CARE vs Best 60M
30 Questions Every Section 33/39 Insured Person Should Know Before Retirement

CARE (Career Average Revalued Earnings) is a new pension calculation formula that the Cabinet approved in principle on 14 July 2026, as proposed by the Ministry of Labour. It changes the calculation basis from wages in the final period before retirement to an average of earnings across a person's entire contributing working life, with past wages revalued to reflect present-day value.

Best 60M (Best 60 Months) is Boon Arayapon's proposal to use the 60 months with the highest wage base across an insured person's entire work history as the pension calculation basis — regardless of when in their career those 60 months occurred — instead of mandating the final 60 months before retirement as under the current system, which are often a period of reduced income due to approaching retirement, reduced hours, or a shift to lighter work.

The system actually in force right now (before CARE takes legal effect) calculates the pension from the average wage base of the final 60 months before leaving employment — this is a separate system from both CARE and Best 60M, which are both still under debate. In short, there are currently three related systems: the current system (final 60 months), the government's new proposal (CARE), and the alternative Boon Arayapon proposes (Best 60M).

It has not taken effect yet. After the Cabinet's 14 July 2026 approval in principle, the draft ministerial regulation still needs review by the Council of State (Krisdika), publication in the Royal Gazette, and then takes effect 180 days after publication — the whole process is expected to take roughly another 8-10 months from the date of Cabinet approval.

It covers Section 33 and Section 39 insured persons — roughly 600,000-800,000 people would be directly affected by the formula change, particularly those who have not yet retired and are still contributing at the point the new formula takes effect.

Because Best 60M selects only the highest-earning 60 months as the calculation base, while CARE averages earnings across an entire working life, including the early-career period when wages are typically lower. This pulls the overall average down.

Section 39 insured persons (former Section 33 members who left formal employment and voluntarily continue contributing) generally face greater risk, because the Section 39 contribution base is far lower than Section 33. Changing the calculation formula could therefore hit this group's pension proportion harder, especially for those who moved from Section 33 to Section 39 not long before retirement.

Under CARE, someone with employment gaps or frequent job changes (creating months with no or low contributions interspersed throughout their career) will have a lower lifetime average than someone who worked continuously. Best 60M is unaffected by these gaps, since it selects only the best 60 months regardless of what happened in between.

According to information presented by the Ministry of Labour, people whose income rose steadily and consistently throughout their working life, or whose income was higher earlier in their career than later, may benefit more from CARE than the current system, since averaging across a lifetime could give a higher base than using only the declining final 60 months.

Technically yes, if designed as an opt-in/opt-out system letting each insured person choose which formula to use. This is exactly what labor networks — including Sawit Kaewwan, president of the Thai Labour Solidarity Confederation — proposed during discussions with the Ministry of Labour on 3 August 2026.

This is the core problem that both CARE critics and Best 60M supporters agree on: the current final-60-months system can be unfair to people whose income declines toward the end of their career.

Best 60M clearly helps the calculation base reflect a person's true earning history, rather than being dragged down by a lower-earning final period.

This example shows that for someone whose earnings peaked mid-career and then declined, CARE may produce a higher base than the current system (final 60 months) but still lower than Best 60M. Actual figures vary based on each person's individual earnings history.

Because an actual pension depends on each insured person's unique wage history and contribution period. The examples in this article are hypothetical, meant only to illustrate the comparative principles. Anyone wanting figures closer to their own situation should check their contribution history via the SSO Connect app or contact the Social Security Office directly.

Not entirely — this claim covers only current pension recipients and those who retire within the first 5 years of the transition period (2568-2573, or 2025-2030 CE), and this protection tapers down year by year. It is not a permanent guarantee for all insured persons. See the full fact-check article linked below.

Two main groups receive full protection: (1) those already receiving a pension, and (2) those who retire and begin receiving a pension within the first 5 years of the transition. Beyond these two groups, protection begins to taper off.

According to fact-checking published on this site, real impact on insured persons outside the 5-year protected window begins to appear clearly from 2571 (2028 CE) onward — information that tends to receive less emphasis than the "no one loses" messaging.

Not yet, officially. This is one of the main demands from labor networks and Boon Arayapon — proposing an opt-in/opt-out system that would let people who have already contributed for some time choose whether to stay on the old formula or move to the new one, rather than forcing everyone onto a single formula.

Insured persons who disagree can follow and join labor-network opposition efforts, which have submitted formal objection letters to the government since 21 July 2026 and continue organizing activities, and can track the Council of State's review process, an important stage before final enactment.

The Section 39 Class Action is a separate movement concerning the pension calculation of insured persons who moved from Section 33 to Section 39 before retirement, referencing Supreme Court Ruling No. 3307/2567 — a distinct issue from CARE directly, but connected in the broader question of pension calculation fairness. See the full details on this site's Section 39 Class Action page.

The Cabinet resolved to approve "in principle" the draft ministerial regulation adjusting the old-age pension calculation criteria under the CARE formula on 14 July 2026, as proposed by the Ministry of Labour. The phrase "in principle" matters — it means this is not yet enforceable law and further steps remain.

The draft ministerial regulation must go to the Council of State (Krisdika) for legal review, then be published in the Royal Gazette, taking effect 180 days after publication. It was during this Council of State review stage that labor networks and Boon Arayapon submitted formal objection letters requesting reconsideration.

The entire process, from Cabinet approval in principle to actual enforcement, is expected to take roughly 8-10 months — meaning there is still time for opposition movements or calls for reconsideration before the law takes effect.

Labor networks, led by the Thai Labour Solidarity Confederation, submitted a formal objection letter to the Labour Minister on 21 July 2026, followed by a meeting with the Department of Labour Protection and Welfare on 3 August, and a rally at Government House Gate 5 on 4 August 2026, with a follow-up gathering scheduled for 6 September 2026.

According to the government's claim, current pension recipients will not be affected, as they fall within the fully protected group during the transition. However, it is worth following the complete ministerial regulation once finalized, to confirm no other conditions affect existing benefits.

Check whether you fall within the first 5 years of the transition period (fully protected) by following official announcements from the Social Security Office, and check your own wage history via SSO Connect to assess which calculation base (final 60 months or lifetime average) would give you a better result in your specific case.

This is a question that needs individual consideration, since there is not yet 100% clarity on the exact effective date and the full details of the final ministerial regulation. This article cannot provide individualized financial advice. Anyone planning retirement should consult the Social Security Office directly or a financial planning professional, alongside closely following legal developments.

Boon Arayapon, Candidate No. 2, firmly opposes forcing the CARE formula on everyone without a choice, proposes Best 60M as the primary or a parallel alternative, and calls for any change to the pension calculation formula to be transparent, fair, and to involve insured persons in the decision-making process.

The Social Security Board holds direct authority to set, review, and oversee the implementation details of benefit calculation formulas, including transition measures. Regardless of which direction CARE takes through the Council of State review, having an independent board representative who understands and prioritizes fairness for insured persons remains important.

Start by: (1) following news updates on the CARE formula continuously, (2) checking your own wage and contribution history via SSO Connect, (3) researching each SSO Board candidate's policy positions before voting, and (4) exercising your right to vote in the SSO Board election when it is held, to send a representative who understands this issue into the board itself.