ARCHIVED – Elderly immigrants in Canada: Income sources and self-sufficiency
V. Income – Incidence and averages
In this section, the incidence of reporting income from a specific source, as well as the average income received from that source, will be examined for the three elderly populations. In total there are ten sources of income available to elderly immigrants; five market sources and five retirement sources. These income types were described in section III. The focus here will be on income sources with higher incidences and/or notable trends across years since landing. Of the market sources greater detail will be given to employment earnings, investment income and provincial supplements and of the retirement sources particular attention will be given to income from C/QPP, private pensions, OAS, and GIS/Allowance.
Figure 4 shows the incidence of employment earnings for the three elderly populations in tax year 2000 [note 15]. There appears to be a negative relationship between age at landing and the incidence of employment earnings. In the first year of observation, 45 percent of the long-term elderly population reported employment earnings and after 20 years this had declined by only 10 percentage points. In the first year after landing, 50 percent of short-term elders reported employment earnings but this declined steadily and by the 11- and 20-year marks the shares were 20 and 2 percent, respectively. Immediate elders displayed a similar pattern but with a lower incidence in each year observed. Less than 30 percent of immediate elders reported employment earnings in the first year after landing. At the 11-year mark the incidence of employment earnings was less than 5 percent and in the fifteenth year there were no immediate elders reporting employment earnings.
Figure 4: Incidence of Employment Earnings for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Elderly Subgroup
There is also evidence of a negative relationship between employment earnings and age at landing; however, unlike the trend in incidence, average employment earnings were higher for immigrants with additional years since landing [note 16]. Long-term elders had roughly $25 000 in employment earnings eleven years after landing and $32 500 at the 20-year mark. In the first year after landing, short-term elders had employment earnings equal to $12 000. In the eleventh year employment earnings were approximately $22 000. Immediate elders reported employment earnings slightly less than $10 000 in the first year after landing and slightly above $10 000 at the ten year mark [note 17].
Figure 5 shows the differences that exist in the incidence of employment earnings for different immigrant categories [note 18]. This figure groups all elderly immigrants within a category together. Details on the three elderly subgroups within each immigrant category are provided in the text.
Figure 5: Incidence of Employment Earnings for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category
The negative relationship between age at landing and the incidence of employment earnings seen in Figure 4 was present for all immigrant categories. The lower incidence at later years since landing was present for elderly immigrants in most categories. However, the incidence itself and the speed at which it declines differ among immigrant categories. A similar conclusion was found for the amount of employment earnings reported. Although the various immigrant categories reported different levels of employment earnings, the negative relationship between employment earnings and age at landing, and higher employment earnings in later years, were present for most immigrant categories.
Economic immigrants, especially Skilled Principal Applicants, had a greater incidence of employment earnings at each point in the observation period. Skilled Principal Applicants also reported employment earnings approximately $7 500-$10 000 higher than the average at each mark.
Family Class immigrants had an incidence very similar to that seen in Figure 4, with the exception of the long-term elderly Parents and Grandparents who had an incidence much lower than the average. Employment earnings for these two categories, especially Parents and Grandparents, were also below the average. Short-term and immediate elders in the Parents and Grandparents category never reported more than $15 000 in employment earnings.
Refugees had an incidence that was lower than the average and employment earnings that were comparable with the average. Retired immigrants had the lowest incidence of all categories which never exceeded 10 percent. However, for the few who reported employment earnings the average was very close to that seen in Figure A4 in the Appendix.
Figure 6: Incidence of Investment Income for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Elderly Subgroup
Figure 6 illustrates the incidence of investment income for the elderly population in tax year 2000 [note 19]. There is some evidence of a positive relationship between the incidence of investment income and age at landing but only for long-term elders. A little less than 40 percent of long-term elders reported investment income at the 11-year mark. Incidence increased a small amount across years since landing and was 45 percent by the 20-year mark. Short-term and immediate elders had incidence of 20 percent in the initial years after landing. Between the 5- and 10-year marks incidence was roughly 30 to 40 percent. Following the 10-year mark incidence decreased slightly and stabilized around 35 percent.
