People with very different severities of disability currently get the same amount of PIP

Eligibility for personal independence payment (PIP, a disability benefit) is assessed on a points-based system. Claimants are assessed on two components: how much their disability affects their ability to do activities of daily living, and how much it affects their mobility. Everyone scoring at least 12 points on a given component is awarded the same ‘enhanced rate’ for that component, despite some having much higher levels of assessed disability than others. 

For example, someone who cannot wash themselves and needs assistance dressing their upper body would currently get the same level of support for daily living – £5,960 a year – as someone who cannot wash themselves, cannot dress themselves at all, cannot talk and cannot read. 

The government could more closely link PIP awards to the level of assessed disability, thereby targeting support towards those with the most severe conditions. If it did this using the current points system and while keeping overall spending the same, this would on average benefit younger claimants and claimants with learning disabilities or cerebral palsy, as they tend to have higher levels of assessed disability. Older claimants with arthritis or back pain would be more likely to see their PIP award reduced. If the government wanted to go down this route, it would be more important to be confident that the assessment process accurately captures the severity of disability. 

These are among the findings of new IFS research, funded by the Nuffield Foundation and published as part of the IFS Green Budget. 

We set out a range of potential options for reforming PIP with a view to informing the upcoming Timms Review and the upcoming Budget. We explore reforms that either reduce spending or maintain spending at current levels, in line with the remit of the Timms Review. Savings from reforms that reduced the number of claimants could be used to raise per-claimant awards or increase spending on other forms of support. Findings from the options we consider include: 

• Means-testing PIP, by making it part of universal credit, would deliver an initial saving of up to £8.2 billion (33% of PIP spending) before any changes in the behaviour of applicants in response. This would more closely target resources towards those with the lowest living standards – 62% of PIP claimants on below-average incomes report not being able to afford essentials, compared with 34% of PIP claimants on above-average income. However, there are also gaps in living standards between disabled and non-disabled people higher up the income distribution. Means-testing PIP would make it less effective at closing these gaps. 
• 45% of PIP claimants have a mental, learning or neurodevelopmental issue as their ‘main’ condition. A commonly discussed option is to reduce or remove eligibility for this group. One argument is that it is harder to verify the effects of mental rather than physical health conditions – although this is not true for all conditions. Savings would be lower than often expected because most claimants with mental health conditions also have a physical health diagnosis. 
• The government may want to restrict access to PIP for younger claimants if, for example, it thinks they might be better helped by more employment support and training opportunities. Stopping all under-30s claiming PIP would save £5.5 billion a year, but many of those affected have severe disabilities. There are 689,000 PIP claimants under 30 (20% of working-age caseload), approximately half of whom qualify for the highest possible award, compared with only 34% of claimants over 30. Allowing young people with the highest possible awards, and so the most severe conditions, to keep PIP would reduce the saving to at most £2.2 billion a year. 

The government asked the Timms Review to investigate options for reforming PIP in response to big increases in claimant numbers and spending. The share of 16- to 64-year-olds claiming PIP has risen from 5.5% in 2019 to 8.2% in 2025. Spending on PIP has increased from £14 billion in 2019–20 to £25 billion in 2025–26 (in today’s prices) and official forecasts suggest it will increase further to £34 billion in 2030–31. 

Eduin Latimer, Senior Research Economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said:

‘Before making reforms to PIP, the government needs to decide what PIP is for. If it is to help disabled people in the greatest need, there is a case for targeting support on those with the most severe disabilities or on the lowest incomes. If it is to reduce inequalities between disabled and non-disabled people more broadly, there is a case for spreading support more widely. Given that the Timms Review has ruled out spending more than currently forecast, any reforms inevitably mean there will be losers as well as winners.’

Mark Franks, Director of Welfare at the Nuffield Foundation, said: 

‘The government faces meaningful choices and trade-offs in reforming PIP, and there are likely to be significant impacts on the lives of some people currently receiving the benefit. There is scope to better target support towards those with the greatest needs, but any changes must be accompanied by a concerted focus on removing the barriers that make it harder for people with disabilities to access, remain in and progress in good-quality, sustainable work.’