time, having a higher prevalence of low income under LIM-AT.

Older women and men followed the same pattern under the three measures of low income – with older women having higher rates of low income than older men under each measure (Chart 2). The low-income rates of older women and men decreased significantly from the late 1970s to the mid-1990s, followed by a generally declining trend under LICO-AT (and MBM) while, under LIM-AT, the rates started to increase in the mid-1990s – with some variations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Data table for Chart 2

Data table for Chart 2
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 2 MBM ― Men aged 65 years and over, LICO-AT ― Women aged 65 years and over, MBM ― Women aged 65 years and over, LICO-AT ― Men aged 65 years and over, LIM-AT ― Women aged 65 years and over and LIM-AT ― Men aged 65 years and over, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	LIM-AT ― Men aged 65 years and over	LIM-AT ― Women aged 65 years and over	LICO-AT ― Men aged 65 years and over	LICO-AT ― Women aged 65 years and over	MBM ― Men aged 65 years and over	MBM ― Women aged 65 years and over
	percent
Note .. not available for a specific reference period Source: Statistics Canada. Low income statistics by age, sex and economic family type, table 11-10-0135-01.
1976	26.0	34.3	22.7	34.1	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1977	29.2	36.3	25.0	34.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1978	28.3	34.9	23.8	33.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1979	24.6	31.2	19.6	31.1	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1980	18.1	28.7	14.5	26.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1981	16.0	23.8	14.2	26.3	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1982	10.3	19.2	9.8	23.9	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1983	11.0	19.2	12.6	24.6	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1984	9.9	17.6	10.3	20.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1985	8.3	14.6	8.4	19.3	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1986	8.3	13.2	8.1	17.6	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1987	7.3	12.5	7.2	16.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1988	9.0	16.1	6.8	17.5	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1989	7.5	13.1	6.1	15.1	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1990	5.1	9.4	5.9	14.4	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1991	4.2	6.3	6.6	14.6	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1992	3.7	6.3	5.1	13.4	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1993	4.0	6.6	6.2	14.1	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1994	3.1	4.9	4.2	11.9	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1995	2.8	4.7	4.0	12.3	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1996	2.9	5.8	5.1	13.2	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1997	3.7	5.8	5.5	11.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1998	4.3	7.2	5.4	11.1	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
1999	3.7	8.3	4.8	10.4	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2000	5.2	9.5	4.6	10.0	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2001	5.6	9.8	4.6	8.3	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2002	7.1	11.8	4.9	9.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2003	6.7	11.0	4.4	8.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2004	6.2	10.7	3.5	7.3	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2005	6.8	13.0	3.4	8.4	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2006	7.4	12.5	3.9	7.5	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2007	8.1	13.3	4.0	6.8	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2008	8.9	16.1	3.7	8.0	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2009	8.9	15.6	3.9	7.4	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2010	9.5	16.2	3.9	7.6	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2011	10.4	15.9	5.0	7.8	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2012	9.4	14.7	3.3	5.7	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2013	9.6	13.3	3.1	4.3	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2014	10.4	14.5	3.5	4.4	.. not available for a specific reference period	.. not available for a specific reference period
2015	12.2	16.6	3.8	5.0	6.1	8.0
2016	12.3	16.6	4.2	5.5	6.4	7.6
2017	12.2	18.2	3.5	5.4	5.5	6.7
2018	12.2	17.2	3.6	5.0	5.3	6.6
2019	12.9	18.1	3.6	4.8	5.1	6.3
2020	11.7	17.0	1.8	2.8	2.7	3.5
2021	14.5	19.4	3.9	5.1	4.9	6.1
2022	12.9	17.5	3.5	3.9	5.6	6.3

The income gap between older persons and the working-age population narrowed from 1976 to 1995 but widened from 1996 to 2022

The idea according to which the diverging trends under the different lines of low income would reflect an increase in the income level of older persons over time and, starting in the mid-1990s, a widening of the income gap between the older and the working-age populations is aligned with the median after-tax income trend of older and working-age people (Chart 3). From 1976 to 1995, the median after-tax income (excluding zeros) of individuals aged 65 years and older has generally risen and, in total, has significantly increased by 60.9%, from $15,600 to $25,100 (in 2022 constant dollars). For the same period, the median after-tax income of those aged 18 to 64 years has decreased by 15.4%, from $36,900 to $31,200.

Then, from 1996 to 2022, the median after-tax income of older persons has continued to increase (31.5%), but at a slower pace than those aged 18 to 64 years (41.6%). It has risen from $24,800 in 1996 to $32,600 in 2022, compared with $30,300 to $42,900 for individuals aged 18 to 64 years. As a result of these trends, while the median after-tax income of older individuals has generally increased from 1976 to 2022, the gap in income between older and working-age persons has narrowed from 1976 to 1995 but has widened from 1996 to 2022.