Average investment income was relatively constant across years since landing and almost identical for all three elderly groups [note 20]. On average, long-term and short-term elders reported investment income equal to $5 000 and immediate elders reported investment income of $6 000. There was some variation in the incidence and average amount of investment income among different immigrant categories.
Figure 7 shows the incidence of investment income in tax year 2000 for the elderly population broken down by immigrant category [note 21]. Once again, this figure provides aggregate information on elderly immigrants by category while the text provides more detailed information on the three elderly subgroups.
Figure 7: Incidence of Investment Income for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category
Skilled Principal Applicants and Skilled Spouses and Dependents in all elderly groups had a 10 percent higher incidence than seen in Figure 6. Other Economic immigrants and Retired immigrants had an even higher incidence that began near 70 and 85 percent, respectively, and remained above 60 and 70 percent by the 20-year mark. Immigrants in the economic categories and the retired category also reported higher annual investment income. All immigrants in these categories reported investment income at least equal to $10 000 in the initial years after landing. For Skilled Principal Applicants and Skilled Spouses and Dependents this amount dropped below $5 000 at the 10-year mark and remained there through the 20-year mark. However, Other Economic and Retired immigrants continued to report annual investment income above $10 000 through the 20-year mark.
Other family immigrants had an incidence and an average investment income comparable to that seen overall. The one difference is that short-term elderly in this category had an incidence approximately 10 percent higher than that seen for short-tern elders in Figure 6. Average investment income for all three elderly groups was in line with the averages reported for the entire elderly population.
Parents and Grandparents and Refugees, again, had different results. For elderly in these two categories incidence was noticeably lower than that seen in Figure 6. Average investment income reported was also lower than the amount illustrated in Figure A6 in the Appendix. On average, Parents and Grandparents in all three elderly groups reported annual investment income below $5 000 and Refugees reported less than $2 000 in investment income each year.
Figure 8 presents the incidence of provincial supplements for elderly immigrants in tax year 2000. There is evidence of a positive relationship between age at landing and the incidence of provincial supplements for two out of the three elderly groups. There is also evidence of a relationship between incidence and years since landing for two elderly groups. On average, 10-15 percent of long-term elders reported provincial supplements for all years since landing. In contrast, short-term and immediate elders had an incidence of provincial supplements that was higher for immigrants with additional years since landing. Short-term elders had an incidence of roughly 5 percent in the first year after landing. At the 10-year mark incidence was slightly over 20 percent and at the 20-year mark 35 percent of short-term elders reported provincial supplements. Similarly, immediate elders had an incidence of 10 percent in the first year after landing and a steady increase in incidence across years since landing. At the 5-year mark 20 percent of immediate elders reported provincial supplements and from the 10-year mark and on incidence was 40-45 percent.
Figure 8: Incidence of Provincial Supplements (including Social Assistance Benefits) for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Elderly Subgroup
Although incidence increased with years since landing, the average dollar amount of provincial supplements fell [note 22]. Long-term elders reported slightly below $8 000 in benefits until the 15-year mark at which time the average amount of provincial supplements began to decline. At the 20-year mark the average provincial supplements was just under $4 000. Short-term and long-term elders reported closer to $9 000 in benefits in the first year after landing; however, at the 10-year mark this average decreased substantially. From the 11-year mark and on for immediate elders, and the 15-year mark and on for short-term elders, average provincial supplements equalled roughly $1 500.
Figure 9 presents the incidence of provincial supplements for elderly immigrants in tax year 2000 disaggregated by immigrant category [note 23]. Note, again, that this figure does not disaggregate the elderly population within each immigrant category. The text which follows will speak specifically to each elderly subgroup within each immigrant categories.
