People in the pet world often talk about the rising cost of care, but it is rarer to see clear data showing how unevenly that pressure falls. Pet insurance is not equally accessible to everyone, and new research gives one of the clearest pictures yet of how big that gap can be.
What the study looked at
A study published in Veterinary Record in 2026 surveyed more than 2,100 dog and cat owners across the UK, Austria and Denmark. It set out to understand not just who has pet insurance, but why so many owners go without it, and whether income plays a significant role.
The answer, according to the study, is uncomfortable but not surprising: money matters a great deal.
Insurance take-up varies a lot by country
Across the three countries surveyed, 41.7% of owners had insurance. But the differences between countries were huge. Austria had the highest uninsured rate at 78.7%, while the UK sat somewhere in between.
That tells us something important about how different countries build pet healthcare and insurance systems. Culture matters, but so do claims processes, vet pricing, trust and how normal insurance feels to owners. We looked at that wider international picture in our piece on South Korea's pet insurance reforms.
Cost is the main barrier
The study found that cost was the main reason owners gave for not having insurance. That may sound obvious, but it is important because it shows many people are not uninsured because they think cover is pointless. They understand the value in principle. They simply cannot afford it.
That distinction matters. It changes the conversation from "why don't people insure their pets?" to "what happens when insurance is priced beyond reach?"
The income gap is stark
The income gap in the UK is sharp. Other UK data referenced in this area of research shows that more than 70% of pet owners with a household income of £60,000 or more have insurance, while take-up falls steeply at lower income levels.
The result is a two-tier system. Wealthier owners are more likely to have insurance supporting access to veterinary care, while lower-income owners are more likely to face very difficult decisions when a pet becomes seriously ill.
Love is not the question
The study also looked at willingness to spend on life-saving treatment and found that emotional bonds and financial circumstances both played a role. That needs handling carefully. Most owners love their pets deeply, regardless of income.
The gap in insurance take-up is not about who cares more. It is about financial reality. A person can love their animal completely and still not have spare money for a monthly premium, especially when rent, food, energy and other bills are already stretched.
Why this connects to vet reform
This is part of the reason the UK's CMA vet reforms matter. Vet costs are no longer just a consumer issue. They are a welfare issue too, because unclear or unaffordable costs affect the choices owners can realistically make.
Falling premiums in 2026 are a small step in the right direction, and we have covered the latest data on pet insurance premiums falling. But a short-term drop does not solve the deeper affordability problem.
What options exist
For some owners, pet insurance genuinely is not affordable right now. That is a real situation, not a personal failing. Charities such as PDSA, Blue Cross and Dogs Trust may offer free or lower-cost veterinary care to owners who qualify, and it is worth knowing those routes exist before a crisis happens.
For owners who are considering insurance and trying to keep costs down, it helps to understand the different types of cover. Time-limited or maximum benefit cover can be cheaper than lifetime cover, while lifetime cover is structured differently for ongoing conditions. Our guide to why the cheapest pet insurance is not always the full picture explains that trade-off in more detail.
Source: Investigating dog and cat owners' uptake of pet health insurance and spending on veterinary treatment, Veterinary Record, 2026 (doi: 10.1002/vetr.70621)
This article is for general information only and does not constitute advice of any kind.