Data table for Chart 3

Data table for Chart 3
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 3 Men aged 18 to 64 years, Persons aged 18 to 64 years, Men aged 65 years and over, Women aged 18 to 64 years, Women aged 65 years and over and Persons aged 65 years and over, calculated using 2022 constant dollars units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	Persons aged 18 to 64 years	Women aged 18 to 64 years	Men aged 18 to 64 years	Persons aged 65 years and over	Women aged 65 years and over	Men aged 65 years and over
	2022 constant dollars
Note: Median after-tax income excluding zeros. Source: Statistics Canada, Canadian Income Survey.
1976	36,900	23,000	50,600	15,600	13,700	20,700
1977	37,500	24,500	50,900	15,800	14,000	19,500
1978	37,400	24,800	51,000	16,900	15,200	21,400
1979	37,000	24,300	49,500	17,100	15,700	21,600
1980	36,700	24,400	50,000	19,200	16,900	25,000
1981	35,900	24,600	48,300	19,700	17,400	24,600
1982	34,200	24,100	45,600	20,500	17,900	26,500
1983	32,500	22,500	43,900	20,200	17,600	25,800
1984	32,500	23,600	43,500	21,100	18,600	26,300
1985	32,700	23,600	43,700	22,000	19,800	27,400
1986	33,300	24,200	43,800	22,100	20,000	27,200
1987	33,200	24,500	43,300	22,800	20,600	27,700
1988	34,200	25,400	45,100	22,900	20,200	29,100
1989	34,700	26,400	45,000	23,800	21,000	29,700
1990	33,400	25,200	43,200	24,700	21,900	30,000
1991	32,300	24,600	41,100	24,100	21,200	29,300
1992	32,400	25,100	41,000	24,500	21,400	30,400
1993	31,300	25,100	39,300	24,200	21,300	30,300
1994	31,400	24,700	39,500	25,000	22,000	31,100
1995	31,200	24,800	39,100	25,100	22,000	31,400
1996	30,300	23,700	38,600	24,800	21,900	31,000
1997	30,400	23,800	38,500	25,000	22,100	31,100
1998	31,000	24,100	39,300	25,200	22,200	31,200
1999	32,500	25,700	41,100	25,800	22,700	31,800
2000	33,100	25,800	41,500	25,900	22,700	31,700
2001	34,000	27,000	42,400	26,600	23,300	32,800
2002	33,900	26,700	42,200	26,700	23,400	32,700
2003	33,700	26,800	41,900	26,600	23,500	32,800
2004	33,900	27,000	42,600	27,100	23,700	33,700
2005	35,100	28,000	42,700	27,200	23,700	33,500
2006	35,600	28,800	42,400	28,200	24,300	34,500
2007	36,600	30,100	43,800	28,300	24,700	35,500
2008	37,200	30,300	44,600	28,500	24,600	36,000
2009	37,300	31,200	43,400	29,300	25,000	36,800
2010	37,300	31,500	43,600	28,500	24,600	35,800
2011	37,600	31,500	44,200	28,500	24,600	35,600
2012	37,700	31,700	45,000	30,300	26,000	38,300
2013	38,700	32,700	44,800	30,200	26,300	37,500
2014	38,900	33,200	45,300	30,400	25,900	38,200
2015	38,900	33,500	45,300	30,400	26,700	37,300
2016	39,000	34,000	45,300	30,300	26,700	36,900
2017	40,000	35,200	45,700	31,200	26,800	38,700
2018	40,100	35,400	45,800	31,400	27,500	38,600
2019	41,100	36,500	46,300	31,700	27,900	37,700
2020	42,500	38,800	46,600	33,600	29,300	40,200
2021	43,200	39,700	47,700	33,100	28,400	39,500
2022	42,900	38,900	47,300	32,600	28,600	38,700

When disaggregated by gender, the pattern is similar but different between older women and men (and their younger counterparts).

From 1976 to 1995, the median after-tax income of older women has increased significantly (60.6%), from $13,700 to $22,000 (in 2022 constant dollars). During this period, the median after-tax income of women aged 18 to 64 years (7.8%) hasn’t decreased, but has increased less than that of older women, narrowing the income gap between older women and working-age women. For the second period, from 1996 to 2022, the median after-tax income of women aged 18 to 64 years (64.1%) has increased more than the median after-tax income of older women (30.6%), widening the income gap between the two groups.

For men, during the first period from 1976 to 1995, the median after-tax income of older men has increased significantly (51.7%), from $20,700 to $31,400, while the median after-tax income of men aged 18 to 64 years has decreased by 22.7% (from $50,600 to $39,100), narrowing the income gap between men of the two age groups. However, during the second period, from 1996 to 2022, the median after-tax income of older men (24.8%) has continued to increase more than that of working-age men (22.5%), continuing to narrowing the income gap between younger and older men, but at a slower pace.

While the overall gap in median income between working-age and older persons has decreased over time by 33.7 percentage points, from 57.7% in 1976 to 24.0% in 2022, the gender gap between older women and men hasn’t decreased as much. From 1976 to 2022, women have had lower median income than men. The gender gap in median income (excluding zeros) was 33.8% in 1976 and it has decreased 7.7 percentage points over the period to reach 26.1% in 2022.

The older persons’ income growth: from government transfers to market income

From 1976 to 1995, the period during which the median income after-tax of older persons has increased by 60.9% (Chart 3) and their low-income rates have dropped significantly (Chart 1), the income growth of older persons was mainly attributable to the government transfers (such as CPP/QPP, OAS, and GIS)^Note  (Chart 4). Indeed, during this period the government transfers for older persons rose 64.0%; it has increased from $11,400 in 1976 to $18,700 in 1995 (in 2022 constant dollars). Over the same period, the median market income (which includes employment income, private retirement income, and investment income)^Note  grew at a slower pace (22.2%), from $10,800 in 1976 to $13,200 in 1995.