The positive relationship between age at landing and the incidence of provincial supplements was present for all immigrant categories; however, the higher incidence at later years since landing was only seen for Parents and Grandparents. Economic immigrants, on average, had lower incidence in later years and Refugees had a decline in incidence each year. A similar conclusion was found for average provincial supplements. Immigrants in different categories reported varying levels of social assistance; however, the positive relationship between provincial supplements and age at landing, as well as the decline in provincial supplements in later years, was present for most immigrant categories. The increase in incidence and simultaneous decline in average provincial supplements in the tenth and eleventh year, while present for all categories, was most pronounced for Parents and Grandparents.
Figure 9: Incidence of Provincial Supplements (including Social Assistance Benefits) for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category
Economic immigrants, especially those in the Other Economic category, had a lower incidence of provincial supplements than observed in Figure 8. Incidence remained fairly constant over the period with a slight decline for those with the greatest number of years since landing. Skilled Principal Applicants also had lower average provincial supplements throughout the entire period. Although the average amount of provincial supplements was lower at the end of the period, this decline did not occur all at once in the tenth year. Rather, it was a gradual decline that began in the first year of observation and continued past the 10-year mark.
Parents and Grandparents had an incidence very similar to that seen in Figure 8, with the exception of the long-term elderly Parents and Grandparents who had a higher incidence than the average. Provincial supplements for Parents and Grandparents, were also very close to the averages seen in Figure 8 but with an even sharper decline at the 10-year mark. In contrast, Other Family immigrants had a constant incidence of 15 to 20 percent for all elderly groups and for all years since landing. Other Family immigrants also had slightly lower average provincial supplements and a less noticeable decline at the 10-year mark.
Long-term elderly Refugees had an incidence of provincial supplements like that of the long-term elderly Parents and Grandparents; specifically, the incidence fluctuated between 20 and 30 percent with no apparent relationship to years since landing. However, Refugees in the short-term and immediate elderly groups had the highest incidence of all categories in the first few years after landing. Incidence began at 80 and 90 percent for short-term and immediate elders, respectively. It declined gradually as years since landing increased and by the 20-year mark incidence was 50 percent for short-term elders and 70 percent for immediate elders.
Retired immigrants had the lowest incidence of provincial supplements and the lowest average provincial supplements. For all elderly groups incidence remained equal to or less than 10 percent and average provincial supplements was approximately $1 000.
Figure 10: Incidence of C/QPP Benefits for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Elderly Subgroup
Figure 10 illustrates the incidence of C/QPP benefits for elderly immigrants in tax year 2000. Since benefits are related to the length of time worked in Canada it is not surprising that there is a positive relationship between years since landing and incidence of C/QPP. In fact the same rationale would also suggest that there would be a positive relationship between age at landing and incidence. A lower age at landing, translates into a greater number of years available to work in the Canadian labour market and, hence, a larger window for contributing to C/QPP. This is what is seen for short-term and immediate elders, with the former having noticeably higher incidence from the 10-year mark and on. Both groups had incidence below 10 percent until the 7-year mark. They increased to nearly 20 percent for short-term and 30 percent for immediate elders by the 10-year mark. From the 10-year mark and on the incidence of C/QPP increased more rapidly for the short-term elderly population. It stabilized near 65 percent by the 14-year mark while the incidence for immediate elders fluctuated between 20 and 30 percent. Long-term elders had incidence in between the two other elderly groups. Long-term elders had an incidence of slightly over 10 percent in the first year of observation. It increased steadily with years since landing and reached 60 percent by the twenty-year mark. Although long-term elders would have had the longest period to contribute to C/QPP, they did not have the highest incidence of benefits.
