In 2026, contributing for the maximum Social Security contribution base and receiving the maximum pension are not two proportional things. The Order PJC/297/2026has set the maximum contribution limit to the General Regime at 5,101.20 euros per month and the maximum pension that a retiree can receive that same year is 3,359.60 euros. Between what a worker can contribute and what he can receive there is almost 1,742 euros difference each month. Alfonso Muñoz Cuenca, a Social Security official specialized in pensions and benefits, has published a video on YouTube in which he answers a very common question and that is whether it is interesting to contribute for the maximum contribution base.
The official begins by explaining how our public pension system works. “The principle of contribution in Social Security establishes a relationship of proportionality between what a person contributes to the system through social contributions and what they receive as a benefit.” That is, those who contribute more, in greater amounts and for longer, tend to receive a higher pension.
But this principle has a legal limit that conditions the entire calculation. A worker with a theoretical regulatory base of 5,000 euros will earn a maximum of 3,359.60 euros, regardless of how many years he has contributed to the maximum. The question, therefore, does not have a single answer. “The issue is very complex and has many nuances,” the official advances. “Let’s look at it with different assumptions.”
When it pays and when it doesn’t
The first assumption is the most direct: a worker who retires at age 65 with 40 years of contributions, practically all of them at the maximum. This worker would receive 100% of the regulatory base, which is equivalent to a theoretical pension of around 5,000 euros per month. The problem is that Social Security runs into it. “At most you will be able to collect the maximum pension, which is 3,359.60 euros,” says Muñoz, pointing out that “there is already a significant imbalance between the base for which contributions are made and the pension received, of almost 2,000 euros difference.”
The second assumption qualifies the first. If that same worker has had periods with lower salaries, part-time work, contribution gaps or years receiving a subsidy throughout his career, the maximum bases do have a real function, which is to compensate for the periods in which he contributed less. In this case, contributing at the maximum when possible increases the regulatory base and cushions the impact of years with reduced income.
The third assumption is the one that has the most impact. Muñoz compares two profiles. Worker one has 40 years of contributions with high salaries, always at the maximum. He retires early at age 63. Its regulatory base is 5,101 euros. 100% of that base corresponds to you, but as you advance two years, Social Security applies reducing coefficients of 19%, which would leave the pension at 4,132 euros. When the maximum pension is exceeded, the coefficients are applied directly to the ceiling, and the pension falls to 2,721 euros. Applying the personal income tax withholding corresponding to your income, of 20.42%, the monthly liquid pension remains at 2,165.59 euros.
Worker two has only contributed for 15 years, part-time, with a base of 1,100 euros per month and retires at age 65 with a dependent spouse; For your years of contributions, you are entitled to 50% of the regulatory base, that is, 550 euros. If you do not reach the minimum pension, Social Security recognizes the corresponding supplements. Your resulting pension is 1,127 euros per month, without income tax withholding.
The contrast that Muñoz draws is devastating: “The first worker has contributed to the system for 40 years with very high bases and does not receive even 50% of what he contributes. For his part, the second worker, having contributed only 15 years throughout his working life, receives more than 100% of what he has contributed.”
The three reflections of the official
With this explanation, Muñoz draws three conclusions. The first is that despite the imbalance, “the more years we contribute and the more amount we contribute, the better, because our retirement pension will be higher.” The principle works in relative terms although it is not proportional to the last euro contributed.
The second is a criticism of the direction of the reforms. “The Government should further reinforce the principle of contribution,” agrees the official, who recognizes that the latest reforms have reinforced the principle of solidarity “and that is good,” but considers that this is going to the detriment of those who contribute the most receiving in proportion what they are entitled to.
The third connects directly with a motion approved in the Congress of Deputies at the end of 2025. Muñoz asks the Government to set an ‘objective 40’: that workers who reach 40 years of contributions can retire early without penalties, whenever they want (something that, remember, platforms such as ASJUBI40 ask for). “It is neither logical nor reasonable to seriously penalize the workers who contribute the most to the sustainability and economic viability of the public pension system,” he concludes.