Data table for Chart 4

Data table for Chart 4
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 4 Market income, Government transfers and Total income, calculated using 2022 constant dollars units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	Total income	Market income	Government transfers
	2022 constant dollars
Note: Median incomes excluding zeros. Source: Statistics Canada. Income of individuals by age group, sex and income source, Canada, provinces and selected census metropolitan areas, table 11-10-0239-01.
1976	15,700	10,800	11,400
1977	15,800	10,100	11,600
1978	16,900	11,600	12,100
1979	17,200	10,100	13,200
1980	19,300	11,600	13,500
1981	19,800	12,100	14,100
1982	20,500	12,100	14,700
1983	20,300	10,900	15,300
1984	21,300	11,200	16,000
1985	22,200	11,500	16,200
1986	22,400	11,100	16,500
1987	23,000	11,000	17,100
1988	23,100	11,000	17,400
1989	24,200	14,000	17,400
1990	25,200	13,400	17,900
1991	24,600	12,600	17,800
1992	25,100	12,500	18,400
1993	24,800	12,800	18,300
1994	25,500	12,200	19,000
1995	25,900	13,200	18,700
1996	25,500	13,500	18,500
1997	25,800	13,200	19,000
1998	26,000	12,500	18,800
1999	26,600	13,000	18,500
2000	26,800	13,300	18,400
2001	27,500	13,900	18,500
2002	27,500	14,200	18,300
2003	27,500	13,900	18,300
2004	28,000	14,700	18,400
2005	27,900	14,800	18,300
2006	28,800	15,500	18,600
2007	29,200	16,200	18,400
2008	29,400	15,900	18,500
2009	30,000	16,500	18,900
2010	29,100	16,100	18,800
2011	29,300	16,400	18,500
2012	31,600	18,100	18,500
2013	31,700	18,600	18,600
2014	31,900	20,100	18,300
2015	31,800	19,800	18,400
2016	31,700	19,600	18,400
2017	32,900	21,300	18,500
2018	33,200	21,600	18,500
2019	33,200	21,300	18,600
2020	35,500	21,200	20,100
2021	35,300	22,200	18,800
2022	34,600	22,400	18,600

In contrast, from 1996 to 2022, the government transfers scarcely increased (0.5%) while the market income has increased by 65.9%, becoming the main factor of the income growth of older persons. The expansion of private occupational pensions and the growth in women’s labour force participation over the past decades, as well as the increase in the number of older men and women who have continued to work after 65 years (see the text box Employment rates of older persons) have likely contributed to the increase of market income in older ages.

The pattern was different for older women and men (charts 5 to 8). The weight of the government transfers being more important for older women than older men, throughout the two periods.

From 1976 to 1995, the median income of older women has grown by 60.6% (Chart 3) and this growth was mainly attributable to the government transfers, which have increased by 68.6% over this period (Chart 5). The amount older women have received from government transfers has increased from $10,200 in 1976 to $17,200 in 1995 (Chart 5), accounting for 58.2% of the total income of older women in 1995 (Chart 6). In fact, until 2012, more than 50% of the total income of older women came from government transfers (Chart 6).

Data table for Chart 5

Data table for Chart 5
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 5 Market income, Government transfers and Total income, calculated using 2022 constant dollars units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	Total income	Market income	Government transfers
	2022 constant dollars
Note: Median incomes excluding zeros. Source: Statistics Canada. Income of individuals by age group, sex and income source, Canada, provinces and selected census metropolitan areas, table 11-10-0239-01.
1976	13,700	6,400	10,200
1977	14,000	7,200	10,700
1978	15,200	8,000	10,600
1979	15,700	7,000	12,500
1980	17,000	8,600	12,500
1981	17,400	8,700	13,000
1982	18,000	8,300	13,500
1983	17,600	7,500	14,100
1984	18,700	7,800	14,600
1985	19,900	8,100	14,500
1986	20,100	8,100	14,600
1987	20,700	8,100	15,400
1988	20,300	8,000	15,700
1989	21,000	10,100	15,500
1990	22,000	9,800	16,200
1991	21,400	9,100	15,900
1992	21,700	9,000	16,600
1993	21,500	8,600	16,700
1994	22,200	8,400	17,500
1995	22,300	9,100	17,200
1996	22,100	9,800	17,300
1997	22,400	8,900	17,800
1998	22,400	9,000	17,500
1999	22,900	9,200	17,600
2000	22,900	9,400	17,300
2001	23,600	10,200	17,400
2002	23,700	9,900	17,300
2003	23,800	9,700	17,300
2004	24,000	10,200	17,600
2005	23,900	10,400	17,700
2006	24,400	10,800	17,800
2007	25,300	11,900	17,800
2008	25,000	11,400	17,900
2009	25,400	11,500	18,300
2010	25,100	11,300	18,100
2011	25,100	11,400	18,000
2012	26,600	12,400	17,900
2013	27,100	13,800	18,000
2014	26,800	14,200	17,900
2015	27,300	14,300	18,000
2016	27,300	14,900	18,100
2017	27,600	15,100	18,100
2018	28,400	15,900	18,000
2019	28,600	16,100	18,300
2020	30,100	16,000	19,700
2021	30,000	17,400	18,400
2022	29,800	17,700	18,100

During the second period, from 1996 to 2022, the government transfers have continued to increase (4.6%), but at a slower pace (Chart 5). This period is rather marked by an important increase (80.6%) in older women’s market income, increasing from $9,800 in 1996 to $17,700 in 2022 (Chart 5). However, despite this increase in income from the market, the government transfers still accounted for 43.1% of older women’s total income in 2022 (Chart 6) – suggesting that without the government’s transfers the low-income rate of older women would have been higher and the gap in low-income rates between older women and older men would have been larger.