Recall that age at landing for long-term elders is defined as 40 to 49 years. Previous to the 20-year mark the long-term elderly group was not captured in the sample in its entirety. Even at the 20-year mark, the youngest of the group had just reached 60 years of age and were not eligible to receive full C/QPP benefits. Not unrelated to this, as illustrated in Figure 4, 30 percent of long-term elders were still reporting employment earnings twenty years after landing. The fact that a greater proportion of long-term elders worked beyond the age of 60, relative to the other elders, will play a role in the incidence and potentially the average dollar amount of all retirement type incomes investigated in this section.
As expected, there is evidence of a positive relationship, albeit slight, between average C/QPP benefits and age at landing [note 24]. There was also a very modest trend upward across years since landing for long-term and short-term elders. Long-term elders reported average C/QPP benefits of $2 000 to $2 500. Short-term elders had benefits equal to $1 000 to $2 000 and immediate elders reported benefits of $1 000. All immigrant categories exhibited comparable relationships and trends in incidence and average benefits.
Figure 11 illustrates the incidence of C/QPP for elderly immigrants in tax year 2000 for each immigrant category [note 25]. This figure groups all elderly immigrants within a category together. Details on the three elderly subgroups within each immigrant category are provided in the text below.
Figure 11: Incidence of C/QPP Benefits for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category
Economic immigrants, particularly Skilled Principal Applicants, in the long-term elderly group had lower incidence than seen in Figure 10 [note 26]. Short-term elders in the economic categories had incidence approximately 20 percent higher than the average from the 15-year mark and forward. The average dollar amount of benefits reported by all economic immigrants did not differ much from the average seen in Figure A10 in the Appendix. However, Skilled Principal Applicants reported benefits roughly $1 000 greater than the average.
Parents and Grandparents had incidence and average benefits in line with those seen for the entire elderly population. The only differences were seen in the long-term elderly group. Long-term elders in this category had a higher incidence of C/QPP and lower dollar amounts of benefits. Other Family immigrants had incidence similar to the average seen in Figure 10, with the exception of short-term elders who had 20 percent higher incidence from the 15-year mark and on [note 27]. For all elderly immigrants in this category C/QPP benefits were $500 to $1 000 higher than the average.
Refugees reported incidence like that seen in Figure 10, with the exception of immediate elders whose incidence was lower and never exceeded 20 percent. Retired immigrants had the lowest incidence and average benefits of all immigrant categories. This is not surprising given that less than 10 percent of Retired immigrants ever reported employment earnings.
Figure 12: Incidence of Private Pension Income for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Elderly Subgroup
Figure 12 displays the incidence of private pension income for elderly immigrants in tax year 2000 [note 28]. There is evidence of a negative relationship between incidence of private pension income and age at landing. There also appears to be a trend upward across years since landing. Long-term elders had incidence below 5 percent at the 11-year mark but it increased steadily and by 20 years after landing nearly 20 percent of long-term elders reported income from private pensions. Less than 5 percent of short-term elders reported income from private pension in the initial years after landing. From the 10-year mark and on, incidence increased and at the 20-year mark incidence was approximately 25 percent. Immediate elders had a similar pattern of incidence. Immediate elders had incidence below 10 percent in the initial years after landing. Incidence for this group increased at the 10-year mark and remained between 20 and 25 percent through the 20-year mark.
Elderly immigrants reported relatively high average amounts of income from private pension prior to the 10 year mark [note 29]. However, average income from this source declined across years since landing. Long-term elders reported between $10 000 and $12 000 in income from private pension from the 11- to 15-year mark. After the 15-year mark average income from this source declined and at 20 years after landing it equalled less than $10 000. Short-term elders reported nearly $25 000 in annual income from private pension at the 6-year mark. This average amount had declined to $12 500 by the 10-year mark and $7 500 by the 20-year mark. Although the decline in average income from this source was not as substantial as that seen for short-term elders, it was present for immediate elders as well. On average, immediate elders reported $16 000 in income from private pension prior to the 10-year mark and $12 500 from the 10-year mark and on.
