Survey on Income and Living Conditions (SILC) 2023

At risk of poverty

In SILC 2023, the at risk of poverty rate was 10.6%, a 1.9 percentage point decrease on the SILC 2022 estimate of 12.5%. This figure is also lower than the SILC 2021 estimate of 11.8%.

An individual is defined as being at risk of poverty if their nominal equivalised disposable income is under the at risk of poverty threshold, i.e. 60% of the median nominal equivalised disposable income. See At Risk of Poverty Indicators Explained (PDF 1,094KB) ).

The at risk of poverty threshold increased by 2.8% to €16,558 in SILC 2023 while the equivalised disposable income rose to a greater extent for individuals in groups who were most likely to be at risk of poverty (e.g. unemployed, single adult households etc.), thus moving some individuals in these groups over the at risk of poverty threshold and reducing the at risk of poverty rate in SILC 2023. This is analysed further below. See figure 5.1 and table 5.1.

One in four unemployed persons are at risk of poverty

An analysis by socio-demographic characteristics shows that those most at risk of poverty in SILC 2023 were those individuals who described their Principal Economic Status (PES) as unable to work due to long-standing health problems (27.3%), followed by unemployed persons (25.5%). This compares with an at risk of poverty rate of 5.8% for those that described themselves as employed.

With the exception of those persons in employment, the risk of poverty decreased across all Principal Economic Status groups in SILC 2023. The at risk of poverty rate for persons who stated their PES as retired decreased by the greatest extent, falling by 10.9 percentage points in the year to 8.8%. The at risk of poverty rate fell by 7.9 and 6.6 percentage points respectively for those who describe themselves as fulfilling domestic tasks and unemployed. The at risk of poverty rate increased by 0.5 percentage points for those in employment.

As outlined in the previous chapter, SILC respondents’ PES is self-defined at the time of interview (first six months of 2023), whereas their income reference period is the calendar year 2022, therefore reported income may not be perfectly aligned with PES. Measures put in place to mitigate the economic impact of the cost-of-living crisis contributed to the decrease in the at risk of poverty rate for respondents in SILC 2023, see Chapter 6 for more analysis of this. See figure 5.2 and table 5.1.

Looking at the profile of the population, in SILC 2023 2.8% of persons described their PES as unemployed, while these unemployed persons represented 6.6% of those who were at risk of poverty and 7.2% of those in consistent poverty.

For persons who describe themselves as unable to work due to long-standing health problems, in SILC 2023 they represented 4.3% of persons, while these persons represented 11.1% of those who were at risk of poverty and 19.8% of those in consistent poverty. See table 5.3.

In SILC 2023, 47.0% of persons defined themselves as being employed, while employed persons made up 26.0% of people that were at risk of poverty and 20.2% of those in consistent poverty. See figure 5.3 and table 5.3.

One in seven people aged under 18 years are at risk of poverty

By age group, persons aged under 18 years had the highest at risk of poverty rate in SILC 2023, followed by those aged 50 to 64 years. Those aged 65 years and over had the lowest at risk of poverty rate of 8.3%, which was the largest year on year change, falling 11.8 percentage points from 20.1% in 2022.

By household composition, the at risk of poverty rate was highest in households composed of one adult aged less than 65 years (27.1%), followed by households of one adult with children (19.2%). The rate was lowest for those living in households with three or more adults (3.5%).

The at risk of poverty rate for individuals in households with one adult and one or more children aged under 18 was 19.2%, compared with 14.2% of persons living in two adult households with 1-3 children. See figure 5.4 and table 5.1.

Enforced Deprivation

In 2023 the enforced deprivation results were published in a separate release.  See SILC: Enforced Deprivation 2023.

In SILC 2023, 17.3% of the population were defined as living in enforced deprivation, i.e. had experienced two or more of the eleven types of deprivation indicators.  This compares with 16.6% in 2022.

The enforced deprivation rate for those at risk of poverty was 33.8% in SILC 2023 compared with 38.9% in 2022.  The deprivation rate for those not at risk of poverty was 15.4% in 2022, compared with 10.8% in 2021.  In SILC 2023 there was a divergence between those who are at risk of poverty and those who are experiencing enforced deprivation. This is in part due to the increased proportion of individuals in middle equivalised income deciles who experienced enforced deprivation in 2023 and a reduced proportion of individuals in bottom equivalised income deciles who experienced enforced deprivation. See table 5.5 and PxStat table SIA79

Consistent poverty

The consistent poverty measure is defined as people who are both at risk of poverty and experiencing enforced deprivation.  The consistent poverty rate in SILC 2023 was 3.6%, compared with 4.9% for the previous year.  See figure 5.1 and table 5.1.

While the at risk of poverty rate has decreased in SILC 2023 and the enforced deprivation rate has increased, while the consistent poverty rate has decreased. This suggests a divergence in SILC 2023 between those who are at risk of poverty and those who are experiencing enforced deprivation. For example, the proportion of persons in the fourth equivalised income decile experiencing enforced deprivation increased from 15.1% in SILC 2022 to 22.7% in SILC 2023, while for those in the fifth decile it increased from 14.9% to 25.1%. Individuals in these deciles are not at risk of poverty, but an increased proportion are experiencing enforce deprivation in 2023. See PxStat table SIA79

One in six persons unable to work due to long-standing health problems are living in consistent poverty

For persons of working age, the risk of poverty, deprivation and consistent poverty tends to be correlated with employment status. An analysis by PES shows that the consistent poverty rate was highest among persons unable to work due to long-standing health problems (16.5%) and the unemployed (9.4%), while it was lowest amongst those who were employed (1.5%).

Analysis by household composition shows that persons living in households comprised of one adult aged less than 65 years and persons living in one adult households with children had the highest consistent poverty rates (13.0% and 7.1% respectively). Persons living in two adult households, where at least one adult was aged 65 years or older, had the lowest consistent poverty rate at 0.9%.

Similarly, the risk of poverty, deprivation and consistent poverty tends to follow a downward trajectory as the number of employed persons within a household increase. For persons living in households where no one is at work, the consistent poverty rate is 8.9%, compared with 5.5% for those living in households with one person at work, and 1.3% for those in households with two persons at work.

In terms of tenure status, the consistent poverty rate for those living in owner-occupied dwellings was 1.4% compared with 8.5% for those living in rented or rent-free accommodation. See figure 5.5 and table 5.1.

Seven in ten persons experiencing consistent poverty are living in rented or rent-free accommodation

Looking at the profile of the population, while 30.7% of the population are living in rented or rent-free accommodation, such people make up 72.9% of those living in consistent poverty. See figure 5.6 and table 5.3.

At Risk of Poverty Rate after Deducting Rent and Mortgage Interest

At risk of poverty rate after deducting rent and mortgage interest is used to help analyse inequalities in housing costs and their impact on poverty risk. Using the standard at risk of poverty threshold (€16,558 in SILC 2023), if rent and mortgage interest payments were deducted from income the at risk of poverty rate would have been 17.9%, 7.3 percentage points higher than without the deduction. See the Background Notes for full technical details.

Analysis by tenure shows that after deducting rent paid, more than two in five (44.1%) of those that stated they lived in accommodation rented from the Local Authority would have been at risk of poverty. The at risk of poverty rate for those living in accommodation rented with other forms of social housing supports such as the Housing Assistance Payment (HAP), Rent Supplement and the Rental Accommodation Scheme (RAS), was 58.6% when rent was deducted from disposable income. For persons living in accommodation rented without housing supports, the at risk of poverty rate was 36.2% after deducting rent paid. See figure 5.8 and table 5.6.