Data table for Chart 6

Data table for Chart 6
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 6 Government transfers and Market income, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	Government transfers	Market income
	percent
Source: Statistics Canada. Income of individuals by age group, sex and income source, Canada, provinces and selected census metropolitan areas, table 11-10-0239-01.
1976	61.4	38.6
1977	55.9	44.1
1978	52.9	47.1
1979	58.7	41.3
1980	54.4	45.6
1981	55.3	44.7
1982	54.8	45.2
1983	61.3	38.7
1984	58.6	41.4
1985	57.5	42.5
1986	60.0	40.0
1987	59.8	40.2
1988	61.4	38.6
1989	55.7	44.3
1990	54.9	45.1
1991	58.3	41.7
1992	59.4	40.6
1993	61.5	38.5
1994	63.9	36.1
1995	58.2	41.8
1996	60.5	39.5
1997	62.2	37.8
1998	59.8	40.2
1999	57.6	42.4
2000	57.0	43.0
2001	56.3	43.7
2002	54.8	45.2
2003	55.4	44.6
2004	54.7	45.3
2005	55.2	44.8
2006	52.9	47.1
2007	51.3	48.7
2008	53.0	47.0
2009	52.3	47.7
2010	53.4	46.6
2011	52.5	47.5
2012	49.4	50.6
2013	48.9	51.1
2014	48.5	51.5
2015	47.4	52.6
2016	46.5	53.5
2017	45.5	54.5
2018	44.5	55.5
2019	45.7	54.3
2020	48.1	51.9
2021	44.9	55.1
2022	43.1	56.9

In comparison, for older men, while the government transfers have increased by 60.8% from 1976 to 1995 (Chart 7) – driving their overall income increase for this period – their government transfers have never accounted for half of their total income (Chart 8).

Data table for Chart 7

Data table for Chart 7
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 7 Market income, Government transfers and Total income, calculated using 2022 constant dollars units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	Total income	Market income	Government transfers
	2022 constant dollars
Note: Median incomes excluding zeros. Source: Statistics Canada. Income of individuals by age group, sex and income source, Canada, provinces and selected census metropolitan areas, table 11-10-0239-01.
1976	21,100	15,600	12,500
1977	19,500	13,100	12,500
1978	21,500	16,100	13,100
1979	21,700	15,000	13,800
1980	25,200	16,500	14,900
1981	24,700	16,200	15,400
1982	26,900	16,500	15,800
1983	26,400	14,400	16,600
1984	26,800	15,600	17,400
1985	27,900	16,000	17,800
1986	28,100	14,300	18,100
1987	28,700	15,500	18,500
1988	29,600	15,300	19,000
1989	31,100	18,900	18,700
1990	31,300	17,300	19,200
1991	30,500	17,500	19,200
1992	32,300	16,800	20,100
1993	32,500	18,000	19,700
1994	33,400	18,200	20,300
1995	33,800	18,900	20,100
1996	33,400	18,700	19,900
1997	33,600	18,500	20,200
1998	33,700	18,000	20,200
1999	34,600	18,900	19,800
2000	34,600	19,200	19,400
2001	35,500	20,200	19,500
2002	35,100	20,400	19,200
2003	35,400	20,600	19,200
2004	36,500	21,700	19,300
2005	35,800	21,200	19,200
2006	37,000	22,500	19,200
2007	37,300	22,900	19,000
2008	37,700	23,500	19,200
2009	38,500	23,500	19,400
2010	37,100	22,500	19,400
2011	37,300	23,800	18,900
2012	40,800	25,700	19,100
2013	39,700	24,600	19,100
2014	40,700	26,800	18,700
2015	39,800	25,900	18,900
2016	39,100	26,200	18,900
2017	41,500	29,100	18,700
2018	41,600	28,300	18,900
2019	40,300	27,700	18,900
2020	43,300	27,500	20,500
2021	42,800	27,800	19,100
2022	41,700	28,200	19,000

During the second period, from 1996 to 2022, the government transfers have decreased by 4.5% for older men while the income coming from the market has increased by 50.8%, from $18,700 in 1996 to $28,200 in 2022 (Chart 7).

Data table for Chart 8

Data table for Chart 8
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 8 Government transfers and Market income, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	Government transfers	Market income
	percent
Source: Statistics Canada. Income of individuals by age group, sex and income source, Canada, provinces and selected census metropolitan areas, table 11-10-0239-01.
1976	35.1	64.9
1977	41.4	58.6
1978	38.0	62.0
1979	40.3	59.7
1980	36.4	63.6
1981	39.9	60.1
1982	38.7	61.3
1983	42.8	57.2
1984	41.5	58.5
1985	44.0	56.0
1986	44.8	55.2
1987	46.6	53.4
1988	46.2	53.8
1989	41.8	58.2
1990	45.1	54.9
1991	45.1	54.9
1992	48.2	51.8
1993	46.4	53.6
1994	46.2	53.8
1995	44.8	55.2
1996	45.4	54.6
1997	45.6	54.4
1998	44.6	55.4
1999	43.9	56.1
2000	42.8	57.2
2001	42.5	57.5
2002	41.5	58.5
2003	41.4	58.6
2004	40.9	59.1
2005	40.2	59.8
2006	39.9	60.1
2007	37.8	62.2
2008	38.1	61.9
2009	39.2	60.8
2010	39.0	61.0
2011	38.8	61.2
2012	35.6	64.4
2013	37.4	62.6
2014	34.3	65.7
2015	36.3	63.7
2016	36.5	63.5
2017	33.9	66.1
2018	34.1	65.9
2019	34.9	65.1
2020	37.2	62.8
2021	34.8	65.2
2022	32.3	67.7

Overall, older women had lower income, higher low-income and poverty rates, and relied more on government transfers than older men. Considering that government’s transfers increase the overall income of people, reduce low-income rates, and mitigated the gender difference in low-income rates (Harding, 2018), these results suggest that the low-income rate of older women would have been much higher and the gender gap would have been larger without the transfers. It must be noted, however, that older women in Canada are not a homogenous group and aggregate data may mask different experiences among this population.