Figure 13: Incidence of Private Pension Income for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category
Figure 13 illustrates the incidence of private pension income for elderly immigrants in tax year 2000 disaggregated by immigrant category [note 30]. Again, this figure provides aggregate information on elderly immigrants in each category and the text which follows provides further detail on the three elderly subgroups.
Economic immigrants had higher incidence than seen in Figure 12 following the 10-year mark. At the 20-year mark, long-term elderly in the economic categories had an incidence of 25 percent and short-term elderly had an incidence of 55 percent. Economic immigrants had higher average income form private pension initially; however, at the 20-year mark most had income in line with that observed in Figure A12 in the Appendix. Skilled Principal Applicants were the exception and had average private pension equal to $15 000 at the 20-year mark.
Retired immigrants had even higher incidence from the 10-year mark and on. Incidence for this group was between 70 and 75 percent at the 20-year mark. Average annual income from this source was also higher than the average and than that of economic immigrants. At the 20-year mark short-term elders in the retired category reported average private pension income equal to $15 000 and immediate elders reported nearly $20 000.
Parents and Grandparents and Refugees had a lower incidence and lower average amounts of income from private pension for all years since landing. Incidence for elderly immigrants in these categories never exceeded 20 percent and for most years it remained below 10 percent. Long-term and short-term elders in these categories reported just under $5 000 of income from this source in from the 10-year mark and on. Immediate elders in the Parents and Grandparents category reported $8 500 from at the 10-year mark and thereafter, while immediate elders in the Refugee category reported no income from private pension.
Figure 14: Incidence of OAS Benefits for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Elderly Subgroup
Figure 14 illustrates the incidence of OAS benefits for the elderly population in tax year 2000. Long-term elderly did not report OAS benefits until the 16-year mark [note 31]. At the 16-year mark the incidence of OAS was 15 percent and at the 20-year mark it was 45 percent. Short-term elders do not report OAS benefits until 6 years after landing, the point at which the eldest of this group have reached age 65. Incidence remained at 10 percent or less until the 10-year mark when it increased sharply to 35 percent. It continued to increase before stabilizing near 95 percent at the 15-yer mark. Immediate elders showed a similar pattern of incidence of OAS benefits. Immediate elders had low incidence of OAS in the initial years since landing. This changed with the sharp increase to 75 percent at the 10-year mark. After the 10-year mark incidence increased by another 20 percent and remained above 95 percent from the 14-year mark and on.
Average OAS benefits were almost identical for all three elderly groups [note 32]. The dollar amount received by all elderly immigrants was fairly constant around $2 000 with a very modest increase across years since landing. A small dip in the average amount of benefits occurred at the 10-year mark for short-term and immediate elders. The 10-year mark represents the point at which the vast majority of immigrants have accumulated ten years of residency in Canada and, thus, become eligible for OAS [note 33]. Since the dates which immigrants landed in Canada were distributed across the year, the start date for receiving benefits will also be distributed over the full first year. Consequently, the average amount of benefits received by this group is much lower than the full-year benefits they receive in the following year. It is likely that the large share of individuals who became eligible to receive only part-year benefits in the tenth year caused the temporary fall in average benefits. The dramatic increase in incidence combined with the low level of initial benefits appeared as a trough in the annual average benefits received by the immigrant cohort at the ten-year mark.
Figure 15: Incidence of OAS Benefits for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category
Figure 15 illustrates the incidence of OAS benefits for elderly immigrants in tax year 2000 broken down by immigrant category [note 34]. This figure presents information on all elderly immigrants within each category. The text below will provide more details on the elderly subgroups within the immigrant categories.
Economic immigrants had, to a certain extent, a different incidence of OAS. Long-term elders in the economic categories had lower incidence than that displayed in Figure 14. Short-term elders had a similar pattern of incidence, with lower levels initially and an incidence of 95 percent in the final years of observation. However, the increase was much more gradual for economic immigrants. The sudden increase at the 10-year mark observed for the elderly population as a whole did not occur for economic immigrants. With respect to average OAS benefits, immigrants in these categories reflected the same pattern seen in Figure A14 of the Appendix but had benefits a bit higher.