Employment rates of older persons

After having decreased from 1976 to early 2000s (especially for older men), the employment rates of older women and men have increased and reached, in 2023, 10.8% for women aged 65 years and older (and 10.5% in 2019, i.e. before the COVID-19 pandemic), and 18.5% for men aged 65 years and older (18.8% in 2019).

Data table for Chart 9

Data table for Chart B.1
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart B.1 Women aged 70 years and over, Men aged 65 to 69 years, Men aged 65 years and over, Women aged 65 to 69 years, Men aged 70 years and over and Women aged 65 years and over, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	Women aged 65 years and over	Women aged 65 to 69 years	Women aged 70 years and over	Men aged 65 years and over	Men aged 65 to 69 years	Men aged 70 years and over
	percent
Source: Statistics Canada. Labour force characteristics by sex and detailed age group, annual, table 14-10-0327-01.
1976	4.2	7.7	2.2	15.0	23.9	9.1
1977	3.9	7.7	1.8	13.8	22.6	7.9
1978	3.9	6.9	2.3	13.5	21.0	8.4
1979	3.8	7.5	1.7	13.6	22.1	7.8
1980	3.8	7.4	1.8	13.0	20.9	7.5
1981	4.0	7.0	2.2	12.4	19.3	7.8
1982	3.9	7.4	1.9	12.4	20.2	7.2
1983	3.6	6.2	2.2	11.8	19.3	7.1
1984	3.8	6.9	2.2	11.5	18.4	7.3
1985	3.9	7.5	2.0	11.2	17.6	7.3
1986	3.3	6.6	1.6	10.8	17.0	6.9
1987	3.2	6.2	1.6	11.0	17.6	6.9
1988	3.5	6.5	1.8	10.5	16.7	6.6
1989	3.8	7.0	2.1	10.3	15.9	6.6
1990	3.5	6.7	1.9	10.6	16.8	6.7
1991	3.2	6.3	1.7	10.7	16.4	7.1
1992	3.2	6.9	1.4	10.1	16.8	6.1
1993	3.4	6.9	1.7	9.2	14.6	6.0
1994	3.2	6.8	1.6	10.2	16.5	6.6
1995	3.2	6.8	1.5	9.6	15.8	5.9
1996	3.2	6.8	1.7	9.4	15.8	5.8
1997	3.5	7.5	1.7	9.6	16.2	5.8
1998	3.4	7.1	1.9	10.0	17.2	6.0
1999	3.3	7.0	1.8	9.5	16.4	5.8
2000	3.2	6.9	1.7	9.3	15.5	6.0
2001	3.3	7.3	1.7	9.2	15.5	5.9
2002	3.7	8.5	1.8	10.1	17.6	6.4
2003	4.1	10.0	1.9	11.2	20.2	6.9
2004	4.3	10.5	1.9	11.3	20.8	6.8
2005	4.8	11.6	2.2	11.7	22.3	6.7
2006	4.9	11.9	2.1	11.7	22.3	6.6
2007	5.2	12.4	2.3	12.5	23.8	7.0
2008	6.3	14.8	2.8	13.8	25.9	7.8
2009	6.2	14.9	2.6	14.8	27.6	8.2
2010	6.9	16.2	2.9	15.5	28.9	8.6
2011	7.4	16.8	3.3	16.0	28.5	9.4
2012	8.0	17.6	3.7	16.6	28.6	10.0
2013	8.5	18.6	3.7	17.3	30.4	9.9
2014	8.8	18.9	4.0	17.6	30.7	10.2
2015	9.0	18.8	4.2	17.4	30.3	10.1
2016	9.5	19.3	4.7	17.1	30.0	9.8
2017	9.6	19.6	4.8	17.9	31.6	10.5
2018	9.9	20.2	5.1	17.8	30.2	11.2
2019	10.5	22.4	4.9	18.8	33.0	11.5
2020	9.1	18.8	4.6	17.3	30.3	10.7
2021	9.3	20.4	4.3	17.6	31.2	10.6
2022	10.5	22.4	5.0	17.8	31.9	10.7
2023	10.8	22.3	5.5	18.5	34.0	10.8

Men aged 65 to 69 years were the most likely to be employed among the older population and the employment rates of older men have been higher than that of older women in each age group and for the entire period.

Among people aged 65 years and older who were employed, older men were more likely to work full-time while older women were, since the late 1980s, more likely to work part-time.

Data table for Chart 10

Data table for Chart B.2
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart B.2 Men employed full-time, Women employed part-time, Men employed part-time and Women employed full-time, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	Women employed full-time	Women employed part-time	Men employed full-time	Men employed part-time
	percent
Source: Statistics Canada. Labour force characteristics by sex and detailed age group, annual, table 14-10-0327-01.
1976	56.5	43.5	72.8	27.2
1977	53.3	46.7	72.7	27.3
1978	55.5	44.5	72.6	27.4
1979	52.3	47.7	71.1	29.0
1980	49.1	50.9	70.2	29.8
1981	51.4	48.6	68.4	31.6
1982	50.4	49.8	68.7	31.3
1983	48.8	51.2	67.8	32.2
1984	48.7	51.3	64.8	35.3
1985	45.7	54.3	66.0	34.0
1986	51.9	48.1	63.4	36.5
1987	49.6	50.6	65.6	34.4
1988	44.3	55.7	66.4	33.6
1989	44.0	56.0	62.2	37.8
1990	38.7	61.1	62.5	37.5
1991	40.2	59.8	62.6	37.4
1992	42.5	57.5	64.2	35.8
1993	42.1	58.0	63.9	36.1
1994	44.2	55.8	65.3	34.7
1995	41.2	58.8	65.5	34.5
1996	40.6	59.4	63.8	36.2
1997	40.6	59.4	65.4	34.6
1998	43.2	56.8	66.3	33.7
1999	46.6	53.4	65.5	34.5
2000	42.5	57.5	62.9	37.1
2001	41.2	58.8	65.3	34.6
2002	40.4	59.6	64.4	35.6
2003	38.5	61.6	63.9	36.1
2004	36.6	63.3	63.4	36.6
2005	42.7	57.3	64.9	35.1
2006	42.4	57.6	63.4	36.6
2007	41.4	58.6	62.8	37.2
2008	40.7	59.3	64.2	35.8
2009	40.8	59.2	63.8	36.2
2010	40.8	59.2	61.9	38.1
2011	43.7	56.3	63.0	37.1
2012	44.4	55.6	64.3	35.7
2013	43.0	57.0	64.1	35.9
2014	44.5	55.5	64.0	36.0
2015	45.9	54.1	63.9	36.1
2016	45.2	54.8	63.8	36.2
2017	45.0	55.0	63.1	36.9
2018	45.8	54.2	62.7	37.3
2019	46.0	54.0	63.5	36.5
2020	47.7	52.3	66.4	33.6
2021	50.2	49.7	65.8	34.2
2022	46.8	53.2	64.0	36.0
2023	49.2	50.8	64.9	35.1

Section 2: Closer look at the low-income and poverty rates of different groups of older women

Older women and men have had different poverty rates and low-income situations, median income, as well as different main sources of income over the period studied – with older women faring worst than older men in each of these measures. Using the 2016 and 2021 Censuses of Population to further disaggregate characteristics of older women, this second section provides a snapshot of the low-income and poverty rates of different groups of older women in 2020, including older racialized^Note  and older immigrant women.^Note Note  In this section the low-income rate is measured with the LIM-AT and the poverty rate with the MBM.

Older racialized women have the highest low-income and poverty rates

Under both measures, LIM-AT and MBM, older racialized women (18.6% and 9.1%, respectively) were the most likely of all groups to live in low income in 2020, followed by older immigrant women (17.6% under LIM-AT and 7.3% under MBM) (Chart 11). In comparison, older Canadian-born women had the lowest low-income (LIM-AT) (16.7%) and poverty (MBM) (3.8%) rates.

Data table for Chart 11

Data table for Chart 9
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 9 LIM-AT, MBM and 95% confidence interval, calculated using upper bound, percent and lower bound units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	LIM-AT			MBM
	percent	95% confidence interval		percent	95% confidence interval
		lower bound	upper bound		lower bound	upper bound
Note: The category "Women+" includes women, as well as some non-binary persons. Source: Statistics Canada, Census of Population, 2021.
Canadian-born women+	16.7	16.6	16.8	3.8	3.9	3.9
Non-racialized women+	16.7	16.6	16.8	4.2	4.2	4.2
Immigrant women+	17.6	17.4	17.8	7.3	7.2	7.4
Racialized women+	18.6	18.4	18.9	9.1	8.9	9.3

However, among older racialized women, the poverty and low-income rates varied significantly from one group to another (Chart 12).

Among older racialized women, Filipino women are the least likely to live in low income or poverty

Older Arab women had the highest rates of low income (31.5%) and of poverty (16.8%) of the six largest racialized groups studied, while older Filipino women had the lowest rates (9.0% and 5.8%, respectively) of all older racialized women.^Note  These results are aligned with the pattern observed among all racialized persons in Canada, wherein higher shares of Arab persons and lower shares of Filipino persons are in low income (Schimmele, Christoph et al., 2023). With respect to older Filipino women, they had, in fact, a lower low-income rate than non-racialized older women (16.7%), and a slightly higher poverty rate (5.8% for older Filipino women vs 4.2% for non-racialized older women) – suggesting that a smaller proportion of Filipino women aged 65 years and older than non-racialized women of the same age group were at or below the half of the median of the income distribution (i.e. lower income), but, at the same time, that among older Filipino women who had lower income, a bigger proportion of them had a disposable income lower than the cost of a specific “basket” of goods and services than non-racialized older women.

Data table for Chart 12

Data table for Chart 10
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 10 LIM-AT, MBM and 95% confidence interval, calculated using upper bound, percent and lower bound units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	LIM-AT			MBM
	percent	95% confidence interval		percent	95% confidence interval
		lower bound	upper bound		lower bound	upper bound
Note: The category "Women+" includes women, as well as some non-binary persons. Source: Statistics Canada, Census of Population, 2021.
South Asian women+	11.3	10.9	11.7	6.1	5.8	6.4
Chinese women+	23.9	23.4	24.3	11.3	10.9	11.6
Black women+	18.8	18.1	19.4	8.0	7.6	8.4
Filipino women+	9.0	8.4	9.6	5.8	5.4	6.2
Arab women+	31.5	30.1	32.9	16.8	15.7	17.9
Latin American women+	24.9	23.8	26.0	10.7	10.0	11.5
Non-racialized women+	16.7	16.6	16.8	4.2	4.2	4.2

The low-income rate of non-racialized established immigrant women aged 65 years and older is somewhat equivalent to the rate of older Canadian-born women

While the low-income and poverty rates of older immigrant women were higher than those of older Canadian-born women in 2020 (Chart 11), there were variations in these proportions depending on the period of immigration (Table 1).