Family immigrants had a pattern of incidence like that seen in Figure 14. Except, Parents and Grandparents in the long-term and short-term elderly groups had higher incidence of OAS. With respect to the average amount of benefits, Parents and Grandparents reported the same as the average, while Other Family immigrants reported benefits a bit higher.
Refugees had incidence and benefits in line with the averages seen for the entire elderly population. Retired immigrants had similar patterns but the short-term and long-term elders in this category had slightly lower incidence from the 10-year mark and on.
Figure 16 displays the incidence of GIS/Allowance benefits for elderly immigrants in tax year 2000. The pattern of incidence for GIS/Allowance is much like that of OAS benefits. Nearly 10 percent of long-term elders reported GIS/Allowance benefits in the first year of observation. The incidence of GIS/Allowance increased gradually through the 15-year mark and more rapidly thereafter. At the 20-year mark the incidence of GIS/Allowance had reached 40 percent. Short-term elders had an incidence below 10 percent until the 10-year mark at which point it jumped to 35 percent. It continued to increase at a steady rate until the 16-year mark and remained fairly constant at just over 80 percent thereafter. Similarly, immediate elders had incidence below 20 percent until the sharp increase to 65 percent at the 10-year mark. Shortly after the 10-year mark incidence surpassed 80 percent and remained at that level through the 20-year mark.
Figure 16: Incidence of GIS/Allowance Benefits for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Elderly Subgroup
Similar to the pattern of OAS benefits, average GIS/Allowance amounts were constant across years since landing, with the exception of a temporary decline at the 10-year mark for short-term and immediate elders [note 35], [note 36]. However, the average amounts were much higher than those reported for OAS and there was evidence of a positive relationship between average GIS/Allowance benefits and age at landing. Of the three elderly groups, long-term elders had the lower average benefits equal to roughly $6 000. Average benefits reported by short-term and immediate elders were a bit higher and equalled $7 500 and $8 000, respectively, with the exception of the 10-year mark at which point they temporarily dropped to $5 000.
Figure 17 illustrates the incidence of GIS/Allowance benefits for elderly immigrants in tax year 2000 for each immigrant category [note 37]. This figure groups all elderly immigrants within a category together. Details on the three elderly subgroups within each immigrant category are provided in the text.
Economic immigrants had different patterns of incidence than those seen in Figure 16. First, although incidence increased across years since landing, there was no spike in the incidence of GIS/Allowance at the 10-year mark. Second, economic immigrants, especially Skilled Principal Applicants, had lower incidence. Long-term elders in the economic categories had at least a 10 percent lower incidence of GIS/Allowance at the twenty year mark. In the case of Skilled Principal Applicants it was 20 percent lower. Short-term elders had approximately a 15 percent lower incidence than that seen in Figure 16. The constant pattern of GIS/Allowance benefits across land years with a dip at the 10-year mark was also observed for economic immigrants. However, the average dollar amount of benefits was roughly $1 000 lower for long-term and short-term elders.
Once again, Parents and Grandparents exhibited incidence and average benefits quite similar to those presented for all immigrant categories taken together. However, there are some noteworthy differences. Long-term elders in this category had a much higher incidence of GIS/Allowance which equalled 85 percent at the 20-year mark. Short-term elders did not show a gradual increase in incidence but rather a spike in incidence at the 10-year mark like immediate elders. Short-term and immediate elders also had slightly higher incidence from the 10-year mark and on. With respect to average benefits, the only difference is that long-term elders in the Parents and Grandparents category reported about $500 more than what was observed in Figure A16 in the Appendix.
Figure 17: Incidence of GIS/Allowance Benefits for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category
In contrast, Other Family immigrants had a lower incidence of GIS/Allowance than seen in Figure 16 and, although it increased over years since landing, there was no spike at the 10-year mark. Average benefits for elderly immigrants in this category were also approximately $1 000 lower than those seen for all immigrant categories collectively.