Among immigrant women aged 65 years and older, established immigrant women^Note  had a significantly lower low-income (17.4%) and poverty (6.6%) rates than older recent immigrant women, whose rates were 19.8% for LIM-AT and 17.4% for MBM.

When another layer of disaggregation is added (racialized groups) (Table 1), non-racialized established immigrant women aged 65 years and older (16.4%) became as likely as non-racialized Canadian-born women of the same age group (16.7%) to live in low income.^Note  And, under MBM, non-racialized established immigrant women aged 65 years and older (5.4%) had a higher poverty rate than that of older non-racialized Canadian-born women (3.8%). These results suggest, on the one hand, that similar proportions of older non-racialized Canadian-born women and older non-racialized established immigrant women were at or below the half of the median of the income distribution (i.e., in the bottom income quartile), and, on the other hand, that among those with a lower income, a higher proportion of non-racialized established immigrant women aged 65 years and older had a disposable income lower than the cost of a specific “basket” of goods and services. Also worth noting, the difference in the poverty rates between Canadian-born and immigrant women aged 65 years and older, decreased from 2.8 percentage points when we compare all older Canadian-born women to all established immigrant women aged 65 years and older, to 1.6 percentage points when only non-racialized established immigrant and non-racialized Canadian born women aged 65 years and older are taken into account.

The non-racialized and the Canadian-born populations aged 65 years and older have the highest gender poverty and low-income gaps

Based on data from the 2021 and 2016 Censuses of Population, the poverty rate (MBM) of women aged 65 years and older was 5.0% in 2020, down from 8.9% in 2015. While they remained slightly more likely to live in poverty than men of the same age group (4.3%), the gender poverty gap has decreased from 1.7 percentage points in 2015 to 0.7 percentage point in 2020. The gender low-income gap (LIM-AT) has also decreased, but to a much lesser extent, from 4.7 percentage points in 2015 to 4.3 percentage points in 2020.

The gender gap also varied by characteristics of older women and men. While older racialized women had the highest rates of low income and poverty in 2020 (Chart 11), the gender gap among older racialized men and women was the lowest (because the low-income and poverty rates of older racialized men were also the highest among different groups of older men) (tables 2 and 3). This result suggests that being part of the racialized population seems to play a more important role in explaining low income and poverty than the fact of being a woman or a man. However, this didn’t hold true across all racialized groups. The Arab population had the highest gender low-income gap (6.6 percentage points) and poverty gap (3.0 percentage points) of all racialized groups studied, but also of all groups examined in this study.

Among the older immigrant population, there was no statistically significant difference between the low-income and poverty rates of men and women aged 65 years and older who recently immigrated, as opposed to the established immigrant population, for whom the gender low-income gap was 4.1 percentage points (and 0.8 percentage point for the gender poverty gap) in 2020.

Overall, when aggregated, the gender difference between older women and men in terms of low income was the biggest among the Canadian-born population and the non-racialized population, i.e., these groups were those where the differences in the low-income rates between older women and men were the largest in 2020.

Conclusion

Using different measures of low income, this study finds that older persons aged 65 years and older in Canada fare better in terms of income than in the past decades (from 1976 to 2022), but, at the same time, that they have lost ground relative to the incomes of working-age persons aged 18 to 64 years since the mid-1990s.

This paper also shows that, while the low-income situations of older women and men followed the same pattern over time, older women have had higher rates of low income than older men throughout the period studied, and the government’s transfers have represented a more important part of their sources of income. In fact, the government transfers have accounted for more than 50% of the total income of older women until 2012 and were still at 43.1% in 2022. In comparison, the government’s transfers have never accounted for half of the total income of older men, and they represented 32.3% of their total income in 2022.

Despite older women’s higher level of government’s transfers, the gap in median income between older men and women hasn’t decreased much over time. The gender gap in median after-tax income was 33.8% in 1976 and it has decreased 7.7 percentage points over the period to reach 26.1% in 2022.

The low-income rate of older women was higher than that of older men throughout the period studied and it was among the Canadian-born population and the non-racialized population that the gender gaps were the biggest, i.e., where the differences in the low-income rates between older women and men were the largest.

The study also shows that there were important variations in terms of low-income and poverty rates among different groups of older women. Older racialized women were the most likely of all groups of women studied to live in low income or poverty (18.6% under LIM-AT and 9.1% under MBM) in 2020, followed by older immigrant women (17.6% under LIM-AT and 7.3% under MBM).

Among older racialized women, Filipino women were the least likely to live in low income (9.0%) or poverty (5.8%). In fact, they even had a lower low-income rate than non-racialized older women (16.7%). Older Arab women, however, had the highest low-income and poverty rates (31.5% under LIM-AT and 16.8% under MBM) in 2020.

With respect to older immigrant women, the results varied significantly depending on the number of years that these immigrant women have lived in Canada and on whether or not they were part of a racialized group. The low-income rate of non-racialized established immigrant women aged 65 years and older (16.4%) was the lowest of all same-age immigrant women and was also somewhat equivalent to the rate older non-racialized Canadian-born women (16.7%) in 2020.

Overall, the disparity in terms of low-income and poverty rates, median income, and sources of income between older women and men as well as the variations in low-income and poverty rates among different groups of older women illustrate the importance of using a gender-based analysis plus lens, which examines the intersection of gender and different characteristics, to better describe the distinct experiences of different groups of the older population. Future research on the poverty rate and low-income situation of older women and men in Canada could focus on the interactional effects of various characteristics (such as gender, ethnocultural characteristics, immigration status [including period of immigration and admission category]) and their explanatory power related to the gender low-income and poverty gap.

Note to readers

In the First section (estimates in charts 1 to 8), this paper uses data from the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) from 1976 to 1992, a combination of the SCF and the Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics (SLID) from 1993 to 1997, the SLID from 1998 to 2011, and the Canadian Income Survey (CIS) beginning in 2012. For this study, the population sample for these surveys is drawn from all individuals in Canada, excluding residents of the Territories, residents of institutions, individuals living on reserves and other Aboriginal settlements, and members of the Canadian Forces living in military camps.

In the Second section, this paper uses data from the 2021 long-form Census of Population to allow further disaggregation. Statistics Canada conducts the Census of Population every five years. It is designed to provide information about people and housing units in Canada by their demographic, social and economic characteristics. The census is the primary source of socioeconomic data for specific population groups and for detailed or small geographies. A sample of approximately 25% of Canadian households received a long-form questionnaire. All other households received a short-form questionnaire. It means that while demographic information is collected from 100% of the population, a random sample of 1 in 4 private dwellings in Canada is selected systematically for the long-form questionnaire.

Beginning in 2021, the census asked questions about both the sex at birth and gender of individuals. While data on sex at birth are needed to measure certain indicators, as of the 2021 Census, gender (and not sex) is the standard variable used in concepts and classifications. For more details on the new gender concept, see Age, Sex at Birth and Gender Reference Guide, Census of Population, 2021. Given that the non-binary population is small, data aggregation to a two-category gender variable is sometimes necessary to protect the confidentiality of responses. In these cases, individuals in the category “non-binary persons” are distributed into the other two gender categories. In the second section of this paper, the category “women+” includes women, as well as some non-binary persons, while the category “men+” includes men, as well as some non-binary persons. A fact sheet on gender concepts, Filling the gaps: Information on gender in the 2021 Census, is also available.

In this article, data on racialized groups are measured using the “visible minority” variable. The “non-racialized group” is measured with the category “not a visible minority” of the variable, excluding Indigenous respondents. For the purpose of this study, Indigenous respondents are not part of the racialized group, nor the non-racialized group. Visible minority refers to whether a person is a visible minority or not, as defined by the Employment Equity Act. The Employment Equity Act defines visible minorities as “persons, other than Aboriginal peoples, who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour.” The visible minority population in Canada consists mainly of the following groups: South Asian, Chinese, Black, Filipino, Latin American, Arab, Southeast Asian, West Asian, Korean and Japanese. In this paper, the low-income and poverty rates of older racialized persons were studied for the six largest racialized groups in Canada, i.e.: South Asian, Chinese, Black, Filipino, Latin American and Arab.

References

Aldridge, Hannah. 2017. Backgrounder: How do we measure poverty? Toronto: Maytree.

Cotton, Cathy. 2000. “Bridging Two Surveys: An Integrated Series of Income Data from SCF and SLID 1989-1997”, in Income Research Paper Series, Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 75F0002MIE.

Harding, Adriene. 2018. “The effect of government transfer programs on low-income rates: a gender-based analysis, 1995 to 2016”, in Income Research Paper Series. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 75F0002M

HUMA (Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities). 2010. Report: Federal Poverty Reduction Plan: Working in Partnership Towards Reducing Poverty in Canada, House of Commons, Ottawa, 316 pages.

Lathe, Heather. 2005. “Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics: 2003 Historical Revision”, in Income Research Paper Series, Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 75F0002MIE.

Murphy, Brian, Zuang, Xuelin and Claude Dionne. 2012. “Low Income in Canada: a Multi-line and Multi-index Perspective”, in Income Research Paper Series, Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 75F0002M.

Myles, John. 2000. “The Maturation of Canada’s Retirement Income System: Income Levels, Income Inequality and Low Income Among the Elderly”, in Analytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series, Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 11F0019M.

Myles, John. 2010. “The Maturation of Canada’s Retirement Income System: Income Levels, Income Inequality and Low Income Among Older Persons” in Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement, 19(3), 287-316.

Schimmele, Christoph, Hou, Feng, and Max Stick. 2023. “Poverty among racialized groups across generations”, in Economic and Social Reports, Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 36280001.

Statistics Canada. 2015. “Revisions to 2006 to 2011 income data”, in Income Research Paper Series, Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 75F0002MIE. 

Statistics Canada. 2016a. “Low Income Lines: What they are and how they are created”, in Income Research Paper Series, Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 75F0002M.

Statistics Canada. 2016b. “Seniors’ income from 1976 to 2014: Four decades, two stories”, in Canadian Megatrends, Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 11-630-X2016008.

Statistics Canada. 2022. “In the midst of high job vacancies and historically low unemployment, Canada faces record retirements from an aging labour force: number of seniors aged 65 and older grows six times faster than children 0-14”, in The Daily, Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 11-001-X.

Statistics Canada. (n.d.). Table 11-10-0239-01  Income of individuals by age group, sex and income source, Canada, provinces and selected census metropolitan areas.

Statistics Canada. (n.d.). Table 14-10-0327-01  Labour force characteristics by sex and detailed age group, annual.

Statistics Canada. (n.d.). Table 11-10-0135-01  Low income statistics by age, sex and economic family type.

Statistics Canada. (n.d.). Table 17-10-0005-01  Population estimates on July 1, by age and gender.