Elderly Refugees, like Parents and Grandparents, showed patterns similar to the overall results but with slightly and higher incidence and average benefits. Long-term elders in this category had incidence almost 20 percent higher than that seen in Figure 16 and short-term and immediate elders had incidence grater than 90 percent in most years following the 10-year mark.
Retired immigrants in the short-term and immediate elderly groups had the lowest incidence of all immigrant categories. The incidence of GIS/Allowance for Retired immigrants jumped from 0 to 40 percent at the 10-year mark but did not increase any further after this point. Average benefits reported were also $1 500 to $2 500 lower than the averages seen in Figure A16 in the Appendix.
15 Employment earnings refers to income reported from wages and salaries, measured by the amount reported in Box 14 of an individual’s T4 Slip, and other employment income not reported on an individual’s T4 (including tips and gratuities).
16 See Appendix. Figure A4: Average Real Employment Earnings for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000
17 Due to insufficient observations there are no meaningful results to present on employment earnings for short-term elders beyond 15 years after landing or for immediate elders beyond 10 years after landing.
18 A similar figure presenting average employment earnings is available in the Appendix, Figure A5: Average Real Employment Earnings for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category.
19 Investment income refers to “interest and other income”. It includes amounts reported in line 121 of an individual’s Statement of Investment Income (Schedule 4).
20 See Appendix. Figure A6: Average Real Investment Income for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000
21 A similar figure presenting average investment income is available in the Appendix, Figure A7: Average Real Investment Income for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category.
22 See Appendix. Figure A8: Average Real Provincial Supplements (including Social Assistance Benefits) for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000
23 A similar figure presenting average provincial supplements is available in the Appendix, Figure A9: Average Real Provincial
Supplements (including Social Assistance) for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category.
24 See Appendix. Figure A10: Average Real C/QPP Benefits for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000
25 A similar figure presenting average C/QPP benefits is available in the Appendix, Figure A11: Average Real C/QPP Benefits for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category.
26 Recall that 55 percent of Skilled Principal Applicants in the long-term elderly group continued to report employment earnings at the 20-year mark.
27 The 15-year mark is the point at which all immigrants in the short-term elderly population have reached a minimum age of 65.
28 Private pension income refers to income from “other pensions or superannuation” reported on line 115 on an individual’s tax form. It includes amounts reported in Box 16 of T4A slip and Box 31 of T3 slip, and also includes any lump-sum income from Box 18 of a T4A slip or Box 22 of a T3 slip. Line 115 also includes annuity payments for tax filers over the age of 65 years and pensions from a foreign country.
29 See Appendix. Figure A12: Average Real Private Pension Income for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000
30 A similar figure presenting average private pension income is available in the Appendix, Figure A13: Average Real Private Pension Income for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category.
31 The 16-year mark is the point at which the eldest immigrants in the long-term elderly population have reached the minimum age of 65 and have become eligible for OAS benefits.
32 See Appendix. Figure A14: Average Real OAS Benefits for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000
33 Although some immigrants have accumulated 10 years of residency before the 10-year mark due to time spent in Canada on a temporary basis prior to landing, this is not a large share of the population.
34 A similar figure presenting average OAS benefits is available in the Appendix, Figure A15: Average Real OAS Benefits for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category.
35 See Appendix. Figure A16: Average Real GIS/Allowance Benefits for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000
36 Since GIS benefits are likely to begin in the same month as OAS benefits, the explanation provided for the dip in OAS benefits at the 10-year mark also holds true for the temporary decline in GIS/Allowance benefits observed at that time.
37 A similar figure presenting average Real GIS/Allowance benefits is available in the Appendix, Figure A17: Average GIS/Allowance Benefits for Elderly Immigrants in Tax Year 2000, by Immigrant Category.
Page details
- Date modified: